Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Mark Esper says Trump's refusal to attend Biden's presidential inauguration a final act of petulance


psyche101
 Share

Recommended Posts

When Trump picked Esper as secretary of defence, he called him "a highly respected gentleman with a great career — West Point, Harvard, a tremendous talent."

Clearly, the sentiment is not returned.

Quote

Esper, a graduate of the United States Military Academy, said Trump's decision to forgo attending the ceremony undermined Biden's standing with a wide swath of the public.

"Donald Trump did not even bother to attend the Inauguration — the first sitting and able president to skip his successor's inauguration since 1869," he wrote in his book, which was released on Tuesday. "It was a final act of petulance that defied tradition, tarnished our democracy, and further damaged Biden's legitimacy with millions of Americans."

Esper also mentioned the military's role in the inaugural activities, which was heightened in the wake of the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the same Capitol complex where the main ceremony was held. After the riot, fencing with barbed wire was installed around the historic building to provide an additional layer of security.

"The military played its traditional part in the peaceful transfer of power, however — providing honor cordons and military bands to welcome the new president and vice president — while also securing the city from those misguided Trump true believers who might want to interrupt the sanctity of a peaceful, orderly, democratic transfer of power," he wrote.

https://www.businessinsider.com/esper-trump-skipping-biden-inauguration-petulance-transition-of-power-book-2022-5?

Couldn't agree more. I've always thought it was one of Trump's lowest moments. What seperated him from a true patriot like Esper, who served. Unlike private bonespurs. 

Refusing inaugeration was to me saying Trump doesn't respect America. I don't think I will ever understand why so many supported him. And why anyone still would. Refusing to attend inaugeration was just flipping the bird to the whole country. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump believed - with some justification - that Biden's victory was engineered and ensured by an unofficial collaboration between Democrats, media and tech.  I'm UK so I can't speak to/for everyday American people, but consider just three points:

a) The Hunter Biden laptop.  This contains emails illustrating dubious commercial transactions that might actually be criminal; Joe Biden is clearly implicated in these.  It calls into question his entire character and integrity and ought to have been fully investigated immediately.  Instead parts of the media and tech crushed it, stating it was all lies, which we now know was a totally false position based on no analysis of the available information.  Would some Americans have voted differently if the story had been properly discussed before the election?

b) The Clinton smear campaign.  Sections within the Clinton team paid 'experts' to invent evidence of Trump-Russian collusion.  We now know that there was never any such collusion, but what did ordinary Americans believe at the time of the election?  Would any have voted differently if the truth had been known at the time?

c) Jussie Smollett's lies.  Smollett invented a racist and homophobic attack to boost his media image and career.  A prominent feature of his lies was the alleged assailants were wearing MAGA hats.  This was at the height of BLM protests, and would have reinforced in many minds the message that Trump's supporters are racists and homophobes.  We now know this story was nothing but a lie, but how many wavering Americans felt unwilling to support Trump on election day?

Biden got seven million more votes than Trump, so it might be comforting to conclude that he would have won the election even if the media and tech machines reported stories like these openly and fairly.  But with an electorate of 240 million, a third of whom did not vote, is it possible that the vested interested of media and tech firms swayed more voters' opinions than actual politics and policies?  

Politics is rough and tough, and perhaps for many seasoned politicians defeat is just part of the job when you inevitably fall out of favour with the electorate.  But to be beaten by lies and lies and lies must surely hurt more than simply upsetting the voters?  If you've never been cheated out of anything you're certainly luckier or more astute than the majority of us.  How would you feel if your job is given to a clearly incompetent candidate who lied and smeared you to get the post, and then you were told you had to congratulate them on their victory?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

So that's why he is still calling the election stolen?

You can make excuses for his rubbish behaviour, but he's still doing it. Honestly, that should tell you something. That's if his penchant for CTs hadn't already. Hunters son. Hillary. Juliet Smollett. None of them should have anything to do with inaugeration. America is supposed to be the focus at that time. The laptop is more an endless list if what ifs and Smollett wasn't charged till recently. He is just showing that he really is as bad as he sounds.

For his staunch and still supportive mob, I'd say that Smollett stereotype isn't far from the mark regardless of the outcome. 

Edited by psyche101
  • Like 4
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Tom1200 said:

Trump believed - with some justification - that Biden's victory was engineered and ensured by an unofficial collaboration between Democrats, media and tech.  I'm UK so I can't speak to/for everyday American people, but consider just three points:

a) The Hunter Biden laptop.  This contains emails illustrating dubious commercial transactions that might actually be criminal; Joe Biden is clearly implicated in these.  It calls into question his entire character and integrity and ought to have been fully investigated immediately.  Instead parts of the media and tech crushed it, stating it was all lies, which we now know was a totally false position based on no analysis of the available information.  Would some Americans have voted differently if the story had been properly discussed before the election?

b) The Clinton smear campaign.  Sections within the Clinton team paid 'experts' to invent evidence of Trump-Russian collusion.  We now know that there was never any such collusion, but what did ordinary Americans believe at the time of the election?  Would any have voted differently if the truth had been known at the time?

c) Jussie Smollett's lies.  Smollett invented a racist and homophobic attack to boost his media image and career.  A prominent feature of his lies was the alleged assailants were wearing MAGA hats.  This was at the height of BLM protests, and would have reinforced in many minds the message that Trump's supporters are racists and homophobes.  We now know this story was nothing but a lie, but how many wavering Americans felt unwilling to support Trump on election day?

Biden got seven million more votes than Trump, so it might be comforting to conclude that he would have won the election even if the media and tech machines reported stories like these openly and fairly.  But with an electorate of 240 million, a third of whom did not vote, is it possible that the vested interested of media and tech firms swayed more voters' opinions than actual politics and policies?  

Politics is rough and tough, and perhaps for many seasoned politicians defeat is just part of the job when you inevitably fall out of favour with the electorate.  But to be beaten by lies and lies and lies must surely hurt more than simply upsetting the voters?  If you've never been cheated out of anything you're certainly luckier or more astute than the majority of us.  How would you feel if your job is given to a clearly incompetent candidate who lied and smeared you to get the post, and then you were told you had to congratulate them on their victory?

1 hour ago, Tom1200 said:

Trump believed - with some justification - that Biden's victory was engineered and ensured by an unofficial collaboration between Democrats, media and tech.  I'm UK so I can't speak to/for everyday American people, but consider just three points:

a) The Hunter Biden laptop.  This contains emails illustrating dubious commercial transactions that might actually be criminal; Joe Biden is clearly implicated in these.  It calls into question his entire character and integrity and ought to have been fully investigated immediately.  Instead parts of the media and tech crushed it, stating it was all lies, which we now know was a totally false position based on no analysis of the available information.  Would some Americans have voted differently if the story had been properly discussed before the election?

b) The Clinton smear campaign.  Sections within the Clinton team paid 'experts' to invent evidence of Trump-Russian collusion.  We now know that there was never any such collusion, but what did ordinary Americans believe at the time of the election?  Would any have voted differently if the truth had been known at the time?

c) Jussie Smollett's lies.  Smollett invented a racist and homophobic attack to boost his media image and career.  A prominent feature of his lies was the alleged assailants were wearing MAGA hats.  This was at the height of BLM protests, and would have reinforced in many minds the message that Trump's supporters are racists and homophobes.  We now know this story was nothing but a lie, but how many wavering Americans felt unwilling to support Trump on election day?

Biden got seven million more votes than Trump, so it might be comforting to conclude that he would have won the election even if the media and tech machines reported stories like these openly and fairly.  But with an electorate of 240 million, a third of whom did not vote, is it possible that the vested interested of media and tech firms swayed more voters' opinions than actual politics and policies?  

Politics is rough and tough, and perhaps for many seasoned politicians defeat is just part of the job when you inevitably fall out of favour with the electorate.  But to be beaten by lies and lies and lies must surely hurt more than simply upsetting the voters?  If you've never been cheated out of anything you're certainly luckier or more astute than the majority of us.  How would you feel if your job is given to a clearly incompetent candidate who lied and smeared you to get the post, and then you were told you had to congratulate them on their victory?

Well as things stand after all these months the only voter fraud has been proven to be committed by members of the Republican Party. This consisted of fraudulent electoral vote counts and the entire event was organized under the direction of President Trumps lawyer Rudy Giuliani. It was planned to substitute the fraudulent electoral vote counts during electoral vote certification on 6 January 2021. However, thanks to the integrity of Vice President Pence he would not subvert the certification by reading the fraudulent vote certification.

Beside this event no legitimate proof of voter fraud has ever been proven, this is the reality of the situation today. 

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Manwon Lender said:

Well as things stand after all these months the only voter fraud has been proven to be committed by members of the Republican Party. This consisted of fraudulent electoral vote counts and the entire event was organized under the direction of President Trumps lawyer Rudy Giuliani. It was planned to substitute the fraudulent electoral vote counts during electoral vote certification on 6 January 2021. However, thanks to the integrity of Vice President Pence he would not subvert the certification by reading the fraudulent vote certification.

Beside this event no legitimate proof of voter fraud has ever been proven, this is the reality of the situation today. 

But I didn't mention voter fraud in #2.  Why quote me (twice!) and then write something totally unrelated to my points?  I just listed three facts - things that happened - which might have swayed voters' views at the time of the election.  There were many others (and of course there was vitriolic rhetoric on the Republican side too which gained them votes: I'm not so dumb as to believe otherwise).  But these were just three examples of how American voters were influenced by powerful groups to support Biden over Trump.  The media fawned over Smollett even after he was proven a liar.  The Clinton team lied about links to Russia.  Social media banned any damaging discussion of Hunter's laptop. 

So my question remains unanswered: how many of the 240 million people eligible to vote in 2020 would have changed their behaviour if all this had been known at the time?  Correction - it WAS all known at the time, so I should really ask - if there was an honest and open discussion about such matters of relevance to ordinary Americans?  

 

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

So that's why he is still calling the election stolen?

You can make excuses for his rubbish behaviour, but he's still doing it. Honestly, that should tell you something. That's if his penchant for CTs hadn't already. Hunters son. Hillary. Juliet Smollett. None of them should have anything to do with inaugeration. America is supposed to be the focus at that time. The laptop is more an endless list if what ifs and Smollett wasn't charged till recently. He is just showing that he really is as bad as he sounds.

For his staunch and still supportive mob, I'd say that Smollett stereotype isn't far from the mark regardless of the outcome. 

I didn't comment on his behaviour now.  In truth I don't know what Trump is saying or doing these days - I'm far more worried by what the incumbent geriatric is saying and doing.  You've created this thread about what Mark Esper says about Trump's refusal to attend the Jan 20th 2021 inauguration.  I gave thoughts for why Trump may have been sufficiently pi$$ed off to conclude "this guy did not win fairly so sod the lot of 'em."  Yes, it looks like childish petulance, and sour grapes to still be complaining about it two years on.  (You would never see Hillary harping on about stolen elections, would you?) 

I don't know enough about the USA to analyse whether his absence from the inauguration undermined the importance of that event.  If you and Esper are right then I imagine it would backfire on Trump and damage his chances of a comeback or re-election?  Trump-o-phobes should surely be delighted by that?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

Trump believed - with some justification - that Biden's victory was engineered and ensured by an unofficial collaboration between Democrats, media and tech.  I'm UK so I can't speak to/for everyday American people, but consider just three points:

a) The Hunter Biden laptop.  This contains emails illustrating dubious commercial transactions that might actually be criminal; Joe Biden is clearly implicated in these.  It calls into question his entire character and integrity and ought to have been fully investigated immediately.  Instead parts of the media and tech crushed it, stating it was all lies, which we now know was a totally false position based on no analysis of the available information.  Would some Americans have voted differently if the story had been properly discussed before the election?

b) The Clinton smear campaign.  Sections within the Clinton team paid 'experts' to invent evidence of Trump-Russian collusion.  We now know that there was never any such collusion, but what did ordinary Americans believe at the time of the election?  Would any have voted differently if the truth had been known at the time?

c) Jussie Smollett's lies.  Smollett invented a racist and homophobic attack to boost his media image and career.  A prominent feature of his lies was the alleged assailants were wearing MAGA hats.  This was at the height of BLM protests, and would have reinforced in many minds the message that Trump's supporters are racists and homophobes.  We now know this story was nothing but a lie, but how many wavering Americans felt unwilling to support Trump on election day?

Biden got seven million more votes than Trump, so it might be comforting to conclude that he would have won the election even if the media and tech machines reported stories like these openly and fairly.  But with an electorate of 240 million, a third of whom did not vote, is it possible that the vested interested of media and tech firms swayed more voters' opinions than actual politics and policies?  

Politics is rough and tough, and perhaps for many seasoned politicians defeat is just part of the job when you inevitably fall out of favour with the electorate.  But to be beaten by lies and lies and lies must surely hurt more than simply upsetting the voters?  If you've never been cheated out of anything you're certainly luckier or more astute than the majority of us.  How would you feel if your job is given to a clearly incompetent candidate who lied and smeared you to get the post, and then you were told you had to congratulate them on their victory?

On point (a) Vox is the outlet that seems to be the most balanced and most detailed.  They say the Big Guy didn't want any part in the deals.  They also say Hunter Biden has been under investigation since Obama.  In not sure it's appropriate for an LEO to speak to the details of Hunter Biden's case before he's charged.  Deny him natural justice and it could mitigate sentencing or perhapsran he couldn't even be charged.  Its an odd story. We'll have to wait see.

I don't really see (b) and (c) influencing the 2020 election to a great degree.

Lastly you really don't have a lot of respect for the American voter if you can't when filling out the ballot on 2020.  I don't believe in RT influence in 2016 either.

I tend to think voters have strongly formed, albeit arbitrary, judgements on who'll they vote for.

Edited by Golden Duck
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh…Trump was snubbed by the whole establishment for the entirety of his presidency. Had Trump gone to the inauguration, the media would have cooked up a controversy and Democrats would still be talking about it 5 years later. 
 

It’s entirely possible that NOT going to Biden’s inauguration was the most considerate and stately thing  Trump could do. His attendance probably would have overshadowed the event (certainly in the media coverage) and marred an otherwise completely forgettable ceremony. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Only 3 presidents have not gone to inaguration in our nations history. And the other two were in the early 1800's.

https://time.com/5928537/trump-biden-not-attend-inauguration-history/

 

Trump is an embarrassment.

Edited by spartan max2
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

But I didn't mention voter fraud in #2.  Why quote me (twice!) and then write something totally unrelated to my points?  I just listed three facts - things that happened - which might have swayed voters' views at the time of the election.  There were many others (and of course there was vitriolic rhetoric on the Republican side too which gained them votes: I'm not so dumb as to believe otherwise).  But these were just three examples of how American voters were influenced by powerful groups to support Biden over Trump.  The media fawned over Smollett even after he was proven a liar.  The Clinton team lied about links to Russia.  Social media banned any damaging discussion of Hunter's laptop. 

So my question remains unanswered: how many of the 240 million people eligible to vote in 2020 would have changed their behaviour if all this had been known at the time?  Correction - it WAS all known at the time, so I should really ask - if there was an honest and open discussion about such matters of relevance to ordinary Americans?  

 

I didn't comment on his behaviour now.  In truth I don't know what Trump is saying or doing these days - I'm far more worried by what the incumbent geriatric is saying and doing.  You've created this thread about what Mark Esper says about Trump's refusal to attend the Jan 20th 2021 inauguration.  I gave thoughts for why Trump may have been sufficiently pi$$ed off to conclude "this guy did not win fairly so sod the lot of 'em."  Yes, it looks like childish petulance, and sour grapes to still be complaining about it two years on.  (You would never see Hillary harping on about stolen elections, would you?) 

I don't know enough about the USA to analyse whether his absence from the inauguration undermined the importance of that event.  If you and Esper are right then I imagine it would backfire on Trump and damage his chances of a comeback or re-election?  Trump-o-phobes should surely be delighted by that?

My comments were directed at the fact that more than once you alluded to the fact that Trumps loss was actually do to voter fraud. As far as quoting you twice that was not intentional, however my comments were not unrelated to comments you made if you didn’t want comments made on voter fraud you should not have made the comments you did. 

 “ Politics is rough and tough, and perhaps for many seasoned politicians defeat is just part of the job when you inevitably fall out of favour with the electorate.  But to be beaten by lies and lies and lies must surely hurt more than simply upsetting the voters?  If you've never been cheated out of anything you're certainly luckier or more astute than the majority of us.  How would you feel if your job is given to a clearly incompetent candidate who lied and smeared you to get the post, and then you were told you had to congratulate them on their victory?”

“Even you first sentence alludes to voter fraud as being a reason that Trump lost: Trump believed - with some justification - that Biden's victory was engineered and ensured by an unofficial collaboration between Democrats, media and tech.” 

Trump wasn’t beaten by lie’s, he wasn’t cheated out of anything, and while I am certainly not a Biden fan in anyway. I have been a moderate Republican my entire life I have never voted on the Democratic ticket. However, to honest I didn’t vote during the last two elections because in both cases a candidate didn’t exist that I could support. I really don’t know where you get your information from, but Trump didn’t lose the election because of anything Biden did. He lost the election because he lost the Christian majority vote that allowed him to win the election in 2016.

Trumps actions during his Presidency alienated Christians Nationwide and this was do to his own actions no else’s. Last as for as open relevant and honest discussion between ordinary Americans there certainly is but the problem is the fact it’s not bipartisan. My country has never been divided along political lines as it became during the Trump Presidency. There was division, however President Trump took this division to levels never seen before and he did so intentionally. Because of this many ordinary Americans no longer feel comfortable discussing politics openly like in days past. 

JIMO

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

Trump believed - with some justification - that Biden's victory was engineered and ensured by an unofficial collaboration between Democrats, media and tech.  I'm UK so I can't speak to/for everyday American people, but consider just three points:

a) The Hunter Biden laptop.  This contains emails illustrating dubious commercial transactions that might actually be criminal; Joe Biden is clearly implicated in these.  It calls into question his entire character and integrity and ought to have been fully investigated immediately.  Instead parts of the media and tech crushed it, stating it was all lies, which we now know was a totally false position based on no analysis of the available information.  Would some Americans have voted differently if the story had been properly discussed before the election?

b) The Clinton smear campaign.  Sections within the Clinton team paid 'experts' to invent evidence of Trump-Russian collusion.  We now know that there was never any such collusion, but what did ordinary Americans believe at the time of the election?  Would any have voted differently if the truth had been known at the time?

c) Jussie Smollett's lies.  Smollett invented a racist and homophobic attack to boost his media image and career.  A prominent feature of his lies was the alleged assailants were wearing MAGA hats.  This was at the height of BLM protests, and would have reinforced in many minds the message that Trump's supporters are racists and homophobes.  We now know this story was nothing but a lie, but how many wavering Americans felt unwilling to support Trump on election day?

Biden got seven million more votes than Trump, so it might be comforting to conclude that he would have won the election even if the media and tech machines reported stories like these openly and fairly.  But with an electorate of 240 million, a third of whom did not vote, is it possible that the vested interested of media and tech firms swayed more voters' opinions than actual politics and policies?  

Politics is rough and tough, and perhaps for many seasoned politicians defeat is just part of the job when you inevitably fall out of favour with the electorate.  But to be beaten by lies and lies and lies must surely hurt more than simply upsetting the voters?  If you've never been cheated out of anything you're certainly luckier or more astute than the majority of us.  How would you feel if your job is given to a clearly incompetent candidate who lied and smeared you to get the post, and then you were told you had to congratulate them on their victory?

Trump's entire election fraud claims are that there are fake ballots and computer errors and such.

Your entire post is irrelevant to Trump not going to inaguration.

He didn't go because he claimed and continues to claim the elections results are a fraud and that he is actually the rightful president.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

I don't really see (b) and (c) influencing the 2020 election to a great degree.

I don't see how a prevailing anti-XYZ air could fail to influence voters.  People went to vote hearing that Trump's campaign was shored up by Russia (lies) and his supporters beat up poor little black dudes (lies).  They were told that the laptop was a Trump-campaign lie to smear the Bidens (lies).  If you can't imagine how effectively politicians use the media to affect voting patterns - look at our recent local elections here in Britain.  Two issues: the cost of living crisis, or whether Boris ate cake at a party during lockdown.  Labour focussed (almost) entirely on the cake, farcically calling it Partygate and made huge political capital out of a totally irrelevant event... and now just a week later Labour are in deep sheet for doing exactly the same kind of thing, breaking stupid covid rules.  But the elections are done! and by next time in four years the minutiae will be forgotten.

23 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

I tend to think voters have strongly formed, albeit arbitrary, judgements on who'll they vote for.

Many people support one party or another, regardless.  But many other people think long and deep about who to support, and there are many wards/regions where these swing voters can have a major impact on election outcomes.  So a strong, repetitive message from the media can change voting patterns.  If this is simply a matter of stating a fact like Boris ate cake, and that's enough to persuade voters he's out of touch and doesn't deserve support, so be it.  But if there is an unrelenting assault of lies about one candidate, from every direction - politicians,media, tech - with no balance or open discussion, that's hardly conducive for an honest and fair election.

31 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Lastly you really don't have a lot of respect for the American voter if you can't when filling out the ballot on 2020.  I don't believe in RT influence in 2016 either.

You're wrong.  People - every one of us - are heavily influenced in how we talk, behave, think, vote.  Politicians train to tap into this.  Advertisers do it all the time, making us want things we don't need.  Accepting that this is so is not the same as disrespecting people who change their votes according to pervasive, persuasive pressure.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

I don't see how a prevailing anti-XYZ air could fail to influence voters.  People went to vote hearing that Trump's campaign was shored up by Russia (lies) and his supporters beat up poor little black dudes (lies).  They were told that the laptop was a Trump-campaign lie to smear the Bidens (lies).  If you can't imagine how effectively politicians use the media to affect voting patterns - look at our recent local elections here in Britain.  Two issues: the cost of living crisis, or whether Boris ate cake at a party during lockdown.  Labour focussed (almost) entirely on the cake, farcically calling it Partygate and made huge political capital out of a totally irrelevant event... and now just a week later Labour are in deep sheet for doing exactly the same kind of thing, breaking stupid covid rules.  But the elections are done! and by next time in four years the minutiae will be forgotten.

Many people support one party or another, regardless.  But many other people think long and deep about who to support, and there are many wards/regions where these swing voters can have a major impact on election outcomes.  So a strong, repetitive message from the media can change voting patterns.  If this is simply a matter of stating a fact like Boris ate cake, and that's enough to persuade voters he's out of touch and doesn't deserve support, so be it.  But if there is an unrelenting assault of lies about one candidate, from every direction - politicians,media, tech - with no balance or open discussion, that's hardly conducive for an honest and fair election.

You're wrong.  People - every one of us - are heavily influenced in how we talk, behave, think, vote.  Politicians train to tap into this.  Advertisers do it all the time, making us want things we don't need.  Accepting that this is so is not the same as disrespecting people who change their votes according to pervasive, persuasive pressure.

I don't think so. I've known how i will vote in this (au) election since the last one.  It's pretty much because of the Green's Manifesto before the last election. Media bias is obvious and noone cares that this has been the worst cycle to govern in memory.

If i was American nothing would have swayed me to vote for HRC.

I simply can't believe Americans would be swayed by Russia Today.  It's fun to think of all Yanks being Homer Simpson. But, deep down you hope most can an at least see that their team needs to do better.

PS.  The way I remember it, the Juicy Smolliet, was well and truly cleared up before the election.  Even, Chappelle didn't miss him.

Edited by Golden Duck
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

My comments were directed at the fact that more than once you alluded to the fact that Trumps loss was actually do to voter fraud. As far as quoting you twice that was not intentional, however my comments were not unrelated to comments you made if you didn’t want comments made on voter fraud you should not have made the comments you did. 

 “ Politics is rough and tough, and perhaps for many seasoned politicians defeat is just part of the job when you inevitably fall out of favour with the electorate.  But to be beaten by lies and lies and lies must surely hurt more than simply upsetting the voters?  If you've never been cheated out of anything you're certainly luckier or more astute than the majority of us.  How would you feel if your job is given to a clearly incompetent candidate who lied and smeared you to get the post, and then you were told you had to congratulate them on their victory?”

“Even you first sentence alludes to voter fraud as being a reason that Trump lost: Trump believed - with some justification - that Biden's victory was engineered and ensured by an unofficial collaboration between Democrats, media and tech.” 

Trump wasn’t beaten by lie’s, he wasn’t cheated out of anything, and while I am certainly not a Biden fan in anyway. I have been a moderate Republican my entire life I have never voted on the Democratic ticket. However, to honest I didn’t vote during the last two elections because in both cases a candidate didn’t exist that I could support. I really don’t know where you get your information from, but Trump didn’t lose the election because of anything Biden did. He lost the election because he lost the Christian majority vote that allowed him to win the election in 2016.

Trumps actions during his Presidency alienated Christians Nationwide and this was do to his own actions no else’s. Last as for as open relevant and honest discussion between ordinary Americans there certainly is but the problem is the fact it’s not bipartisan. My country has never been divided along political lines as it became during the Trump Presidency. There was division, however President Trump took this division to levels never seen before and he did so intentionally. Because of this many ordinary Americans no longer feel comfortable discussing politics openly like in days past. 

JIMO

 

1) I NEVER mentioned voter fraud.  Not this post, not previous posts.  So why do you claim as fact that "more than once you alluded to the fact that Trump's loss was actually do to voter fraud"?

2) I listed three examples that influenced American opinion around election time.  These examples may have persuaded some voters to change their support from Trump to Biden.  Indeed I would go so far as to suggest that the constant negativity pumped out about Trump by the media, social media and big tech did influence voters and did influence the way they voted.  Would anyone genuinely challenge that assertion?

3) You misunderstood my first sentence.  By writing "Biden's victory was engineered and ensured by an unofficial collaboration between Democrats, media and tech" I did not mean to suggest they were clandestinely stuffing ballot boxes with forged voting slips, or any similar malfeasance.  I meant that each of these three huge influencers was doing everything in its power to publish negativity about Trump and the Republicans, even when they knew these were outright lies; and simultaneously supressing open and honest discussion of genuine matters.

4) FACT - Trump was beaten by Biden.  FACT - Trump was beaten because more people in relevant states voted for Biden than for Trump.  OPINION - media lies and negativity swayed many people to vote for Biden instead of Trump.  SPECULATION - media lies and negativity swayed enough people to change their votes that this affected the outcome of the election.

That last point is, as I labelled, pure speculation: we'll never know if Trump ever stood a hope or if, as you suggest, other factors like religion played roles too.  But the fact is Democrats lied, media lied, tech supressed open debate and it was hardly a level playing field.  If people are fed a constant diet of one-sided messages that's what they will come to believe, and that happened in 2020.

17 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

I don't think so. I've known how i will vote in this (au) election since the last one.  It's pretty much because of the Green's Manifesto before the last election. Media bias is obvious and noone cares that this has been the worst cycle to govern in memory.

If i was American nothing would have swayed me to vote for HRC.

And I'm cool with that.  As I recognised, many people never change the way they vote, even as parties and policies change positions.  But many others do change their votes, often at the last moment, influenced by the latest thing they heard or their gut feeling on the day.  And if everything you hear is "X is good, Y is bad" many people won't question that.  That's how influential agencies can affect elections, for better or for worse, and we should at least accept that this is happening instead of denying it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

1) I NEVER mentioned voter fraud.  Not this post, not previous posts.  So why do you claim as fact that "more than once you alluded to the fact that Trump's loss was actually do to voter fraud"?

You're defending Trump's claims that the elections was stolen. Yet youre acting like Trump's claims are not entirely hindged upon him claiming there were fake or uncounted votes. Thats his main argument.

You can't say this

Quote

Trump believed - with some justification - that Biden's victory was engineered and ensured by an unofficial collaboration between Democrats, media and tech. I'm UK so I can't speak to/for everyday American people, but consider just three points:

And ignore what Trump's actual claims are. You're revising history. Trump's continued to claim that there were fake votes.

Edited by spartan max2
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

And I'm cool with that.  As I recognised, many people never change the way they vote, even as parties and policies change positions.  But many others do change their votes, often at the last moment, influenced by the latest thing they heard or their gut feeling on the day.  And if everything you hear is "X is good, Y is bad" many people won't question that.  That's how influential agencies can affect elections, for better or for worse, and we should at least accept that this is happening instead of denying it

I used to vote Labor here.  I got off that horse before Kevin Rudd became PM.  But. I have never seen a good reason to go back to them. 

Imagine a PM runs a "me too/we agree" campaign except for we'll ratify Kyoto and say sorry to the indigenous.  After he wins, he holds an ideas summit at Parliament House to find policies.; but, nothing eventuates and the back stabbing begins.  Not to be trusted again.

I feel or hope - I'm can't say I'm certain - people are becoming more savvy about what might be best to keep their job tomorrow, next week, next year, next decade.  Jobs from coal won the last AU Federal Election.  But, the current PM has copped the blame for climate change.  He's been PM for three years, isn't that weather?  That's what we say to climate change deniers don't we?

Kevin Hassett explained Trump's tax policy better than I've ever heard any policy explained.  It should be a model.  If Trump had sold that, maybe add "we'll have more jobs because we won't tax revenue and expense" he might be still entertaining us.  Other ticks for meeting Kim face-to-face and Operation Warp Speed.

Trump probably could've returned serve of the Ukraine Funding impeachment because even the he may have delayed funding the GAO didn't sue, that is to say Congress's department were too slow ensuring the funding went ahead.

Overall, there were plenty of stupid things that Trump simply should never have said.  His opponents would never have had ammunition without him.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poor baby Donald.       Awwwwww   did him lose his little  binkyyyyyyy?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

honestly, I don't care if a president doesn't attend the inaugural.   I see politicians as scoundrels.   You see them in primaries telling us how evil and bad their competitors are and then the loser endorses the same person they said was unfit to hold the position.  

Edited by Myles
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

Trump believed - with some justification - that Biden's victory was engineered

:lol::lol::lol:

Of course he did because he knew his victory had been engineered in 2016.    Give it up.  There is nothing real about the "war between democrats and republicans" except the effect it has on our maleable minds and division that we are so ready to join in on.

And Trump does spend a lot of time being petulant, like a 5 year old, sometimes like a 13 year old.

Edited by Desertrat56
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Myles said:

honestly, I don't care if a president doesn't attend the inaugural.   I see politicians as scoundrels.   You see them in primaries telling us how evil and bad their competitors are and then the loser endorses the same person they said was unfit to hold the position.  

I certainly agree with there, I also see all politicians as scoundrels and I further believe that our Nation has not had one that put the American people above themselves in the last 50 years. They have all been the same in my opinion, lining their pockets is more important than anything else.

By the way great post!:tu:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

:lol::lol::lol:

Of course he did because he knew his victory had been engineered in 2016.    Give it up.  There is nothing real about the "war between democrats and republicans" except the effect it has on our maleable minds and division that we are so ready to join in on.

And Trump does spend a lot of time being petulant, like a 5 year old, sometimes like a 13 year old.

Like I stated earlier the only proven voter fraud that occurred in 2020, was perpetrated by the Republican Party when the fraudulent Electoral Vote scam was uncovered. There is no doubt Trump was involved in it even though I can’t prove it, I mean Rudy Giuliani was responsible for engineering the entire event. The only thing that prevented the fraud was the fact that Vice President Mike Pence would not sacrifice his integrity like so many other Republican leaders did throughout Trumps Presidency, and still continue to do today. Because The Vice President did not follow Trumps instructions during the vote certification on 6 Jan 2021, he and his family was targeted and threatened with Death threat ( Hang Like Pence ) wonder who was responsible for that!:rolleyes::angry:

 

36A2AC3B-AD69-4BB9-8A8E-7C7F7BBD9370.jpeg

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

I didn't comment on his behaviour now. 

No I did. His behaviour hadn't changed is my point, as such I can't see those as influences for such a childish act.

I have to say, I was stunned that at his actions. It was not a big FU to a handful of people, it was a service to his country to hand over gracefully. 

11 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

In truth I don't know what Trump is saying or doing these days

Plenty of threads on his s continued claims. 

Suffice to say it's probably worse if anything. 

11 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

 - I'm far more worried by what the incumbent geriatric is saying and doing. 

Then your doing it backwards and have learned nothing from Trump's debacle leadership. He looks far worse on the global stage than Biden could even if he tried very hard to be as big an ass. 

11 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

You've created this thread about what Mark Esper says about Trump's refusal to attend the Jan 20th 2021 inauguration.  I gave thoughts for why Trump may have been sufficiently pi$$ed off to conclude "this guy did not win fairly so sod the lot of 'em."  Yes, it looks like childish petulance, and sour grapes to still be complaining about it two years on. 

He pretty much said sod the USA. He took personal issues up as part of the job. He was never fit to take that chair. 

11 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

(You would never see Hillary harping on about stolen elections, would you?) 

She lost to Trump didn't she? 

She's so popular that Trump left her behind with the "not Hillary" vote. 

Yet Trump supporters accept ten times worse from him. Not sure how that works but there you go.

11 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

I don't know enough about the USA to analyse whether his absence from the inauguration undermined the importance of that event.  If you and Esper are right then I imagine it would backfire on Trump and damage his chances of a comeback or re-election?  Trump-o-phobes should surely be delighted by that?

I think the blind support regardless of incidents clearly indicating he sees the people of America as his minions is more interesting. It's hard to fathom why so many Americans see such an ass as a potential leader. He claims to be running again, and that will indeed please his cult following, but is it enough? Refusing to attend inaugeration was a big screw you to the entire country, yet people are asking for more? Considering that, perhaps Emporor Xi could run for president and do the job quickly. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Like I stated earlier the only proven voter fraud that occurred in 2020, was perpetrated by the Republican Party when the fraudulent Electoral Vote scam was uncovered. There is no doubt Trump was involved in it even though I can’t prove it, I mean Rudy Giuliani was responsible for engineering the entire event. The only thing that prevented the fraud was the fact that Vice President Mike Pence would not sacrifice his integrity like so many other Republican leaders did through Trump Presidency, and still continue to do today. Because The Vice President did not follow Trumps instructions during the vote certification on 6 Jan 2021, he and his family was targeted and threatened with Death threat ( Hang Like Pence ) wonder who was responsible for that!:rolleyes::angry:

 

36A2AC3B-AD69-4BB9-8A8E-7C7F7BBD9370.jpeg

I already told you what I was talking about when I say our elections are fixed.  Of course the only voter fraud was perpetrated by the liars who insisted the election was "stolen".  It wasn't stolen and there was no voter fraud except for what you mentioned.   That isn't how our elections are rigged.   There was a reason we had to suffer through 4 years of Trump, just like the 4 years that Old Bush got, and the 4 years Biden will get.   There is a reason Clinton beat old bush and it had less to do with what the voters wanted and everything to do with manipulating who we were allowed to vote for because of the parties.   No  voter fraud, just primary manipulation.

Edited by Desertrat56
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

No I did. His behaviour hadn't changed is my point, as such I can't see those as influences for such a childish act.

I have to say, I was stunned that at his actions. It was not a big FU to a handful of people, it was a service to his country to hand over gracefully. 

Plenty of threads on his s continued claims. 

Suffice to say it's probably worse if anything. 

Then your doing it backwards and have learned nothing from Trump's debacle leadership. He looks far worse on the global stage than Biden could even if he tried very hard to be as big an ass. 

He pretty much said sod the USA. He took personal issues up as part of the job. He was never fit to take that chair. 

She lost to Trump didn't she? 

She's so popular that Trump left her behind with the "not Hillary" vote. 

Yet Trump supporters accept ten times worse from him. Not sure how that works but there you go.

I think the blind support regardless of incidents clearly indicating he sees the people of America as his minions is more interesting. It's hard to fathom why so many Americans see such an ass as a potential leader. He claims to be running again, and that will indeed please his cult following, but is it enough? Refusing to attend inaugeration was a big screw you to the entire country, yet people are asking for more? Considering that, perhaps Emporor Xi could run for president and do the job quickly. 

 

 

Thanks man totally accurate comments that are right on target!:tu:

Oh and by the way, people are certainly very strange!:D

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I already told you what I was talking about when I say our elections are fixed.  Of course the only voter fraud was perpetrated by the liars who insisted the election was "stolen".  It wasn't stolen and there was no voter fraud except for what you mentioned.   That isn't how our elections are rigged.   There was a reason we had to suffer through 4 years of Trump, just like the 4 years that Old Bush got, and the 4 years Biden will get.   There is a reason Clinton beat old bush and it had less to do with what the voters wanted and everything to do with manipulating who we were allowed to vote for because of the parties.   No  voter fraud, just primary manipulation.

You certainly did express you view on how elections are fix, and the more I consider it the more it’s starting to make sense! But, dam that means I have been in the dark for so many years :wacko::w00t:, so thank you and amen sister I am beginning to see the light!:yes:

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

You certainly did express you view on how elections are fix, and the more I consider it the more it’s starting to make sense! But, dam that means I have been in the dark for so many years :wacko::w00t:, so thank you and amen sister I am beginning to see the light!:yes:

You have been standing in a crowded, darkened room.  We aren't supposed to notice the "curtain", much less look behind it.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.