The "If Trump wins...." Prediction thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter ZenMode
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 142
  • Views: 3K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:

Loading…

www.politico.com

“… Trump is weighing a go-it-alone approach to presidential transition planning, which could dramatically slow his takeover of the federal government. …

The decision not to take federal assistance allows them to raise unlimited funds without disclosing their donors, while avoiding oversight from federal bureaucrats … [But] it will limit the information he and his team can access to understand current federal operations and challenges.”
Click to expand...
Ignorance and arrogance from the trump team. Same as it ever was.
 
superrific said:
This has been explained to you many times. That you still seem to cling to this nonsense raises that question again about the intelligence of Trump supporters. One more time I will explain. I'll even give you citations.
Click to expand...
I've never discussed this on this forum or the old ZZLP, but I wouldn't expect relevant details to deter you from acting like a pompous ass.
1. What you're talking about was actually two different programs. The first was Remain in Mexico, promulgated in 2019. The second was the restriction popularly known as Title 42, as it was promulgated by the CDC pursuant to the statutes in the federal code giving it emergency powers under a national health emergency.
Click to expand...
Yah, I know. That's why I referred to one by name (Remain in Mexico/RIM) and acknowledged that I couldn't recall the name of the "COVID" policy.
2. Remain in Mexico is illegal. Only one appeals court has addressed the matter -- the 9th Circuit court of appeals. It found that the program violated US statutory law (which is clearly does). It declared the policy illegal and also entered an injunction. The Supreme Court stayed the injunction but otherwise did not comment. The only way Remain in Mexico could be implemented now would be to defy a judgment by a federal appeals court. God damn that Biden for following the law! Anyway, people stopped talking about it because Trump got what he wanted with Title 42.

Citation: Here is the 9th Circuit's order:
www.aclu.org

Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf | American Civil Liberties Union

The American Civil Liberties Union, Southern Poverty Law Center, and Center for Gender & Refugee Studies filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s new policy forcing asylum seekers to return to Mexico and remain there while their cases are considered.
www.aclu.org
Click to expand...
As Is a stay order a final ruling? Trump expected issues with RIM and had alternate options to address the border issues. One was called PACR or PACER. The combination of trying to revoke RIM and the perception of Dems/Biden admin asylum seekers, is the big picture I'm referring to and is very likely the cause of the crisis.
3. As for Title 42, Biden kept it in place well into 2022, when it became clear that the policy had grave problems. Then rogue federal courts enjoined him from lifting it, because reasons. But anyway, it could haven't survived after the pandemic emergency ended, because the CDC was rule based on the pandemic. Once Biden declared the pandemic to be over (as it clearly is), the authorization for Title 42 disappeared. Title 42 cannot be resumed, because there is no public health emergency.

www.carnegie.org

What Does the End of Title 42 Mean for U.S. Migration Policy? | Immigration | Carnegie Corporation of New York

Andrew Selee, president of Corporation grantee Migration Policy Institute, assesses how shifts in American immigration policy might reverberate across the region and more broadly around the world
www.carnegie.org www.carnegie.org

4. Mexico made it clear that they weren't going to renew their cooperation -- but that's not the main problem. The main problem is that it is illegal under federal law. That was what the bipartisan bill that Trump tanked was going to address.
Click to expand...
I'm not looking to debate legal specifics, because it really is secondary to the bigger problem. I would argue that the main problem, at least for Democrats, is the well-earned perception of encouraging migrants to seek asylum in the US. Obama had a spike and Biden had an even larger spike in asylum seekers.
This has now been explained to you as clearly as possible. Citations have been provided, including a citation to the most authoritative source about the 9th Circuit's ruling -- namely, a link to that ruling itself. If you continue to persist with your nonsense about it, the only possible conclusions are a) you are not sufficiently intelligent to comprehend; or b) you are engaging in bad faith without any interest in learning what you don't know. Either way, it should cause you to reexamine some things.
Click to expand...
Sweet baby Jesus, you love yourself.
 
Last edited:
ZenMode said:
I've never discussed this on this forum or the old ZZLP, but I wouldn't expect relevant details to deter you from acting like a pompous ass. Yah, I know. That's why I referred to one by name (Remain in Mexico/RIM) and acknowledged that I couldn't recall the name of the "COVID" policy.As Is a stay order a final ruling? Trump expected issues with RIM and had alternate options to address the border issues. One was called PACR or PACER. The combination of trying to revoke RIM and the perception of Dems/Biden admin asylum seekers, is the big picture I'm referring to and is very likely the cause of the crisis. I'm not looking to debate legal specifics, because it really is secondary to the bigger problem. I would argue that the main problem, at least for Democrats, is the well-earned perception of encouraging migrants to seek asylum in the US. Obama had a spike and Biden had an even larger spike in asylum seekers. Sweet baby Jesus, you love yourself.
Click to expand...
1. No, a stay is not a final order. That's inherent in the terminology. But it's not.
2. Oh, I see. So now you're going with, "well, OK, I was wrong, but you see there's a perception there." Again, judges killed RIM, not the Dems. I mean, it was an awful policy for reasons that we've discussed at length, but it's ALSO true that the courts enjoined it. That the injunction was stayed doesn't make the policy legal. It's my view that the administration should avoid promulgating illegal policies. What about you?
3. The cause of the crisis is the perception? OK, sure.
4. The Biden "spike" was because Covid had pushed the numbers very low.
5. I don't love myself, actually. I'm just 100% confident that I know more about virtually every legal issue than you do. That's not a boast. Michael Jordan was a better basketball player than a bench warmer on the JV team. So was every player on the varsity team. I'm not claiming to be Michael Jordan. I'm just noting that you're the bench warmer on the JV team (or more likely, an IM player). This is where everything goes wrong for you. You think that you're on the court with the starters, but you're not even on the team.

I explain legal concepts primarily because 1) I'm good at it (not surprising since it was my profession); and 2) many, many posters like to read my legal explanations. I'm not the only person who can teach you, but I suspect there aren't other law professors in your life. So I'm probably your best bet if you want to learn. But I can't make you learn, of course. I will continue to explain concepts because many other people do like it when I share knowledge.
 
If Trump wins, The billionaire Bros establish a Plutocracy/Oligarchy...whether they go 25th A or not.

Very much like the Billionaire Bros post-election "coup" at the end of the series Succession...except for Murdoch dying and a pencil-pushing weasel becoming the President/Owner of FNC.
 
superrific said:
These are interesting thoughts. I disagree with #4. I mean, it depends on what you mean by "hostilities" but there is not going to be peace just because Trump comes into office. Netanyahu has to keep the war going or he will go to jail.

I also disagree with #7. If the Pubs have a majority in the House or Senate, they absolutely will attempt an abortion ban. It will be filibustered in the Senate either way, and I do not think that the Pubs will break the filibuster over it. Maybe later in the term. Not right away.

Elon Musk isn't going to be a close advisor. He will get his graft money from federal contracts and he'll go back to doing whatever he does.

Trump would be toying with another term in 28 if he is still alive and healthy, but given his state of health now, it seems unlikely.
Click to expand...

Regarding #4, at the time that I wrote the list it felt like Netanyahu was prolonging the Gaza action needlessly. Now it feels lie he's taking advantage of the political situation in the US. Currently, I agree that if Trump wins he will go on with his expanded hostilities. I did have a thought yesterday wondering if Trump would trade "peace" in Ukraine as long as the Russians get Iran to back down.

Still feel pretty good about my prediction at #7. GOP will try to go with salami slice strategy in rolling back abortion, not on big swoop.

I don't think Musk will be part of the Cabinet or take a government position. But he will try to exert major influence early on.

The real Trump move would be to anoint one of his kids as his VP candidate, win the election and then step down.
 
CRHeel94 said:
The real Trump move would be to anoint one of his kids as his VP candidate, win the election and then step down.
Click to expand...
1. Fair that you hadn't updated the list. I didn't realize it was a cut-and-paste (literally or semantically).

2. That's not a Trump move at all. This is where maybe your background with latin dictators serves you poorly in understanding Trump (normally it helps, I think). Trump puts relatives in positions of power so they can help him, not so he can have a legacy. There's no way Trump would ever step down, not for his kids or anyone else (except maybe under extreme duress, like 'resign and accept exile or we will shoot you').
 
I do agree it's all about him. His kids are just props to his ends.

In '28 he will be thinking about legacy.
 
If Trump wins and craps the bed, I predict a lot of 3rd party voters will say something along the lines of, “don’t blame me, I voted for Jill Stein.”
 
Less than a year ago — from a guy Trump wants to run the CIA.

 
I heard this morning that Trump was going to replace all generals above two star to aid in his takeover of the government.

In 2020 I heard that Biden was going to outlaw homeschooling, go door to door confiscating guns, implement a national mask and vaccine mandate, free health care and/or amnesty for everyone here illegally, coronavirus was going to magically disappear (Because, you know, it was all just made up to make people scared of Trump), take away all internal combustion engine vehicles, and that was just for starters.

I love election season. It is so entertaining.
 
Last edited:
ZenMode said:
I heard this morning that Trump was going to replace all generals above two star to aid in his takeover of the government.

In 2020 I heard that Biden was going to outlaw homeschooling, go door to door confiscating guns, implement a national mask and vaccine mandate, free health care and/or amnesty for everyone here illegally, coronavirus was going to magically disappear (Because, you know, it was all just made up to make people scared of Trump), take away all internal combustion engine vehicles, and that was just for starters.

I love election season. It is so entertaining.
Click to expand...
This comparison would be apt if Biden or people of prominence in his campaign or cabinet had ever talked about doing things like that.
 
The clock is ticking, so we'll see what the Orange Goblin actually does while in office, you know, if he even leaves office and doesn't anoint himself King.

I don't know if these have been mentioned, but I've heard that there will be internment camps, deporting of those who qualify as Dreamers, multiple claims of a ban on all vaccines and an implication that all seed oils will be outlawed.

Some additional concerns:

1. Will all US citizens be required to join and attend a sanctioned church denomination regularly?
2. Will all US citizens be required to tithe 10% of their income to a sanctioned church?
3. When SS and Medicare are done away with, will the sanctioned churches take over responsibility for caring for the elderly and sick?
4. How long will it be before Ashley Babbitt is canonized as a Saint?
5. Will those of the Christian faith be allowed to use other versions of the Bible...the ones without the US Constitution and the Pledge of Allegiance?
6. Will Congress pass a law that requires all images of Jesus to be light skinned, blonde haired and blue eyed?
7. Once all the brown people are rounded up and deported, will the detainment camps be used to house Muslims and atheists until they can be deported?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top