Topic

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

2020 US Presidential Election. (LOCKED)

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 406 of 442 < 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 >

Topic Locked

milaneagle Cheshunt 17 Jan 21 2.37pm
Mad really I’m looking forward to see what happens on the 20th though!!
Alert a moderator to this post

milaneagle

Cheshunt 17 Jan 21 2.37pm

Mad really
I’m looking forward to see what happens on the 20th though!!

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 17 Jan 21 2.38pm
Originally posted by cryrst I dont think 'normal' and biden/harris/dems is going to work for many Americans! Sometimes though you just get what you deserve. When it starts going south I would guarantee that usa politics wont be reported in the media as much as under trump. I mean bad news is only republican isnt it! Edited by cryrst (17 Jan 2021 8.28am) Trump thrives on attention so his behaviour deliberately invites it. It's Trump which has been in the media and not Republican "bad news". Remove Trump and replace him with a real Republican and the level of attention would subside anyway. Hopefully, it will quickly diminish and change from political controversy to the pressing need to overcome their very serious pandemic. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 17 Jan 21 2.38pm

Originally posted by cryrst

I dont think 'normal' and biden/harris/dems is going to work for many Americans!
Sometimes though you just get what you deserve.
When it starts going south I would guarantee that usa politics wont be reported in the media as much as under trump. I mean bad news is only republican isnt it!

Edited by cryrst (17 Jan 2021 8.28am)

Trump thrives on attention so his behaviour deliberately invites it. It's Trump which has been in the media and not Republican "bad news".

Remove Trump and replace him with a real Republican and the level of attention would subside anyway. Hopefully, it will quickly diminish and change from political controversy to the pressing need to overcome their very serious pandemic.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Matov 17 Jan 21 2.43pm
Originally posted by milaneagle I’m looking forward to see what happens on the 20th though!! Quite. But something really does not seem right at all. Those security measures seem completely over the top. In fact none of the security around Washington makes any sense whatsoever. On the 6th of January, you have the kind of security measures you might see at a Dulwich Hamlet game. And now, for supposedly the most popular US President ever, tens of thousands of troops deployed and security measures on a level never seen before employed. I also note, and would be incredibly happy to be told why, that it is primarily National Guard units being used and not regular Army. Is that how these things are usually done or is there more to this? A 100% genuine question by the way with no slant or expectation of an answer I want to here. Just curiosity. "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.
Alert a moderator to this post

Matov

17 Jan 21 2.43pm

Originally posted by milaneagle

I’m looking forward to see what happens on the 20th though!!

Quite.

But something really does not seem right at all. Those security measures seem completely over the top. In fact none of the security around Washington makes any sense whatsoever.

On the 6th of January, you have the kind of security measures you might see at a Dulwich Hamlet game. And now, for supposedly the most popular US President ever, tens of thousands of troops deployed and security measures on a level never seen before employed.

I also note, and would be incredibly happy to be told why, that it is primarily National Guard units being used and not regular Army.

Is that how these things are usually done or is there more to this? A 100% genuine question by the way with no slant or expectation of an answer I want to here. Just curiosity.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 17 Jan 21 2.55pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Basically he said he'd accept he was incorrect and take it on the chin. It would show some class if he was able to actually do it, although I worry that the totally indoctrinated find it almost impossible to let go of their belief system. For some this would be like Jesus arriving again and announcing that Mohammed was right. Admitting you were wrong is very difficult for some people. By the way, Trump's approval rating is now at 37.6% more than 20% lower than his disapproval rating, measured by the same 538 poll of polls that was referenced last week:- [Link] For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 17 Jan 21 2.55pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Basically he said he'd accept he was incorrect and take it on the chin.

It would show some class if he was able to actually do it, although I worry that the totally indoctrinated find it almost impossible to let go of their belief system.

For some this would be like Jesus arriving again and announcing that Mohammed was right.

Admitting you were wrong is very difficult for some people. By the way, Trump's approval rating is now at 37.6% more than 20% lower than his disapproval rating, measured by the same 538 poll of polls that was referenced last week:-

[Link]

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

milaneagle Cheshunt 17 Jan 21 3.00pm
Originally posted by Matov Quite. But something really does not seem right at all. Those security measures seem completely over the top. In fact none of the security around Washington makes any sense whatsoever. On the 6th of January, you have the kind of security measures you might see at a Dulwich Hamlet game. And now, for supposedly the most popular US President ever, tens of thousands of troops deployed and security measures on a level never seen before employed. I also note, and would be incredibly happy to be told why, that it is primarily National Guard units being used and not regular Army. Is that how these things are usually done or is there more to this? A 100% genuine question by the way with no slant or expectation of an answer I want to here. Just curiosity. Surely this is because they stormed it last time and they cannot allow that again!
Alert a moderator to this post

milaneagle

Cheshunt 17 Jan 21 3.00pm

Originally posted by Matov

Quite.

But something really does not seem right at all. Those security measures seem completely over the top. In fact none of the security around Washington makes any sense whatsoever.

I also note, and would be incredibly happy to be told why, that it is primarily National Guard units being used and not regular Army.

Is that how these things are usually done or is there more to this? A 100% genuine question by the way with no slant or expectation of an answer I want to here. Just curiosity.

Surely this is because they stormed it last time and they cannot allow that again!

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 17 Jan 21 3.05pm
Originally posted by Matov Quite. But something really does not seem right at all. Those security measures seem completely over the top. In fact none of the security around Washington makes any sense whatsoever. On the 6th of January, you have the kind of security measures you might see at a Dulwich Hamlet game. And now, for supposedly the most popular US President ever, tens of thousands of troops deployed and security measures on a level never seen before employed. I also note, and would be incredibly happy to be told why, that it is primarily National Guard units being used and not regular Army. Is that how these things are usually done or is there more to this? A 100% genuine question by the way with no slant or expectation of an answer I want to here. Just curiosity. So far as I am aware it's always the National Guard that is deployed under State authority for this kind of thing and not the Regular Army under Federal control. Something to do with the Army not being used against it's own people. The level of security seems to be in response to the perceived threat. Which is as high as it is because of the rhetoric from Trump both before and after the election. If he had graciously conceded, promised to help the new administration but also to rise again and work hard for the values he believed in, then people would be concentrating on that and not on any thoughts of election fraud. Sorry to say it again but the blame for this lies almost solely with Trump. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 17 Jan 21 3.05pm

Originally posted by Matov

Quite.

But something really does not seem right at all. Those security measures seem completely over the top. In fact none of the security around Washington makes any sense whatsoever.

I also note, and would be incredibly happy to be told why, that it is primarily National Guard units being used and not regular Army.

Is that how these things are usually done or is there more to this? A 100% genuine question by the way with no slant or expectation of an answer I want to here. Just curiosity.

So far as I am aware it's always the National Guard that is deployed under State authority for this kind of thing and not the Regular Army under Federal control. Something to do with the Army not being used against it's own people.

The level of security seems to be in response to the perceived threat. Which is as high as it is because of the rhetoric from Trump both before and after the election.

If he had graciously conceded, promised to help the new administration but also to rise again and work hard for the values he believed in, then people would be concentrating on that and not on any thoughts of election fraud.

Sorry to say it again but the blame for this lies almost solely with Trump.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

milaneagle Cheshunt 17 Jan 21 3.09pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle So far as I am aware it's always the National Guard that is deployed under State authority for this kind of thing and not the Regular Army under Federal control. Something to do with the Army not being used against it's own people. The level of security seems to be in response to the perceived threat. Which is as high as it is because of the rhetoric from Trump both before and after the election. If he had graciously conceded, promised to help the new administration but also to rise again and work hard for the values he believed in, then people would be concentrating on that and not on any thoughts of election fraud. Sorry to say it again but the blame for this lies almost solely with Trump. Exactly
Alert a moderator to this post

milaneagle

Cheshunt 17 Jan 21 3.09pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

The level of security seems to be in response to the perceived threat. Which is as high as it is because of the rhetoric from Trump both before and after the election.

Sorry to say it again but the blame for this lies almost solely with Trump.

Exactly

Alert a moderator to this post

BlueJay UK 17 Jan 21 3.13pm
Police describe facing Capitol riot mob: Kill him with his own gun - [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

BlueJay

UK 17 Jan 21 3.13pm

Police describe facing Capitol riot mob: Kill him with his own gun - [Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Matov 17 Jan 21 3.13pm
Originally posted by milaneagle Surely this is because they stormed it last time and they cannot allow that again! All of which had been signposted weeks in advance. And yet barely any kind of security worthy of its name. Essentially a rabble broke in, scurried around inside, posed for a few photographs and had one of them, an unarmed lady, shot dead. All entirely preventable. But now we have 10,000's of thousands of troops on the ground, in place now for days, miles and miles of fencing along with a host of other measures? For a similar rabble? Something is really not adding up here in the slightest. Personally, I hold little truck with all this 'Q' malarkey but a lot is not adding up at the moment. Using troops for any kind of 'policing' operation makes very little sense. Totally different training regimes, totally different mindsets. Soldiers kill, Cops ensure law and order. Flood Washington with riot police like they should have on the 6th. Put in place control zones with check-points. Again a measure that should have been in place on the 6th. But staff it with cops. People who are trained in crowd-control measures. Not people trained in killing. Soldiers involved in any kind of front line civil role is bad news. A sign of failure, of weakness. Logistics, then yes make sense. But actually on the ground? Only if you are expecting a full-on military attack. Not a bunch of civilians. "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.
Alert a moderator to this post

Matov

17 Jan 21 3.13pm

Originally posted by milaneagle

Surely this is because they stormed it last time and they cannot allow that again!

All of which had been signposted weeks in advance. And yet barely any kind of security worthy of its name. Essentially a rabble broke in, scurried around inside, posed for a few photographs and had one of them, an unarmed lady, shot dead. All entirely preventable.

But now we have 10,000's of thousands of troops on the ground, in place now for days, miles and miles of fencing along with a host of other measures?

For a similar rabble? Something is really not adding up here in the slightest.

Personally, I hold little truck with all this 'Q' malarkey but a lot is not adding up at the moment. Using troops for any kind of 'policing' operation makes very little sense. Totally different training regimes, totally different mindsets. Soldiers kill, Cops ensure law and order.

Flood Washington with riot police like they should have on the 6th. Put in place control zones with check-points. Again a measure that should have been in place on the 6th. But staff it with cops. People who are trained in crowd-control measures. Not people trained in killing.

Soldiers involved in any kind of front line civil role is bad news. A sign of failure, of weakness. Logistics, then yes make sense. But actually on the ground? Only if you are expecting a full-on military attack. Not a bunch of civilians.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Alert a moderator to this post

Matov 17 Jan 21 3.19pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle So far as I am aware it's always the National Guard that is deployed under State authority for this kind of thing and not the Regular Army under Federal control. Something to do with the Army not being used against it's own people. So why were the National Guard not around on the 6th? The National Guard are military. Deployed under state authority makes sense on one level but even so, complete over-kill. A soldier shooting a civilian is the same no matter who has deployed them. Cops are much much better at crowd control. Trained for it, especially I would guess Washington Cops who must be used to this kind of thing more than most other forces, all of which adds to the general sense that what happened on the 6th was absolutely preventable. "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.
Alert a moderator to this post

Matov

17 Jan 21 3.19pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

So why were the National Guard not around on the 6th? The National Guard are military. Deployed under state authority makes sense on one level but even so, complete over-kill. A soldier shooting a civilian is the same no matter who has deployed them.

Cops are much much better at crowd control. Trained for it, especially I would guess Washington Cops who must be used to this kind of thing more than most other forces, all of which adds to the general sense that what happened on the 6th was absolutely preventable.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Alert a moderator to this post

Matov 17 Jan 21 3.30pm
Ok. A little bit of research done (which can be a dangerous thing, I concede). When it comes to domestic enforcement, the National Guard are not under any kind of Presidential command. Authority lays solely with the Governor. So essentially the regular Army are not being trusted. Potentially very interesting. "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.
Alert a moderator to this post

Matov

17 Jan 21 3.30pm

Ok.

A little bit of research done (which can be a dangerous thing, I concede).

When it comes to domestic enforcement, the National Guard are not under any kind of Presidential command. Authority lays solely with the Governor.

So essentially the regular Army are not being trusted.

Potentially very interesting.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Alert a moderator to this post

SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 17 Jan 21 3.49pm
Originally posted by Matov Ok. A little bit of research done (which can be a dangerous thing, I concede). When it comes to domestic enforcement, the National Guard are not under any kind of Presidential command. Authority lays solely with the Governor. So essentially the regular Army are not being trusted. Potentially very interesting. Pretty sure it’s as above. Makes no sense to bring in the army when the national guard are available. As far as I was aware it’s levels of escalation. Don’t see why you’d jump straight to army on the streets - sends a pretty significant message and is probably far more costly. When was the last time troops were deployed domestically anyway? If you’re implying this somehow opens the possibility for an army vs national guard fisticuffs you’re a loon Edited by SW19 CPFC (17 Jan 2021 3.50pm) Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.
Alert a moderator to this post

SW19 CPFC

Addiscombe West 17 Jan 21 3.49pm

Originally posted by Matov

Ok.

A little bit of research done (which can be a dangerous thing, I concede).

When it comes to domestic enforcement, the National Guard are not under any kind of Presidential command. Authority lays solely with the Governor.

So essentially the regular Army are not being trusted.

Potentially very interesting.

Pretty sure it’s as above. Makes no sense to bring in the army when the national guard are available. As far as I was aware it’s levels of escalation. Don’t see why you’d jump straight to army on the streets - sends a pretty significant message and is probably far more costly. When was the last time troops were deployed domestically anyway?

If you’re implying this somehow opens the possibility for an army vs national guard fisticuffs you’re a loon

Edited by SW19 CPFC (17 Jan 2021 3.50pm)

Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert a moderator to this post

Topic Locked

Page 406 of 442 < 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

2020 US Presidential Election. (LOCKED)

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors