[thepostman]

It is also the park police. I wouldn't depend on them for much of anything haha.

[RubberMallet]

at the end of the day, the DNC is still trotting out a feckless and flacid candidate. one who through 40 years of "service" to America has done more to incarcerate the black community than maybe any other politician of our time.

i don't believe in a large scale conspiracy of well organized rioters and looters by any side of the aisle but believe if the hope is that covid lockdowns and civil unrest would assist in unseating the sitting president, its a few months too early as economic signs point to decent recovery (cautiously. buffett and dalio are holding massive amounts of cash), these riots will die down, and we are beginning to open up pretty greatly. at least the chance of that happening before voting is alot better in June than if this all happened in September/October.

[thepostman]

Yeah, the DNC wil do its best to polish up ol' Joe the best that they can. Trump's biggest opponent is himself. As long as he does enough to keep his base fired up he will win. Whether I like it or not, his base eats up he rhetoric and if the economy is bouncing back quickly like most experts seem to think it will, then he will have that going for him.

I can't believe these are our choices. I do like Joe more than Hillary so he's got that going for him I suppose....

[lynchburgwildcats]

Yeah, the DNC wil do its best to polish up ol' Joe the best that they can. Trump's biggest opponent is himself. As long as he does enough to keep his base fired up he will win. Whether I like it or not, his base eats up he rhetoric and if the economy is bouncing back quickly like most experts seem to think it will, then he will have that going for him.

I can't believe these are our choices. I do like Joe more than Hillary so he's got that going for him I suppose....

Neither candidates loyal base will be enough to win.

[thepostman]

Biden doesn't have a loyal base which is one of his many problems. If you want to ignore Trump and his loyal base then that is on you but it is an extreme error in judgement. One that the DNC made 4 years ago and I would imagine they are trying to avoid again but they haven't proven to be skilled enough tactically to do that.

[lynchburgwildcats]

Biden doesn't have a loyal base which is one of his many problems. If you want to ignore Trump and his loyal base then that is on you but it is an extreme error in judgement. One that the DNC made 4 years ago and I would imagine they are trying to avoid again but they haven't proven to be skilled enough tactically to do that.

The Never Trump Republicans that largely appear to be backing Biden and the people that vow to never vote for Trump are basically his base. There sure isn't a third party candidate that's going to have any significant syphoning effects on either side of the political spectrum.

I'm not ignoring his base, his base just isn't big enough to win an election all by itself. To assume every single person that voted for him in 2016 is his base is just a dumb assumption. If his base was so big enough to be all he needed, then there wouldn't have been a blue wave in 2018 and a large number of the people he endorsed wouldn't have lost. No one's base is alone big enough to win a presidential election. They have to draw in a healthy number of independents to win it.

[thepostman]

But the never Trump conservative voters are more likely to vote for a 3rd party or nobody than Joe Biden unless he really ups his game.

Joe Biden is not a good candidate and unless something changes I don't see how he beats Trump. But I guess we will see soon enough. 5 months to go!

[Jonathan Carone]

I think more people stay home in this election than anyone in a while. The conservatives who don't like Trump won't be as motivated to stop Biden as they were Hillary. They hated Hillary and saw the Supreme Court seats opening up. With the bench locked in, there's not as much need to choke down a vote for Trump.

For progressives - they think Joe is terrible. They're not likely to vote for him.

In the end, moderate Republicans and progressive Democrats will stay home and you'll get conservative Republicans against moderate Democrats.

[lynchburgwildcats]

But the never Trump conservative voters are more likely to vote for a 3rd party or nobody than Joe Biden unless he really ups his game.

Joe Biden is not a good candidate and unless something changes I don't see how he beats Trump. But I guess we will see soon enough. 5 months to go!

Not saying he will but he is a very formidable opponent since Trump keeps putting his foot in his mouth nearly every time he talks and tweets. Trump barely beat out Hillary in several swing states in 2016 and thus far she has seemed to be much less likable to Democrats and independents than Biden is.

And there is a wide coalition of Never Trump Republicans currently campaigning and/or advertising in favor of Biden. How much that is working I have no clue though.

The only Presidents with a negative net approval rating* (meaning more disliked than liked) 1200 days into their term that got re-elected was Harry S. Truman. The other two were H.W. and Jimmy Carter.

Given his net rating has largely been stagnant overall for over two years now, I don't foresee that changing given he's the only President in the database that has failed to register even one day with an aggregate positive net approval rating after their second week in office.

There's going to have to be some substantially significant sustained positive news come out before long for the tides to turn, and given how 2020 is going, I don't think that is coming. And that isn't necessarily Trump's fault. COVID-19 making it to America wasn't his fault, and George Floyd getting murdered to incite these protests and riots wasn't his fault, though there is debate raging on how effective his response has been and will be (in addition to policy changes that eventually likely made the situations worse).

It also looks like every president that had a negative net rating by election day failed to get re-elected for a second term, though to be fair the only two presidents that applies to are Jimmy Carter and H.W.

It's entirely possible that he bucks the trend, but it's far from a slam dunk at this point like you seem to think it is.

*https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/tr ... l-ratings/

[lynchburgwildcats]

I think more people stay home in this election than anyone in a while. The conservatives who don't like Trump won't be as motivated to stop Biden as they were Hillary. They hated Hillary and saw the Supreme Court seats opening up. With the bench locked in, there's not as much need to choke down a vote for Trump.

For progressives - they think Joe is terrible. They're not likely to vote for him.

In the end, moderate Republicans and progressive Democrats will stay home and you'll get conservative Republicans against moderate Democrats.

There hasn't been a post on this board I have ever disagreed with more.

[thepostman]

When one of the most respected Generals and SecDef's speaks, I tend to listen.

I know many here will dismiss it but the wisdom in which this man speaks in regards to our military is 2nd to none.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... on/612640/

“Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us,” Mattis writes. “We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.”

[ballcoach15]

When the police cannot protect the public, it's time to call in the troops. Looting and rioting is criminal.

[thepostman]

I gusss you're more knowledgeable than General Mattis.

[Purple Haize]

When the police cannot protect the public, it's time to call in the troops. Looting and rioting is criminal.

National Guard maybe. Not the 10th Mountain or 1st Army Division

[Jonathan Carone]

When the police cannot protect the public, it's time to call in the troops. Looting and rioting is criminal.

Hard to protect and serve when you’re the aggressor.

[thepostman]

I am not in a position to comment much publicly about this but when General Mattis speaks, I tend to listen. The respect I have for that man is far greater than that of the ballcoach's of the world.

[Purple Haize]

I am not in a position to comment much publicly about this but when General Mattis speaks, I tend to listen. The respect I have for that man is far greater than that of the ballcoach's of the world.

I have thoughts. But I’m driving. He’s not wrong about Trump. But he’s wrong about Trump being the first to behave this way

[TH Spangler]

Mattis was basically told to either resign or be fired because his Middle East policy conflicted with Trump. Mattis wanted to escalate conflict throughout the Middle Eastern region. Trump demanded that American soldiers come back from foreign wars.

[thepostman]

That isn't exactly right but yes, their foreign policy differed.

[olldflame]

When the police cannot protect the public, it's time to call in the troops. Looting and rioting is criminal.

National Guard maybe. Not the 10th Mountain or 1st Army Division

I certainly agree that the National Guard is the preferred way to go, but the president does not control that. It looks to me like the "threat" to use the military was mainly leverage to get the governors and mayors to act responsibly. If the National Guard had been brought in early a lot of this could have been prevented.

[Purple Haize]

Mattis is correct that Trump isn’t necessarily trying to bring people together. But its not like the other side is holding out olive branches to try to work with him either. Remember that before he was even sworn into office, he was the target of a Russian collusion investigation whose Genesis was torn to shreds today. The opposition and even members of his own party have been actively trying to derail everything he has attempted. It is literally “Orange Man Bad”.
Mattis is incorrect that this is the first President that has been like this in his tenure. Remember “Elections have consequences?” Republicans went out of their way several times to work with Obama who basically told them to pound sand. The ACA was only passed by parliamentary hijinx. Obama weaponized the IRS and you see now what his Administration tried to do with the current one. He categorized cops doing their job as behaving stupidly. Pictured those in fly over country as “bitter clingers”. And belittled the most milk toast politician ever. Obama wasn’t exactly a United in Chief
That all ended with W. Who tried again and again to meet the opposition half way only to get run over.
Trump has no interest, for better or worse, in getting run over. Mattis needed to expand his main point. Americans can become united despite not just the President but despite the Politicians who see, to ride to prominence on division

[ballcoach15]

I gusss you're more knowledgeable than General Mattis.

As a military policeman I had a lot of civil disturbance training during my 20 years active duty and 2 years in the National Guard. I was deployed to Washington DC area 3 times, on alert during presidential inaugurations.
I taught civil disturbance training at platoon and company level. I am a little more knowledgeable than the average person on the street, or on the computer, when it comes to civil disturbance.

[thepostman]

I thank you for your service. I truly do. I still respect General Mattis a whole lot more than you on military matters. There are very few military leaders i have respected more than him in my career.

[Purple Haize]

I gusss you're more knowledgeable than General Mattis.

As a military policeman I had a lot of civil disturbance training during my 20 years active duty and 2 years in the National Guard. I was deployed to Washington DC area 3 times, on alert during presidential inaugurations.
I taught civil disturbance training at platoon and company level. I am a little more knowledgeable than the average person on the street, or on the computer, when it comes to civil disturbance.

Being an MP is a lot different than deploying a Battalion of Rangers to Seattle or a MEU to NYC. Being “On Alert” for an Inauguration in DC is nothing compared to quelling a riot in Dallas using Active Military. It is patently wrong to say otherwise.

[quote="Purple Haize" post_id=601505 time=<a href="tel:1591227077" data-original-title="" title="">1591227077</a> user_id=150]
[quote=ballcoach15 post_id=601502 time=<a href="tel:1591226793" data-original-title="" title="">1591226793</a> user_id=2260]
When the police cannot protect the public, it's time to call in the troops. Looting and rioting is criminal.

National Guard maybe. Not the 10th Mountain or 1st Army Division
[/quote]

I certainly agree that the National Guard is the preferred way to go, but the president does not control that. It looks to me like the "threat" to use the military was mainly leverage to get the governors and mayors to act responsibly. If the National Guard had been brought in early a lot of this could have been prevented.[/quote]

Exactly. Let the Governors handle it or not. Let them call for additional support from the Guard. If they fail they will pay the price at the ballot box. States rights are still a thing.

[ballcoach15]

Most governors are weak. Some are very weak. See Northam, Ralph, Virginia