POTUS/General Election Thread 2020 + Aftermath

[ReluctantSamurai]

Only in America:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ng-merchandise

“MAKE AMERICA RAKE AGAIN”, read one sticker on sale on the company website on Monday. It also featured the phrase “LAWN AND ORDER!” The stickers were selling for $5 each.

[Hooahguy]

Hey ho, hey ho, off to an attempted authoritarian coup we go!

Attorney General William P. Barr, wading into President Trump’s unfounded accusations of widespread election irregularities, told federal prosecutors on Monday that they were allowed to investigate “specific allegations” of voter fraud before the results of the presidential race are certified.

Mr. Barr’s authorization prompted the Justice Department official who oversees investigations of voter fraud, Richard Pilger, to step down from the post within hours, according to an email Mr. Pilger sent to colleagues that was obtained by The New York Times.

Mr. Barr said he had authorized “specific instances” of investigative steps in some cases. He made clear in a carefully worded memo that prosecutors had the authority to investigate, but he warned that “specious, speculative, fanciful or far-fetched claims should not be a basis for initiating federal inquiries.”

Mr. Barr’s directive ignored the Justice Department’s longstanding policies intended to keep law enforcement from affecting the outcome of an election. And it followed a move weeks before the election in which the department lifted a prohibition on voter fraud investigations before an election.

My next guess is that this is used to persuade electors to be faithless. I hope not but considering most Republicans are spineless cowards who are going along with this to keep Trump's base agitated, I wouldn't be surprised if this happens.

[ReluctantSamurai]

And seeing as how the GOP election committee is hurting for funds, "let's use taxpayer money to fund this bogus investigation." There is hardly a legal expert in the country that gives any of these lawsuits any chance. Even CoviDon's personal attorney Jay Sekulow has said:

[Addressing the prospect of the litigation reversing the result in favor of Biden, Sekulow was circumspect:] “You have to line up a lot of dominoes, as we say, would have to fall in the right direction for that to happen.”

Sekulow did not predict victory in the legal battle over the election, but he did say he expected the Supreme Court to wind up being the arbiter of whether Trump is reelected or defeated.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/1...allenge-435437

Anyone really surprised that all of this is simply a smokescreen for the real show, which is, as has been pointed out, getting electors to go rogue?

[Hooahguy]

Not surprised. The electors vote on December 14, meaning that the next 35 days will be the most dangerous in our history since the Civil War.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Hey ho, hey ho, off to an attempted authoritarian coup we go!



My next guess is that this is used to persuade electors to be faithless. I hope not but considering most Republicans are spineless cowards who are going along with this to keep Trump's base agitated, I wouldn't be surprised if this happens.

Not surprised. The electors vote on December 14, meaning that the next 35 days will be the most dangerous in our history since the Civil War.

Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania all have legislatures controlled by GOP.

Barr will 'find' widespread voter fraud.
The above states will vote to send their own electors.
Congress will be split on which to pick. Lawsuit entails.
SCOTUS will either directly hand Trump the victory OR force the HoR to decide.
HoR split by state delegations will result in GOP win.

Watch it happen, prepare for the worst now.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/elect...b6de79b674a9d5

[spmetla]

Not surprised. The electors vote on December 14, meaning that the next 35 days will be the most dangerous in our history since the Civil War.

My father and I agree on this whole heartedly. Once there are no legal options for retaining power he and his kids will likely run rampant. As a man who has no sense of patriotism I worry what he'd be willing to sell and to whom. If personal bankruptcy and prison look likely on the horizon I don't think it impossible for him to flee to Russia and perpetually rile his base from abroad though that'd be an extreme end.

As for Trumpism, I don't think it will go away, it was just a further evolution of the Tea Party movement. The Republican Party seems likely for the near future to be a rural christian nationalist party.

[Montmorency]

From the NPR link above (referring to 68 of the top 100 counties hardest hit by the pandemic voting predominantly for Trump):

Keep the country safe from COVID? I'm starting to lean more towards ACIN's evaluation that people are just fucking stupid and are easily swayed by media. It so reminds me of Terry Goodkind's Wizard's First Rule [People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true.]

With this kind of narrative I always ask myself, why hasn't everyone bought into these lies?

When Trump called Mexicans rapists and gangbangers, why wasn't there unanimous agreement that this is good and right?

Certain stupidities are correlated, and it has to do with group affiliation, which has to do with things other than stupidity. Many idiots have good hearts. What we're seeing in our timeline, you need a dangerous combination of sheer malice with delusion. There are some people who have so much enmity for their fellow man that they will suffer anything, believe anything, for the sake of those who (ostensibly) fight to destroy their enemies. I am of the ever-calcifying opinion that the majority of Trump supporters are so, with no more than a quarter being individuals of unfathomably-limited awareness of politics and current events. There is a small, small, minority who understand what Trump is, but to remain supporters they must be all the more consciously-motivated by will to power and the desire to see liberals driven before them and hear the lamentation of their women. Being merely wealthy or interested is no longer enough, as the Trump and Republican regime is actively bad for business, unless you're the sort of predator or disaster capitalist who thinks they can get rich quick and leave the invoice to someone else.

No, to be a Republican and a Trump supporter demands much more than common-clay stupidity. And that, unfortunately, is what imbues American carnage with the quality of a civilizational struggle: Lincoln's house divided.

(I can't emphasize enough that the disease known as FuStu (Fucking Stupid) is still a great epidemic plaguing the country though.)

Not surprised. The electors vote on December 14, meaning that the next 35 days will be the most dangerous in our history since the Civil War.

https://twitter.com/AmyArgetsinger/s...88818550358016

“'What is the downside for humoring him for this little bit of time? No one seriously thinks the results will change,' said one senior Republican official."

1. Permanently damages American norms and institutions
2. Weakens the American government
3. Further polarizes the population with potential violent externalities
4. Gives license to authoritarians around the world to seize or consolidate power without regard to American or Western notices/rhetoric

Could be a few more downsides.

Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania all have legislatures controlled by GOP.

Barr will 'find' widespread voter fraud.
The above states will vote to send their own electors.
Congress will be split on which to pick. Lawsuit entails.
SCOTUS will either directly hand Trump the victory OR force the HoR to decide.
HoR split by state delegations will result in GOP win.

Watch it happen, prepare for the worst now.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/elect...b6de79b674a9d5

I think they're still playing around, the Republican elites around Trump, but there is actually a serious risk now that things go too far. Once you get the ball rolling without safeguards, in the context of one man with unbounded will to power (if feeble) among a bunch of craven bootlickers, opportunists, and party hacks and flacks... an unpredictable cascade of events and double-downs is not out of the question.

This is indeed dangerous.


Important thread
https://twitter.com/mattsheffield/st...08316548493313

As a former conservative activist and journalist, it has been so frustrating to see my former compatriots spreading wild and unchecked claims about "voter fraud." @jacknicas of the NYT took a deep look at claims of "dead" people in Michigan voting. Link in next tweet.
While examining claims made by right-wing activists who are not credible individuals is a thankless task which elite media editors despise, this is vital and important work in this age of fake news. Here's the link:

How Claims of Dead Michigan Voters Spread Faster Than the Facts
Journalists have debunked most claims of voter fraud, but President Trump’s supporters have not seemed to notice.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/06/t...er-claims.html
As the co-creator of NewsBusters, the most prominent anti-media website, I was part of a decades-long tradition of complaining about media elites being "unfair" to conservative views. There is still much to that argument, but eventually I saw that I was missing context.
What I did not realize until I began expanding my work into creating actual media and reporting institutions such as the Washington Examiner (I was the founding online editor) was that U.S. conservatives do not understand the purpose of journalism.
This became evident to me as I saw that conservative-dominated media outlets were MUCH more biased than outlets run by liberals. The latter had flaws that arose from a lack of diversities (note plural) but they operated mostly in good faith. That's not how the former operated.
I eventually realized that most people who run right-dominated media outlets see it as their DUTY to be unfair and to favor Republicans because doing so would some how counteract perceived liberal bias.
While I was enmeshed in the conservative media tradition, I viewed lefty media thinkers like @jayrosen_nyu as arguing that journalism was supposed to be liberally biased. I was wrong. I realized later that I didn't understand that journalism is supposed to portray reality.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

This thought was phrased memorably by @StephenAtHome as "reality has a well-known liberal bias" which is an oversimplification but is more accurate than the conservative journalist view which is that media should promote and serve conservative politicians.
I also discovered as I rose through the right-wing media ranks that most conservative media figures have no journalism training or desire to fact-check their own side. I also saw so many ppl think that reporting of info negative to GOP pols was biased, even if it was true.
If you would like to get a great look at the tensions and origins of conservative journalism, there is a wonderful, fabulous book by my friend @pastpunditry which I cannot commend enough. My career was an updated version of what she chronicled. amazon.com/Messengers-Rig…
People ask sometimes if conservative media figures like Sean Hannity or anyone associated with the Federalist could actually be so credulous as to believe unfounded and non-specific allegations of "voter fraud." But the reality is that they don't actually even think that far.
Truth for conservative journalists is anything that harms "the left." It doesn't even have to be a fact. Trump's numerous lies about any subject under the sun are thus justified because his deceptions point to a larger truth: that liberals are evil.
This assumption is behind all conservative media output. They never tell you what their actual motives are. Most center-left people don't realize just how radical many conservative elites are, largely because they don't wear it on their sleeves.
Just as a for-instance of this point, most people have no idea that the top two Trump White House figures, Mike Pence and Mark Meadows, think that biological evolution is a lie.

Exclusive: Far-Right Creationists Are Setting Trump’s Virus Response | Right Wing Watch
AnalysisIn a packed Sunday rally filled with thousands of unmasked supporters in Miami, President Trump hinted to the crowd that he was considering firing Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National I…
https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/...irus-response/
This is an extraordinarily dangerous viewpoint in light of the SARS2 coronavirus epidemic because the entirety of virology and epidemiology is based on evolution. If you think it's "fake" then you'll believe ludicrous nonsense like "herd immunity."
The same thing is happening with right-wing media and specious claims of voter fraud. Conservatives are willing to believe them even if there is no evidence, simply because anything negative about liberals is true. This mentality extends to the very highest ranks.
Newt Gingrich, William Bennett, and a bevvy of GOP elected officials have no problem parroting unverified rumors as fact because conservative journalism is not about supporting conservatives, not about finding facts.
I tried for over a decade to inculcate some standards of independence and professionalism among conservative writers but my efforts made me enemies, especially when I argued that the GOP should be neutral on religion instead of biased toward Christians.
I began work on a manuscript in 2012 fearing that Mitt Romney would lose his election because conservatives had not learned how politics actually works and that we should adapt to serve public needs and make peace with secular people.
I showed my manuscript to several people who I thought were my friends because I wanted to get the perspective of religious conservatives. Instead of helping me, some of them began trying to expel me from the conservative movement.
I eventually realized that many conservative activists were committed to identity rather than ideas. One of my friends literally told me in 2016 that he would support Cruz bc "that's what the Christians are doing."
We're at a critical moment in U.S. politics right now because the Christian identity politics that is the edifice of Republican electioneering is teetering. Millions of Americans have for decades thought that their countrymen are evil.
You can watch this play out right now on a television stage when you tune into Fox News as they cover the election. Fact-based journalists have finally realized that the identity rage of the GOP is going into a raging crescendo.
On an hourly basis now outside of the rage-filled lie-fests of primetime, Fox reporters are gently trying to explain to guests that they need actual evidence before accusing people of crimes. The guests, such as Gingrich, have NEVER been challenged like this on Fox.
Bret Baier, Chris Wallace, Martha MacCallum, and others are trying to save conservatism from itself. It's like watching a modern-day adaptation of Aeschylus or Sophocles. Sadly, the rest of us are not just spectators in this tragedy.
How American conservatism dies is the most important story, by far, of this moment. Conventional media will never tell this story because their business is built on the lie that Trump is an aberration rather than apotheosis. That NeverTrump is righteous rather than venal.
At the same time, the tens of millions of people who vote Republican are not deplorable. They are misled. And the mocking and tribalistic coverage that lefty media often engage in only makes things worse. Only love can defeat hate.
I will be undertaking several projects address these and other large subjects including: a memoir of my youth in a fundamentalist Mormon household and a new magazine called Flux that will cover politics, data, sociology, and religion. Please follow to join me!
And just to clarify my point about people who are "misled."

It's the people that Trump referred to when he said "I love the poorly educated." They are the people who work hard, go to church, and feel they have no future in a secular America.

Not the leaders but the led.
Thanks for reading my rant.

If you would to see some of my writing that explores this topic at greater length, here is an older piece I wrote about the vulnerability of "own the libs" conservatism to reaction.

Another one.
https://twitter.com/whstancil/status...79632244420609

People are worried about coups, but the thing causing me real despair is the prospect of living for decades in an ever-tightening vice of right-wing gerrymandering and court packing, in which there is no election victory large enough to permit anyone left of center to govern

Self-styled moderates in the political class see this as salutary, because they think it forces compromise. But it doesn’t, even in the most optimistic rendering, because the right has no such limitation. The right can easily secure governing trifectas with a minority of the vote

The undemocratic structure of our government has created a one-way ratchet: Republicans win total control and further clamp down on civil society, then government becomes divided, creating an interregnum in which they block any swing in the other direction. Republicans are able to always win either total control or divided control despite barely ever winning a majority of votes. Democrats are only able to win either divided control or lose all control, despite almost always producing a majority of votes.

Only a couple oscillations of this one-way pendulum since 2000 has produced four catastrophic years of Donald Trump. What is going to happen on the next swing?

And don’t let it go unnoticed that in addition to the majority of voters, the disadvantaged side of the electorate contains the vast majority of nonwhite Americans, including almost all black Americans.

In order to ensure that conservative white men never leaves the driver seat of US politics, Republicans are reducing us to one-party minority rule.

And so we’re rebuilding an apartheid state, election by election, one four-year cycle at a time.

And what’s truly shocking is that so many people in our politics don’t even see it. To them, it’s simply the natural order that men like McConnell have permanent voice in government.

They never think to question how it is that a party that wins so few votes never leaves power.

This is going to go loud someday, if I have the terminology right. Doesn't it always in these circumstances?


@spmetla
Do you think the polling was accurate that the US military active service demographic decisively rejected Trump at ballot?

As a man who has no sense of patriotism I worry what he'd be willing to sell and to whom.

Is this what they call a dangling modifier? :P

[Hooahguy]

https://twitter.com/AmyArgetsinger/s...88818550358016
“'What is the downside for humoring him for this little bit of time? No one seriously thinks the results will change,' said one senior Republican official."

1. Permanently damages American norms and institutions
2. Weakens the American government
3. Further polarizes the population with potential violent externalities
4. Gives license to authoritarians around the world to seize or consolidate power without regard to American or Western notices/rhetoric

Could be a few more downsides.

Flashback to 2015 when people said the same thing about Trump when he tossed his hat into the ring.

[ReluctantSamurai]

The undemocratic structure of our government has created a one-way ratchet: Republicans win total control and further clamp down on civil society, then government becomes divided, creating an interregnum in which they block any swing in the other direction. Republicans are able to always win either total control or divided control despite barely ever winning a majority of votes. Democrats are only able to win either divided control or lose all control, despite almost always producing a majority of votes.

Isn't this an argument for a more "radical" approach for Democrats? Yes, I know it's not that simple in a political environment where a more radical approach gets labeled as socialism, which scares the hell out of people. I'm also shifting my thinking that such "radicalism" has to happen at the state level rather than the federal level. When you ask yourself how the above agenda gets implemented time and time again, the answer seems to be that Republican control resides in state legislatures and courts continually stacking the system in favor of themselves by voter suppression, and getting state courts packed with conservative judges that more often than not rule in favor of that agenda. It's why Republicans have tried 20 times in the last 10 years to pack state supreme courts, and will continue to do so. When a Democrat does succeed in breaking through that "Red Wall" they get hamstrung by a hostile legislature and unfavorable court rulings. Until Republican power is broken at the state level, it will be nearly impossible to get anything done at the federal level, IMHO.

The perfect example is what we are discussing here about the possibility of rogue electoral voting.

Could be a few more downsides.

Yeah like another 100,000 deaths from COVID-19 by the inauguration date, because there is a refusal of the Trump Administration to transition, leaving our pandemic response still hopelessly adrift. Do not be surprised to see a big military show by China to try to intimidate Taiwan. Especially now that CoviDon has temporarily kneecapped the DoD by firing Mark Esper. I'll be surprised if they don't try and take advantage of the current chaos.

I'm fully expecting some sort of terrorism act by the right-wing. It's been uncannily quiet so far, and that makes me nervous. The longer this horse-shit about a fraudulent vote goes on, the more likely the opportunities for violence. Also, I expect there will be more firings which will likely include Dr. Fauci, Dr. Birx, Dr. Redfield, and any other medical expert that contradicted the President at one time or another. We have a 4 year old that is not picking up his toys and going home, he's breaking all the toys in a temper tantrum.

[edyzmedieval]

I guess the Georgia runoff campaign will receive as much airwave as the election night, so get ready for more John King and Steve Kornacki telling us every nook & cranny of Georgia's counties.

[rory_20_uk]

Am I correct that, even with the two Senate seats in Georgia, most things would be open to being fillibustered?

So even if Biden wanted to undertake significant change there's a pretty good change it might be stymied by even a small handful of Senators.

[Hooahguy]

Well Senator Manchin (D-WV) said he isnt open to getting rid of the filibuster so it would be difficult no matter what. But with a 50 seat majority other things become possible, such as confirming judges and cabinet positions which is also very valuable.

[Montmorency]

Isn't this an argument for a more "radical" approach for Democrats? Yes, I know it's not that simple in a political environment where a more radical approach gets labeled as socialism, which scares the hell out of people. I'm also shifting my thinking that such "radicalism" has to happen at the state level rather than the federal level. When you ask yourself how the above agenda gets implemented time and time again, the answer seems to be that Republican control resides in state legislatures and courts continually stacking the system in favor of themselves by voter suppression, and getting state courts packed with conservative judges that more often than not rule in favor of that agenda. It's why Republicans have tried 20 times in the last 10 years to pack state supreme courts, and will continue to do so. When a Democrat does succeed in breaking through that "Red Wall" they get hamstrung by a hostile legislature and unfavorable court rulings. Until Republican power is broken at the state level, it will be nearly impossible to get anything done at the federal level, IMHO.

I think it comes down to blue states pursuing a shared regulatory agenda, among other things, which leads to nullification of Supreme Court rulings IMO (if the Democrats can't achieve a trifecta anytime this decade - and 2020 was our very best shot). Nullification would present itself not as some kind of appeal to state's rights or legal philosophy or constitutional formalism, but simply according to an emerging and explicit Democratic consensus against the legitimacy of Republicans to rule over us. If and when that happens, red states will rapidly regress into hybrid regimes, freedom of movement between the states will become a quaint notion, and worst of all upon taking the presidency Republicans will proceed to eviscerate blue states by drawing up the fiscal strings.

The old world is dead but the new can't be born yet.

I guess the Georgia runoff campaign will receive as much airwave as the election night, so get ready for more John King and Steve Kornacki telling us every nook & cranny of Georgia's counties.

Can you say more about these names?

Am I correct that, even with the two Senate seats in Georgia, most things would be open to being fillibustered?

So even if Biden wanted to undertake significant change there's a pretty good change it might be stymied by even a small handful of Senators.

The filibuster would almost certainly be terminated with 50 Democratic senators (the alternative would be a crime against the people). On the other hand, one way or another any given Democratic senator would have sole veto over legislation on the floor.

EDIT: Actually, I would like to retract that. Previously, I had said it would take ~52 senators for a Democratic Senate to be comfortable with filibuster abolition. Given the Pyrrhic victory we've endured, attaining 50 would be a miraculous boon but it's hard to argue that the Senate wouldn't be more conservative than under a landslide scenario. I just hope the senators will recognize the greater urgency of the situation the election has revealed.

[ReluctantSamurai]

I think it comes down to blue states pursuing a shared regulatory agenda, among other things, which leads to nullification of Supreme Court rulings IMO

No idea what you mean by "shared regulatory agenda." You've got Democrats already bickering amongst themselves one week after the election. In fact, I dare say Democratic moderates are going harder after the left-wing portion of the party then they did their GOP opponents. It's no wonder they lost ground to Republicans. Can't imagine there being some kind of unified front to "nullification of Supreme Court rulings."

I just hope the senators will recognize the greater urgency of the situation the election has revealed.

There are, of course many aspects to why it's critical to take both senatorial seats, but the immediate one is the most crucial, IMHO.

Yes, I'm crying wolf here, and the plausibility of the "Faithless Elector" can certainly be overstated---which I admit I'm doing. But....

.....putting what my perception of the deranged individual called the 45th President is, and various other clues, I truly believe "The Steal" is in play and it's not the Democrats. I'll repost this link, but without all the copy/paste I did the last time. Note the eerie prescience of some of the authors statements (made back in September):

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...oncede/616424/

Trump hates to lose. He HATES to lose more than anything else. He stated during the campaign that Biden was the weakest candidate in US history, and there was no possible way he could lose to such a weak candidate....until he did....in front of the entire world. He is seething at the moment, and has not made a public appearance in a week. In keeping with his spoiled brat mentality, he's knocking over the chess board by refusing to concede and by firing people. And there will be more firings to come.

Now there's the smoke screen of fraudulent voting currently ongoing. He knows that isn't going anywhere, but that's not the endgame. Part I of the endgame is the Rogue Elector gambit. If you read The Atlantic link, the author was in contact with GOP representatives in Pennsylvania who were, back in September, having conversations with the Trump election committee about doing just that. There is now just under a month before states have to certify their electoral votes and send them to Congress. The current bluster over fraudulent votes will take at least several weeks to resolve (given that the DoJ is now involved, Barr can use any number ways to drag it out that long).

That gives Trump the time to make deals with the Republican legislatures in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Arizona....all crucial to Biden's victory. In Arizona, the GOP has the trifecta...GOP governor, legislature, and a conservative state Supreme Court. Easy pickings. In Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, the Republicans lack only the governors seat. No worries. Electoral appointments have to be submitted by Dec 8 giving Congress 6 days to verify their credentials. For the three, and possibly four states mentioned, there will be two sets of electoral votes. Which ones are the ones to be counted? Well:

The controlling statute says that if “any controversy or contest” remains after that, then Congress will decide which electors, if any, may cast the state’s ballots for president.

(I lied about no copy-and-paste, so sue me)

Furthermore:

The Trump-campaign legal adviser I spoke with told me the push to appoint electors would be framed in terms of protecting the people’s will. Once committed to the position that the overtime count has been rigged, the adviser said, state lawmakers will want to judge for themselves what the voters intended.


“The state legislatures will say, ‘All right, we’ve been given this constitutional power. We don’t think the results of our own state are accurate, so here’s our slate of electors that we think properly reflect the results of our state,’ ” the adviser said. Democrats, he added, have exposed themselves to this stratagem by creating the conditions for a lengthy overtime.

Enter this cryptic statement by Pennsylvania's Republican Party Chairman:

In Pennsylvania, three Republican leaders told me they had already discussed the direct appointment of electors among themselves, and one said he had discussed it with Trump’s national campaign.


“I’ve mentioned it to them, and I hope they’re thinking about it too,” Lawrence Tabas, the Pennsylvania Republican Party’s chairman, told me. “I just don’t think this is the right time for me to be discussing those strategies and approaches, but [direct appointment of electors] is one of the options. It is one of the available legal options set forth in the Constitution.” He added that everyone’s preference is to get a swift and accurate count. “If the process, though, is flawed, and has significant flaws, our public may lose faith and confidence” in the election’s integrity.


Jake Corman, the state’s Senate majority leader, preferred to change the subject, emphasizing that he hoped a clean vote count would produce a final tally on Election Night. “The longer it goes on, the more opinions and the more theories and the more conspiracies [are] created,” he told me. If controversy persists as the safe-harbor date nears, he allowed, the legislature will have no choice but to appoint electors. “We don’t want to go down that road, but we understand where the law takes us, and we’ll follow the law.”

The next crucial date comes on Jan 6 when the new Congress gets sworn in. Hence the absolutely crucial two seats in Georgia that, should they go to the Dems, crushes this strategy, there and then. If they split, or the GOP gets both, Endgame Part II begins, and the law is extremely murky....extremely murky.

If electoral votes from one or more states get disqualified, and in doing so, shorts Biden from getting the required 270, voting now goes back to the House with one vote per state. Guess what? The GOP holds a majority and hands the presidency to Donald Trump. But there is an endgame Part III....Nancy Pelosi expels all Senators from the House floor, and Pence cannot complete the vote "in the presence of" the House as required by the Constitution. So Pence gets all GOP House members together and holds a separate vote, and all hell breaks loose.

One last item here....why fire Secretary of Defense Mark Esper now? Why not sooner? Think back on "the" singular issue that Esper pissed off the President about....oh yeah, sending federal troops out to quell protesters. Trump got around that for awhile by sending DHS agents into the field under the guise of "protecting Federal buildings." Why not put another lap dog in place that has no qualms about sending in the National Guard to deal with the inevitable riots that will be happening during all of this. I expect there will be more DoD firings to completely secure the acquiescence of military force.

Am I just being paranoid? Yeah, probably. Can you folks just poke fun at me later? OF COURSE! I never take my self that seriously. But these words from the article is what prompted this whole rant:

Let us nothedge about one thing. Donald Trump may win or lose, but he will never concede. Not under any circumstance. Not during the Interregnum and not afterward. If compelled in the end to vacate his office, Trump will insist from exile, as long as he draws breath, that the contest was rigged.

Trump’s invincible commitment to this stance will be the most important fact about the coming Interregnum. It will deform the proceedings from beginning to end. We have not experienced anything like it before.

Maybe you hesitate. Is it a fact that if Trump loses, he will reject defeat, come what may? Do we know that? Technically, you feel obliged to point out, the proposition is framed in the future conditional, and prophecy is no man’s gift, and so forth. With all due respect, that is pettifoggery. We know this man. We cannot afford to pretend.

BTW, a cryptic statement today from the US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo:

“The world is watching what’s taking place. We’re gonna count all the votes. When the process is complete, there’ll be electors selected. There’s a process – the constitution lays it out pretty clearly. The world should have every confidence that the transition necessary to make sure that the state department is functional today, successful today and successful with a president who’s in office on January 20 a minute after noon, will also be successful.”

[Montmorency]

One hitch in the scenario, Samurai: It would require total unity within the Republican Party to commit to an auto-coup. As in, an unequivocal declaration of insurgency that can only be adjudicated by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, or perhaps the individual consciences of mobilized unit commands. To the extent that remains an open question, replacing a few bureaucrats

I expect there will be more DoD firings to completely secure the acquiescence of military force.

will not be dispositive.

Given the numerous ranking Republicans who have at least tacitly recognized Biden's victory, I think the weight of priorities is to cut Trump loose while continuing to cultivate the base with paranoid delusions. A coup needs unanimity. It needs, for example, a supermajority of Republicans in the state legislatures named to not only condone, but implement, the Trumpian strategy.

I'm not saying it can't happen. Certainly communications like this are more than ominous (expanding on your quote):
https://twitter.com/JoshNBCNews/stat...26043246694402

NEW: Pompeo asked whether the State Department will cooperate with the Biden transition, says:

"There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration"

"We're in good shape," Pompeo says. He adds that the world is watching

I'm just saying that so far we have reason to believe such an eventuality will not reach fruition on its own. It's a heavy lift, though one that Democrats should respond to by univocally establishing that there is no coming back from this, and that if establishment Republicans do not repudiate Trump - invoke the 25th already - then... (ah, who am I kidding, Dems aren't willing to go that far).

I basically track with the following perspective, though a little more optimistic on the inevitable Untergang.
https://twitter.com/JYSexton/status/1326178439716610048

People keep asking whether Trump and the Republicans attempt to steal the election is legitimate, if it's a coup, if it's a fundraising scheme, if it's posturing, if it's actually all that dangerous.

The answer is yes. All of these things and so much more.

1/
The first thing we have to establish is that Trump is erratic. He flails and rages. But that flailing and raging, paired with his shamelessness, exposes weaknesses in our system.

When Trump finds a weakness, he exploits it until he breaks through.

2/
Right now Trump is defeated. He has no legitimate means of winning this election and so he's throwing everything at it in hopes something will stick. At times, it's laughable, but all he needs is ONE THING to work.

3/
And yes, Trump is using this crisis as a means of fundraising. Sending out alarming emails and messages raises money from angry supporters desperate for hope, but it also continues to establish an escalating crisis.

It does multiple things at once.

4/
Trump is a gambler playing multiple hands. He's a terrible gambler, but his entire life he's just trying so many angles at so many times that he waits until he finds something that even halfway works.

This? Right now? This is multiple hands of badly played poker.

5/
So what are the possible outcomes?

Trump loses but saves face.

Trump loses but raises money.

Trump manages to break through, subvert democracy, and steals the election.

These are all "wins" for him even if it means radicalizing people and a coup.

6/
This is how Trump sees the world. He's not worried about inspiring violence, destroying democracy, hurting the nation or anyone in it.

He's looking for his best possible outcome and doesn't care what he does in the process.

It's a COUP AND A SCAM. Both things at once.

7/
Meanwhile, and this is important, the Republicans are playing their own games.

Some are true believers, nuts who believe the election was stolen. But most understand Trump lost and are playing their own game.

We have to understand why they're doing it.

8/
People like McConnell and Graham are giving voice to Trump for multiple reasons. They need to keep Trumpists active in the GOP, they need to win the special elections in GA, the controversy creates passion, and it leads to fundraising.

But...they're also fine with a coup.

9/
If Trump manages to break through and actually steals the election, the Republicans would be fine with it. That would mean power, and that's their only concern.

This willingness to harness a fascist strongman is why they cannot be trusted with power.

10/
As I mentioned in my article this morning, Fox News is now vying to keep its audience as Trumpists reject it for actually reporting Biden's win.

They'll cover these conspiracy theories to keep viewers loyal if at all possible.

11/


Fox News Created a Monster. And Now That Monster Wants Revenge.
Fox News now “sucks,” election-denying Trumpkins say. And so it’s a race to the bottom for other outlets to appeal to an audience hoping to further remove themselves from reality.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-ne...venge?ref=home

The whole point is this: Trump and the GOP are playing a dangerous game. The coup might not work, but they see an advantage at flirting with a coup.

The coup might work and they see an advantage with grasping power for themselves.

It's a win-win for them while we lose.

12/
I don't think Trump or the GOP truly believe they're going to manage to overturn the election, but peddling these conspiracy theories help them regardless.

But the frightening thing? If it does work and they carry out a coup? They're more than happy to accept that.

13/
This has been theater from the very beginning. Trump played an authoritarian on TV until he BECAME ONE.

You play the role until you are the role. In this case, they're posturing for power and profit until they gain power and profit, one way or another.

14/
Again, this doesn't mean the coup will work. It's haphazard, lazy, and stupid.

But...it COULD work. That's the danger here we have to take seriously.

Not to mention the fact that these people are more than willing to endanger lives and threaten democracy.

15/
If the coup works, we're in a whole world of trouble.

If it doesn't, Trump and the GOP have turned the temperature up, radicalized numbers of supporters, and possibly inspired terroristic acts by their supporters.

It's unconscionable and dangerous on a whole other level.

16/
People are going to tell you there's nothing to worry about. That's absolutely wrong and irresponsible.

You can recognize there's no legal ground here while understanding these people are bad faith actors who rage until they find weakness in the law and systems.

17/
This thing isn't a joke. Trump and the GOP are playing a game, but there's nothing funny about it. We're all in incredible danger right now and pretending like it isn't dangerous, win or lose, only empowers and enables them to continue destroying democracy.

TLDR: Steiner's divisions will probably not relieve Berlin, and Republicans know this, but they're fine with trying and failing. Because to be Republican is to reject the legitimacy and sovereignty (and possibly humanity) of humanswho vote Democratic.

[ReluctantSamurai]

One hitch in the scenario, Samurai: It would require total unity within the Republican Party to commit to an auto-coup.

No, it doesn't. All it requires is the Republican legislatures from 4 states to participate. Doesn't involve Texas, Arkansas, Alabama, or any other deep red state. If any three of those four decide to buy in, it becomes possible...not a certainty, but it's possible. And as you might have read from the article, the GOP legislature from one of those four states, Pennsylvania, was already in conversation with the White House about participating in The Big Steal as far back as September. You've got to figure that Arizona, having the trifecta of control, might be interested, considering Deucy was bold enough to fire three commissioners on the candidate approval board that validates the governor's Supreme Court nominees when they turned down one of his appointees. He appointed three new commissioners, and resubmitted the declined candidate who was then promptly approved to the court. Not a man who gives a crap about the law.

Look, I've already admitted this can be simply fear-mongering, as a lot of things have to fall the Republicans way. But the authors closing statement rings true, and all of us sane people here in the States know it to be true: "We know this man. We cannot afford to pretend [otherwise]." He's unhinged enough to try it because he hates to lose, and he needs the office to protect him from jail for four more years until he can figure out an exit strategy.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Now the Donald is almost certainly on the way out and as a consequence will loose his Presidential Immunity, what should happen next?

One article I've read is that Biden should give him a pardon to put a line under the last 4 years. As he'd the quietly fade into history...

Personally I think, if only to demonstrate that such actions have consequences and the whole "rule of law" thing there should be an investigation and charges at Federal level where appropriate along with the State charges.

Either way I imagine The Donald will start the election campaign for 2024 in February 2021 which is after all his favourite part of being president.

What do other think is going to happen?

First, I think we will see a fairly large slate of pardons coming out of the Oval in January. I would not be surprised if it included the name of Donald J. Trump.

I do not think he will wait to February to start the campaign. I am guessing late November.

[Montmorency]

No, it doesn't. All it requires is the Republican legislatures from 4 states to participate. Doesn't involve Texas, Arkansas, Alabama, or any other deep red state. If any three of those four decide to buy in, it becomes possible...not a certainty, but it's possible. And as you might have read from the article, the GOP legislature from one of those four states, Pennsylvania, was already in conversation with the White House about participating in The Big Steal as far back as September. You've got to figure that Arizona, having the trifecta of control, might be interested, considering Deucy was bold enough to fire three commissioners on the candidate approval board that validates the governor's Supreme Court nominees when they turned down one of his appointees. He appointed three new commissioners, and resubmitted the declined candidate who was then promptly approved to the court. Not a man who gives a crap about the law.

Look, I've already admitted this can be simply fear-mongering, as a lot of things have to fall the Republicans way. But the authors closing statement rings true, and all of us sane people here in the States know it to be true: "We know this man. We cannot afford to pretend [otherwise]." He's unhinged enough to try it because he hates to lose, and he needs the office to protect him from jail for four more years until he can figure out an exit strategy.

Here is a rundown of what it would mean, per "supermajority of Republicans" (and of course we're assuming state leges can appoint slates of electors without executive approval because it's all Calvinball at this point):

Arizona: State Senate - 17 R, 13 D
State House - 31 R, 29 D

Pennsylvania: State Senate - 28 R, 21 D
State House - 109 R, 93 D

Georgia: State Senate - 35 R, 21 D
State House - 103 R, 75 D

Michigan: State Senate - 22 R, 16 D
State House - 58 R, 52 D

Wisconsin: State Senate - 19 R, 14 D
State Assembly - 63 R, 35 D


And yet:

For months, there has been talk swirling that if Joe Biden wins Pennsylvania, Republicans in the state legislature could bypass the popular vote and appoint electors who are favorable to President Trump.

The electors award Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes.

On Friday, State Senate majority leader Jake Corman said Republicans will honor the wishes of the voters.

“Our role is to monitor the process, our role is to provide oversight and call out questions where they might need asked, but certainly want to stay with the tradition of the popular vote winner getting the electors,” Senator Corman said.

Corman says the vote is certified by the state and the governor appoints the electors.

He says the legislature will follow the law.

If you're telling me that we're at the point where in the coming weeks at least: 16/17 + 31/31 Arizona Republican legislators; 16/30 + 102/108 Pennsylvania Republican legislators; 29/35 + 91/103 Georgia Republican legislators; 20/22 + 56/58 Michigan Republican legislators; 17/19 + 50/63 Wisconsin Republican legislators - all agree to go all in on overthrowing our ancient and established form of government, we must presuppose near-unanimity among the Republican party to go through with the thing.

IF there were near-unanimity among a major political party to seize power in such a manner, and they had a good chance of success once they started going through with it, then while dispreferred to civil disobedience it would in fact be morally justified to

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Communicated]

Wouldn't even be as extreme as what John Brown did, and John Brown did nothing wrong. National integrity and self-determination are not to be abandoned easily.

[ReluctantSamurai]

An interesting conversation with Harvard Law professor Larry Lessig:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTU5ruzEyO0

It's roughly a 25 min watch and it makes heavy reference to The Atlantic article by Barton Gellman. Ironically, Lessig represented the plaintiffs in the recent cases this year of Chiafalo v. Washington and Baca v. Colorado, arguing FOR "Faithless Electors." SOB, you might think, until you understand why:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...l-college.html

Harvard Law professor Larry Lessig, who represents the plaintiffs, is aware of that possibility. Indeed, it seems to be his goal. Lessig wants to make the Electoral College so wacky and unpredictable that the entire country turns against it, then adopts a constitutional amendment creating a nationwide popular vote for president. The justices appeared to be aware of this end goal on Wednesday. And they had no apparent interest in facilitating Lessig’s master plan.

And then there's this site prepared by his law students, which, although pre-election day is fun nevertheless:

https://ec-faqs.us/

[Idaho]

Reuters poll shows that currently 3% of Americans think that trump won:

The Reuters/Ipsos national opinion survey, which ran from Saturday afternoon to Tuesday, found that 79% of U.S. adults believe Biden won the White House. Another 13% said the election has not yet been decided, 3% said Trump won and 5% said they do not know.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN27Q3ED

Seeing as 10% of Americans believe the moon landing were fake, this result is actually very encouraging.

[edyzmedieval]

President-Elect this morning had a whole list of meetings with world leaders, particularly in Europe - he discussed with Boris Johnson and with leaders in Ireland, per the campaign managers.

Europe's leaders I guess are more than eager to work with him.

[Montmorency]

Crandar, we found some McCarthyism.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...ms/ar-BB1aTwyF
https://twitter.com/bradheath/status...94667542441987

On Tuesday night, Ronna McDaniel, Chair of the Republican National Committee (RNC) [Ed. Mitt Romney's niece], told FOX News commentator Sean Hannity that she has 234 pages containing 500 sworn affidavits alleging 11,000 incidents of various types of voter fraud.

Briefly listing the allegations on Hannity's show, McDaniel said that a person in Wayne County, Michigan alleged that 60 percent of a batch of voter ballots had the same signature on them, that another affidavit claimed to have seen 35 ballots counted despite not being cast by registered voters, that 50 ballots were counted multiple times in a tabulation machine elsewhere, that one woman's dead son somehow voted in one election and that Democrats handed out documents on how to distract Republican vote challengers.

"It's been rigged from the beginning," McDaniel told Hannity, "rigged from the laws that were being passed in the name of COVID to create a porous election, rigged in the sense that they kicked Republicans out of poll watching and observing... and now you have a media that's rigging it again by saying we're not going to even listen to these stories."

"That's why the RNC is going to pursue this to the very end," McDaniel continued. "We can never let this happen again.... These men and women matter their voices will be heard."

McDaniel claimed that Republican-led "data teams" still need time to conduct their investigations into various allegations.

At least five Supreme Court justices, including two members of its conservative majority, indicated on Tuesday that they would reject attempts by Republicans and the Trump administration to kill the Affordable Care Act.

It was not clear whether the court would strike down a provision of the act that initially required most Americans to obtain insurance or pay a penalty, a requirement that was rendered toothless in 2017 after Congress zeroed out the penalty. But the bulk of the sprawling 2010 health care law, President Barack Obama’s defining domestic legacy, appeared likely to survive its latest encounter with the court.

Both Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh said striking down the so-called individual mandate did not require the rest of the law to be struck down as well.

“Congress left the rest of the law intact when it lowered the penalty to zero,” Chief Justice Roberts said.

Justice Kavanaugh made a similar point. “It does seem fairly clear that the proper remedy would be to sever the mandate provision and leave the rest of the act in place — the provisions regarding pre-existing conditions and the rest,” he said.

[...]

Chief Justice Roberts said that adjusting the penalty while leaving the rest of law in place was telling. “It’s hard for you to argue that Congress intended the entire act to fall if the mandate were struck down,” the chief justice told Mr. Hawkins, “when the same Congress that lowered the penalty to zero did not even try to repeal the rest of the act.”

Justice Kavanaugh also said that the whole law was not tied to the fate of the mandate. “I tend to agree with you,” he told Mr. Verrilli, “that it’s a very straightforward case for severability under our precedents.”

The Republicans are deeply committed to dissolving liberal democracy, but we've already known that and it's not tantamount to stealing this office now.

If the Supreme Court won't even terminate the ACA right now when Democrats can't do anything to stop them, why would they go even further in affirming a coup? The game here is longer, to the extent you can name it that.

Reuters poll shows that currently 3% of Americans think that trump won:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN27Q3ED

Seeing as 10% of Americans believe the moon landing were fake, this result is actually very encouraging.

Add it up and it's about 1/5, which is thorny but better than I hoped.

Let's see how it stands after years of agitprop from the top. Few Republicans believed Obama was born in Kenya at first. After a few years, most did. Now, almost all do.

[Hooahguy]

Crandar, we found some McCarthyism.

It gets worse!

A sign of the loyalty-oath atmosphere now at DOD: When Jim Anderson was fired yesterday as Acting Under Secretary for Policy, he was given a "clap-out" as he left the building. The WH called to request names of any political appointees who joined in so they could be fired.

Unsure if its true, but its par for the course.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Ronna McDaniel and the rest of the GOP need to go back to grade school and redo their math classes. Irregardless of some of the procedural claims (the 'not-zero' BS), the number of votes that they can eventually get invalidated won't be within warp distance of what's required to alter results. Much of the "irregularity" claimed in that 234 page document is nothing but anecdotal. I can't wait to see comments from judges who have to sift through all crap

Here's a thought...if the voting process is so fraudulent, does this mean that the first time the House of Representatives convenes, that Nancy Pelosi can point to all the newly elected Republicans and order them out of the chamber because their seat hasn't been validated yet?

I'm a bit suspicious of the Reuter/Ipsos poll. If 93% of registered Republican voters votes for Trump, now a week after the election, somewhere north of 40% now agree that it's a Biden win?

[spmetla]

Do you think the polling was accurate that the US military active service demographic decisively rejected Trump at ballot?

I can believe it, the institutionalists in the military don't like seeing their allies abandoned, NATO undercut, and major training exercises stopped. I think the Enlisted continue to overwhelming support Trump and some of the Officers but I think most Officers oppose Trump. The military is inherently conservative so I could see many Enlisted and Officers voting for a third party before they'd ever vote for a Democrat. For the junior enlisted, this would probably be the first time voting and if they haven't done it before they may not know how to do an absentee ballot in their home state. There's also a lot of military members that extend their view of having an apolitical military to the extend that they don't vote as they don't think it their business.

Edit: I also wouldn't discount the effect of firing Mcmaster, Kelly, and Mattis. Mattis's book "Call Sign Chaos" is one I've had BDE Commander's and Heads of Staff recommend for reading on leadership. Not to mention Mattis is highly respected by the Marine Corps to almost "Chesty" Puller levels. McMasters's books are excellent for discussions of civil-military relations and roles in the US. The "Professional" core of the military takes leadership seriously and a man who says "I don't take responsibility at all" is much harder to get behind than even a controversial President like Truman whose ethos of "The Buck Stops Here" is far more respectable.

[Hooahguy]

Firing Mattis definitely had an impact. I personally know a couple of former Marines who were really pissed that Mattis was fired and they became pro-Biden because of what Mattis wrote during the BLM protests.

[rory_20_uk]

I can believe it, the institutionalists in the military don't like seeing their allies abandoned, NATO undercut, and major training exercises stopped. I think the Enlisted continue to overwhelming support Trump and some of the Officers but I think most Officers oppose Trump. The military is inherently conservative so I could see many Enlisted and Officers voting for a third party before they'd ever vote for a Democrat. For the junior enlisted, this would probably be the first time voting and if they haven't done it before they may not know how to do an absentee ballot in their home state. There's also a lot of military members that extend their view of having an apolitical military to the extend that they don't vote as they don't think it their business.

Edit: I also wouldn't discount the effect of firing Mcmaster, Kelly, and Mattis. Mattis's book "Call Sign Chaos" is one I've had BDE Commander's and Heads of Staff recommend for reading on leadership. Not to mention Mattis is highly respected by the Marine Corps to almost "Chesty" Puller levels. McMasters's books are excellent for discussions of civil-military relations and roles in the US. The "Professional" core of the military takes leadership seriously and a man who says "I don't take responsibility at all" is much harder to get behind than even a controversial President like Truman whose ethos of "The Buck Stops Here" is far more respectable.

The military is conservative - OK. But republican...?

They have government jobs, are literally ordered what to do by the Federal Government
They have government backed healthcare after leaving military service
They often receive housing paid for by the state.
They rarely get to work on US soil, unless owned by the Federal Government

If they were mercenaries I can understand that - privatise away - but people whose every waking moment is controlled by the government vote for the party that is supposedly against government.

The Democrats have increased the military budget almost as enthusiastically as the Republicans and have continued America's proud tradition of extra-judicial assassinations, supplying weapons to repressive regimes and committing war crimes as Republicans.

Do people in the military chew on the lead bullets?

[Hooahguy]

The military is conservative - OK. But republican...?

They have government jobs, are literally ordered what to do by the Federal Government
They have government backed healthcare after leaving military service
They often receive housing paid for by the state.
They rarely get to work on US soil, unless owned by the Federal Government

So I do have some insight into this, from conversations with my friends who are in the military (I myself was planning to join as an officer before an injury took me out of training), they see the role of national defense as a critical part of government that's embedded in the constitution (whereas healthcare is not in their eyes) so they accept the "socialist" aspects of the job like healthcare and housing since its part of their job. And then after they accept the free healthcare because it is "owed" though VA healthcare is mediocre at best and many use it as an example of "see this is why socialized medicine wouldn't work!"

[Montmorency]

Whoa, this is the ethnically-ambiguous Lieutenant Governor of Pennsylvania with Brazilian wife. NGL they have a certain cinematic look.

I can believe it, the institutionalists in the military don't like seeing their allies abandoned, NATO undercut, and major training exercises stopped. I think the Enlisted continue to overwhelming support Trump and some of the Officers but I think most Officers oppose Trump. The military is inherently conservative so I could see many Enlisted and Officers voting for a third party before they'd ever vote for a Democrat. For the junior enlisted, this would probably be the first time voting and if they haven't done it before they may not know how to do an absentee ballot in their home state. There's also a lot of military members that extend their view of having an apolitical military to the extend that they don't vote as they don't think it their business.

Edit: I also wouldn't discount the effect of firing Mcmaster, Kelly, and Mattis. Mattis's book "Call Sign Chaos" is one I've had BDE Commander's and Heads of Staff recommend for reading on leadership. Not to mention Mattis is highly respected by the Marine Corps to almost "Chesty" Puller levels. McMasters's books are excellent for discussions of civil-military relations and roles in the US. The "Professional" core of the military takes leadership seriously and a man who says "I don't take responsibility at all" is much harder to get behind than even a controversial President like Truman whose ethos of "The Buck Stops Here" is far more respectable.

Well, some Republicans are surprised enough to see decisive active-duty support for Biden that they assert that it constitutes ipso facto evidence of voter fraud.



Voter fraud per their "234 pages containing 500 sworn affidavits alleging 11,000 incidents of various types of voter fraud" (which entails each affidavit embodying efficiency by describing dozens of incidents in just half a page each). Not the first time they've come with receipts of course:






Anyway, for reference here is the last known poll of active-duty troops (plus veterans) before the election.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Fake. I've never heard Trump laugh.

[rory_20_uk]

So I do have some insight into this, from conversations with my friends who are in the military (I myself was planning to join as an officer before an injury took me out of training), they see the role of national defense as a critical part of government that's embedded in the constitution (whereas healthcare is not in their eyes) so they accept the "socialist" aspects of the job like healthcare and housing since its part of their job. And then after they accept the free healthcare because it is "owed" though VA healthcare is mediocre at best and many use it as an example of "see this is why socialized medicine wouldn't work!"

A permanent Navy is embedded in the Constitution, not Army or Airforce. The individual State's National Guard is probably OK.

Interesting that the bits that they directly benefit from are just part of the job and so are ok whereas the same for others is clearly going OTT.

VA healthcare is probably not first rate. But given how the average American would be financially crippled for pretty much any hospital care they are in this regard fortunate.