Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Attorney General Of PA: "If all the votes are added up in PA, Trump is going to lose." (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
BassNBrew
Footballguy
I have seen real estate agents do unethical things. Is it alright if I do 1/10th the unethical things to compete with them?
TheMagus
Footballguy
Shapiro should not have done this. No way.
However, Trump has been ranting for days, including last night at a rally, about how there would be massive voter fraud in PA and we were doing something illegal in the way we planned to count ballots and alluded to violence being a remedy. So Shapiro is probably pissed. I know I am as a resident here.
However, Trump has been ranting for days, including last night at a rally, about how there would be massive voter fraud in PA and we were doing something illegal in the way we planned to count ballots and alluded to violence being a remedy. So Shapiro is probably pissed. I know I am as a resident here.
Mystery Achiever
Footballguy
Gr00vus
Footballguy
It's the truth. They are responsible for lying about the integrity of the voting process to serve their own interest. Had they not done this, none of the rest would have followed, including this AG's statement.
Some times one party is mostly responsible for events. That's not a revolutionary or partisan supposition, it's just reality.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
Don't get into a wrestling match with a pig. You'll just get dirty, and the hog likes it.
dkp993
Footballguy
That it’s being defended is a by product of the current division and the politicalization of the AG office at the highest level. It’s nearly impossible not to view this through the lens of what’s happened with Barr. I hate the “but Trump” thing as much as anyone at this point, it’s tired and old honestly, but applicable here imo (though more accurately it should be “but Barr”).
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
How do you feel about this:
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/02/trump-scotus-pennsylvania-ballots-433889
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
This thread is entirely about a reaction to what Trump did or say. Without Trump and his antics this thread does not exists.
Seems awful. Full stop.
Not sure of the point. Are you hoping someone will say Trump isn't on the PA Supreme Court and that's in essence no different than Don the Barber saying it?
Yeah Shapiro was wrong to state it the way he did. He should focus his message on making sure all the votes are counted. I equate it to someone constantly being bullied and trying to not let it bother them. At some point you might slip up and take a swing at the bully. The bullying doesn’t justify the punch but it also doesn’t mean anything more will happen.
Shapiro is been dealing with a constant stream of accusations of voter fraud and now dealing with several lawsuits aimed to keep votes from being counted. He swung back in a way he shouldn’t have but that doesn’t mean he is going to do anything to influence the election other than making sure everyone gets their votes counted. But of course this will be the calling card for everyone to claim that you can’t trust the results in Pennsylvania.
I'm usually in favor of people making accurate statements even if they are gauche. But there are exceptions. One obvious exceptions is: public officials should not be announcing vote counts (or anything similar to that) before the polls have closed. So even if the State AG's statement were accurate, it should not have been said.
But in this case, his statement is not even factual. An accurate statement would be something like "If all the votes are counted, it will likely decrease Trump's chances of winning." That position seems to be accepted by both sides (which is why Trump doesn't want all the votes to be counted). But a definitive "He will lose" is impossible to know right now.
But in this case, his statement is not even factual. An accurate statement would be something like "If all the votes are counted, it will likely decrease Trump's chances of winning." That position seems to be accepted by both sides (which is why Trump doesn't want all the votes to be counted). But a definitive "He will lose" is impossible to know right now.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Agree 100%!
But we also got to stop getting worked up into a tizzy over every stupid social media viral political meme. What is happening here is plain as day and the Attorney General flubbed what should have been a non controversial statement that everyone more or less agrees with (though for different reason) especially Donald Trump. He allowed Donald Trump to "knock him off his game" like almost everyone that engages with Trump.
It is pathetic that we the people are even bothering discussing these things. Those that curate these social media post to get "oh my god" reactions from one side or another are almost always taking something "true" out of context to make it into something false. And if your friends and family are sharing this nonsense with you it should tell you to stop listening to them when it comes to politics because they have a viewpoint that is not grounded in honesty - even if they themselves are being honest. And this is true for all sides of the political spectrum - the right, the left, the center, the both sides are the problem crowd, self proclaimed independents, single issue voters, etc., etc.
The Attorney General flubbed a tiny bit making an unquestionably true statement that was appropriate for his job duties and we can't believe that everyone is not outraged or dares to find nothing there. Ridiculous!
Yes. That's entirely my point. This was 100% the thinking of my Trump voting attorney friend. That's what worries me.
I'm hoping this isn't an issue.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
You wrote:
I got the impression that you were unaware of such "awful" statements since you asked for something specific and that you had some interest in discussing things 10 times worse. (In my opinion, Trump's comments were worse. How to measure the magnitude in multiples would be guesswork for me though.)
To answer your question, I don't think I had any expectations or hopes that anyone would respond in any particular way.
I'll bow out of this conversation though since I think I read too much into your comments to AAABatteries.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
It’s not an issue. It’s only an issue if actions are taken to undermine the results of the election which is what he is currently fighting against. His words were wrong, his actions are right and there’s nothing to talk about until those actions change.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
If the attorney general had stayed completely quiet your Trump voting friend would have completely trusted a Trump defeat in Pennsylvania and would never have bought into any of Trump's words?
- “We have to be very, very careful in this state," Trump said. “What happens in Philadelphia, we have to be very careful. Everyone has to watch.”
- “November 3rd is going to come and go and we’re not gonna know and you’re gonna have bedlam in our country,” Trump said.
- “You wait and very bad things can happen with ballots,” Trump said.
sho nuff
Footballguy
My point was more...my level of outrage over a state AG of a state I don't live in is less than similar or worse words from POTUS of the entire nation.
jm192
Footballguy
Sure. But every thread is a Trump thread. This thread was started about the PA AG and people quickly try to make it into a Trump thread. It's often presented as we shouldn't talk about anything other than Trump.
Furthermore, if the election comes down to PA, it's a national issue.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Does anyone really believe that this statement changed any behavior of Trump supporters who will shout that he was cheated if all of the votes are counted and PA and the election goes to Biden? Really?
Maybe it gives confidence to some anti Trump voters that it is worth their effort to vote despite all of the noise from Trump as he has crisscrossed that state these past few days. That is pretty clearly the intent of the statement. Is that cheating? Is that inappropriate?
jm192
Footballguy
Anytime a Dem says anything that someone sees as bad, “this is what they meant.”
Should we never take these people at face value?
AOC says they can get Biden to do their progressive agenda—I’m told really they just want people to come vote for Biden.
Harris posts a video saying we should all end up at the same place—I’m told really we should know she means everyone deserves equal opportunity.
PA AG says this—His intent isn’t what his words said.
At what point do we take them at their actual words?
Yup. He never guaranteed anything. He was just pointing out that if Trump is able to suppress the vote there (he's obviously trying) he could win. If Trump fails, Biden will win. He has no control over how the citizens vote except to make sure everyone's vote counts.
Rich Conway
Footballguy
To be fair, anything any politician said over the last 3-6 months is really "come vote for my team".
Gr00vus
Footballguy
jm192
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
But the AG is talking about things because of the actions of Trump. Like it or not...he is related to this and created some of this.
jm192
Footballguy
Ok. Well you guys proceed with the never ending what aboutism.
I came into a non-Trump thread. I know 95% of people here think Trump is bad. I’ve had this discussion 10,000 times. I know the stance.
I thought this thread might be a conversation about something besides “Trump bad.” I’ve done the Trump good, Trump bad thing to death.
But nope. The only thought on the PSF is “Trump bad.” And anything besides that gets swiftly redirected. It’s not worth posting to rehash the same debate over and over and over.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
His actual words. Okay.
He tweets a link to this article with a headline of "Trump baselessly sows doubt about election at Pennsylvania rallies while coronavirus surges". Now the headline is clickbait in my view but that isn't Shapiro's fault.
So in response to "Trump baselessly sows doubt about election at Pennsylvania rallies while coronavirus surges" Shapiro states-
So his words are not to encouraging people to feel confident that if they "ignore the noise" and "vote" that he and his staff have "protected [their[ voting rights". Despite Trump's efforts to "subtract as many votes from the process as possible" because Trump knows "if all the votes are added up in PA, Trump is going to lose". That is not what he is saying.
Instead he is " announcing vote counts (or anything similar to that) before the polls have closed".
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes. My guess is my friend would have trusted the State of Pennsylvania.
My guess is he also would have wondered if there was any truth to the accusations Trump made.
My friend is also smart and reasonable and not prone to drama and I'm guessing he would lean towards, "That's just Trump railing. Attorney Generals are serious lawyer types and I personally know the Attorney General in Tennessee and he'd never do anything partisan like Trump is suggesting".
He likely thought something like, "Trump is saying we have to be careful and we have to watch. But he's probably just being dramatic".
Until the Attorney General for the State of Pennsylvania publicly proclaimed, "If all the votes are added up in PA, Trump is going to lose."
I'm fascinated by how this seems defensible.
jm192
Footballguy
I understand how the Orange Man Bad trope doesnt help or add to the convo, but these scenarios Are what brings it about.
Again, I give alot of people credit. But this thread, like every other hasp devolved into orange man bad.
gianmarco
Footballguy
Here's my thoughts on it:
1) There's no way he can definitely know Trump will lose the state election. I think his comment, combined with others (as I quoted above) is clearly showing his intention was that it is likely that Trump won't win Pennsylvania if all the votes are counted. I do NOT think he was implying that he or anyone else will be ensuring Trump loses Pennsylvania.
2) I, along with others, don't think he should have said anything in his position.
3) I can't speak to the true ethical nature of what he said. It seems some of our resident attorneys here have weighed in that he doesn't direct or impact the election and that there isn't a specific problem with what he said other than it being inappropriate.
4) If there is an ethical boundary that he crossed by saying what he did, then he should suffer whatever consequences required as a result of that. If it means stepping down or recusal or whatever (I have no idea), I would fully support that if deemed necessary by those with experience about these situations.
5) Keeping number 4 in mind, I can't see how what he said has any REAL material impact on the election. I don't see it influencing votes. I don't see it influencing election results. So in the end, this doesn't SEEM like a major issue, but I would defer to those who are familiar with the severity of this kind of action.
6) And, again, I get all the "but Trump" and whataboutisms, etc, but on a scale of severity related to things that have been said or done so far, this ranks pretty low for me. It doesn't make it insignificant, but it pales in comparison to Trump's tweet last night about the PA Supreme Court and his comment about violence or, for example, Texas Republicans trying to throw out 127,000 drive through votes after they were told they were acceptable. Those are significantly more serious in nature to the people of the country and to the election in general than this comment by the PA AG.
My $.02
1) There's no way he can definitely know Trump will lose the state election. I think his comment, combined with others (as I quoted above) is clearly showing his intention was that it is likely that Trump won't win Pennsylvania if all the votes are counted. I do NOT think he was implying that he or anyone else will be ensuring Trump loses Pennsylvania.
2) I, along with others, don't think he should have said anything in his position.
3) I can't speak to the true ethical nature of what he said. It seems some of our resident attorneys here have weighed in that he doesn't direct or impact the election and that there isn't a specific problem with what he said other than it being inappropriate.
4) If there is an ethical boundary that he crossed by saying what he did, then he should suffer whatever consequences required as a result of that. If it means stepping down or recusal or whatever (I have no idea), I would fully support that if deemed necessary by those with experience about these situations.
5) Keeping number 4 in mind, I can't see how what he said has any REAL material impact on the election. I don't see it influencing votes. I don't see it influencing election results. So in the end, this doesn't SEEM like a major issue, but I would defer to those who are familiar with the severity of this kind of action.
6) And, again, I get all the "but Trump" and whataboutisms, etc, but on a scale of severity related to things that have been said or done so far, this ranks pretty low for me. It doesn't make it insignificant, but it pales in comparison to Trump's tweet last night about the PA Supreme Court and his comment about violence or, for example, Texas Republicans trying to throw out 127,000 drive through votes after they were told they were acceptable. Those are significantly more serious in nature to the people of the country and to the election in general than this comment by the PA AG.
My $.02
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Rich Conway
Footballguy
So, in your opinion, your friend's take when Trump says something awful would be "that's just Trump railing" or "he's probably just being dramatic", but that same friend's take will be to disbelieve election results when a Democrat, as a direct response to some of those awful things Trump just said, says something not nearly as awful? Sounds to me like someone just looking for an excuse to be outraged. Do you not see it that way?
Last edited by a moderator:
Rich Conway
Footballguy
I honestly don't know how it could possibly be read any other way, particularly in light of the fact that the "Democrat's less awful comments" were in direct response to "Trump's more awful comments".
BigJim®
Footballguy
It's not defensible. If you're looking for "this AG should not be re-elected when he speaks like that", so be it. However, if your friend, or anyone, is anchoring to inappropriate speculation/statement for purposes of doubting the valid votes of 2.5 million Americans, that person was looking for any rationale to get there. JMHO.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks. All I can tell you is I know him well and he's far from "looking for an excuse to be outraged". I don't see it that way either. And I find the defense and whataboutism on this discouraging but that's ok. We'll have just have to disagree there.
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff
Footballguy
Ummm pretty sure ive posted that the guy was dumb to say it. But its hard to deny its relationship to Trump...of course his rhetoric will be discussed in comparison...and its a valid discussion.
Rich Conway
Footballguy
With respect to the bolded, almost everyone in here has not defended these comments. Almost everyone, including me, stated that he shouldn't have said it.
Re: the whataboutism, it seems pretty clear that the comments were a direct response to comments from Trump, so it's not whataboutism to include the context of Trump's comments. To use a football analogy, the wide receiver just sucker punched the cornerback, and the cornerback gave the WR a shove afterward. When the ref throws a flag at the CB, sure, the 15-yard penalty is appropriate per the rulebook, but you can't really be upset at people for complaining that the ref missed the sucker punch prior.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
No, it isn't. Trump saying dumb stuff doesn't make it okay for other people to say dumb stuff.
Joe Summer
Footballguy
@Joe Bryant, do your friends ever send you alarming stories about things that were said by Republicans?
dgreen
Footballguy
Personally, I've considered that type of behavior to be childish. But, it's clear that many adults disagree so I probably need a new adjective.
My Democrat friends sometimes send alarming stories about things that were said by Republicans. But my Republican friends rarely do. Which is what I'd expect. Most people only want to talk about the alarming things said by the "OTHER" side.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
He should have worded the first sentence better. But saying "If all the votes are added up in PA, Trump is going to lose" means "my office will deliver Pennsylvania" is ridiculous. Even if it was stated absent any context! Turning it into "the votes have been counted and Trump loses" is a little less silly, but that statement favors the GOP in the same way as the "Hillary won, go party rather than vote" robo calls of 2016.
Joe Summer
Footballguy
Sometimes there is a fine line between "being political" and "spreading dangerous misinformation." This tweet is not only blurring that line, but he's potentially undermining his own agenda in multiple ways — first, by motivating any remaining nonvoters or undecided voters; second, by giving Trump one more piece of ammunition in his inevitable lawsuit; and third, by irritating his own constituents. This tweet will no doubt be used by his opponent when he runs for re-election.
Similar threads
