Politics... US election edition (2020 almost over, read all about it!)

[Bartimaeus]

3 hours ago, rjshae said:

One has to always bear in mind that Hitler came to power... via democracy. Many of his methods are recognizable in the current polemic discourse. This type of rabid adherence to lunatic fantasy theories is scary. I'm hoping it will reach a high water mark then recede. But thus far it just keeps getting more stupidly inane.

Came to power via democracy, and then cemented it via illegal and extralegal means once they were in power with the help of collaborators. I know a guy that would love to be able to do the same right about now, but has thankfully been coming up just a little short on the collaborators part so far...

Edited January 5, 2021 by Bartimaeus

[Raithe]

 

[BruceVC]

10 hours ago, rjshae said:

One has to always bear in mind that Hitler came to power... via democracy. Many of his methods are recognizable in the current polemic discourse. This type of rabid adherence to lunatic fantasy theories is scary. I'm hoping it will reach a high water mark then recede. But thus far it just keeps getting more stupidly inane.

I am not  trying to be pedantic or disputing that Hitler came to power through the normal Democrat process but you cannot ignore the reality of Germany at the time and the unfair conditions of the Versailles Treaty after WW1

So in other words you see the likes of Hitler being elected in  certain social and political environment that lead to the Nazi dictatorship after his election. It wasnt really the fault  of Democracy but rather citizens very angry and upset with conditions that they were living with and the views of Hitler resonated with them 

I hope this makes sense because your post could easily be misconstrued as saying " normal Democracy can lead to brutal dictatorships or autocratic leadership  " 

You wont see the likes of Hitler  in modern Democracies because of  things like independent courts, Constitutions that are  the bulwark to government overreach and most important when governments deliver jobs and services citizens wont look for extreme alternatives like a Hitler type dictatorship 

 

Edited January 5, 2021 by BruceVC

[Zoraptor]

Thing is many of the Nazi techniques are visible in the politics of, say, Athens in the 5th century BC- and it's pretty unlikely that Cleon invented them either, no matter how much antipathy Thucydides and Aristophanes felt towards him. They're effective techniques in times of crisis or apparent crisis, always have been. The German 1932 elections really aren't a good comparison to, for want of a better term to describe the current US polarisation, 'Trumpism'.

Why? Hitler got ~37% of the vote in 1932v1 after a load of race baiting nationalistic triumphalism during a massive Depression, that is for sure. But- and it's a but Sir Mixalot would appreciate- he then doubled down on all his electoral strategies and violence plus obstructed forming a government and in consequence got... 33% of the vote 6 months later, with 2 million less votes. His strategy actively turned people off and he only got to be Chancellor with that reduced share because Hindenburg was a tired old man in failing health, and frightened of commies. If it had been an alternative conservative war hero like Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck as President- or a ten year younger Hindenburg- instead Hitler would not have been Chancellor.

OTOH while it isn't of absolute importance in the US system Trump actually gained 12 million votes over 2016, it's just that Biden gained 15 million over Hillary.

Edited January 5, 2021 by Zoraptor

[Gromnir]

39 minutes ago, Raithe said:

vid

 

yeah, raffensperger and sterling down in georgia is getting much credit for standing up to trump. deserved. much applause.

however, is worth noting how raffensperger and sterling purged 200k individuals from voting rolls before the november election and such efforts appeared to be little more than the all-too-familiar southern voter suppression antics which in any other year would make raffensperger and sterling appear to be villains instead o' heroes for many progressives and liberals.  at issue were change of address and use it or lose it  rules which primarily affect lower income and young voters. numerous voting rights organizations provided compelling proof that a large % o' the 200k purged had not changed address but had failed to take notice o' the innocuous 3rd party mailer which required a mailed response to keep an individual registered. 

in spite o' trump ire directed at raffensperger, the ga secretary of state did more to help the republican election cause in 2020 than any other single individual, and sterling were his right-hand man as voter suppression efforts which woulda' made george wallace envious were implemented with little national recognition.

black votes matter and other similar organizations took raffensperger to court regarding the +200k purge. predictable, and all too familiar, the plaintiffs case were dismissed 'cause o' standing. is perhaps ironic that the same case law which for decades has stymied voter rights advocates such as the aforementioned black votes matter case were what resulted in so many trump campaign auto-fails in court. while many cheered as trump failed time and again to get access to judicial relief, the thing is, in 2021 and beyond is once more gonna be poor, minority and young voter groups who is gonna get the whack-a-mole court treatment and is gonna happen quiet and with negligible media coverage.

today's heroes...

HA! Good Fun!

[majestic]

5 hours ago, BruceVC said:

What a strange understanding of how most legal systems work?

Assange has a history of avoiding facing his day in court. Remember he skipped his bail, which is illegal, around rape charges in Sweden which was why he camped out in the Ecuadorian embassy for years

He now faces charges in the USA and again he is refusing to face his day in court. No one is saying he will be found guilty, as I keep saying unless you think the  US justice system is broken and cannot be trusted, because  if the evidence is lacking or unconvincing he wont be charged

It seems to me you believe people just dont have to go to court when they break the law or commit a crime. So to correct your spurious comment, I believe exactly " you go to court to prove your innocence " 

You clearly  believe " you dont need to go to court if you charged with a crime, you just use your privilege and status to avoid your day in court" 

Great world you live in Majestic where famous people can avoid justice 

You're under the impression that Assange would get a fair trial, I disagree. As such, from my point of view, any extradition request from the US of A is to be denied. Period. Regardless of how I personally feel about Assange. Guy's probably a right arsehole. And famous people avoid justice in the USA every day, so that can't possibly be your argument, and no matter how much the Swedish prosecution says that their wittness is credible and they dropped the investigation to allow everyone to move on with their lives, the rape allegations against Assange simply reek of a backhanded effort to get him someplace where he can be extradited easily.

And this is leaving out the greater implications this has. Whistleblowers need to be protected in every possible in order to encourage more people to come forward, not made an example of in order to prevent further whistleblowing. Which is exactly why the USA wants to make an example out of Assange or Snowden, should they ever get their hands on them. Which is why people like them disappear in China or Russia.

Which funnily enough you take exception to. Rightfully... but on the other hand you don't care if the same happens to anyone that does similar things to the glorious West. Yeah. You spell that h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e by the way. With an e at the end.

[BruceVC]

10 minutes ago, majestic said:

You're under the impression that Assange would get a fair trial, I disagree. As such, from my point of view, any extradition request from the US of A is to be denied. Period. Regardless of how I personally feel about Assange. Guy's probably a right arsehole. And famous people avoid justice in the USA every day, so that can't possibly be your argument, and no matter how much the Swedish prosecution says that their wittness is credible and they dropped the investigation to allow everyone to move on with their lives, the rape allegations against Assange simply reek of a backhanded effort to get him someplace where he can be extradited easily.

And this is leaving out the greater implications this has. Whistleblowers need to be protected in every possible in order to encourage more people to come forward, not made an example of in order to prevent further whistleblowing. Which is exactly why the USA wants to make an example out of Assange or Snowden, should they ever get their hands on them. Which is why people like them disappear in China or Russia.

Which funnily enough you take exception to. Rightfully... but on the other hand you don't care if the same happens to anyone that does similar things to the glorious West. Yeah. You spell that h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e by the way. With an e at the end.

Your post has several things I disagree with. Lets start with the premise you dont trust either the USA or Swedish legal systems

Clearly I am not going to change your  view on whether you can trust the US legal system which is disappointing considering it is no different to any other legal system in the world that is seen by  most as completely legitimate  but I am very surprised you are suggesting the Swedish legal system cannot be trusted and they would ignore there own Constitution and laws around extradition just because the US told them to 

This is Sweden, do you have any evidence that their judges and justice department would acquiesce to illegal demands to create a mock trial just to extradite Assange. He was accused of rape and this is a very serious charge and he should have gone to Sweden to answer these charges.

You are conveniently putting the entire Swedish legal system in the same boat as your views of the US legal system which should reveal your own bias towards Assange. For the record Assange's lawyers also claimed " you cant trust the UK legal system " which was their weak justification for him breaking the conditions of his bail in the UK. Do you see the pattern here, its indubitably the same opinion  for all 3 countries that are globally seen as having credible and fair legal systems but no according to your view " none of these countries can be trusted because Assange said so " 

And then as I explained previously, Assange cannot be seen as whistleblower because most of the Wikileaks were confidential views and opinions of US diplomats. Do you not agree that every country has a right to keep the opinions of there diplomats private ?

Its a simple but important question 

[rjshae]

5 hours ago, BruceVC said:

I am trying to be pedantic or disputing that Hitler came to power through the normal Democrat process but you cannot ignore the reality of Germany at the time and the unfair conditions of the Versailles Treaty after WW1

So in other words you see the likes of Hitler being elected in the certain social and political environment that lead to the Nazi dictatorship after his election. It wasnt really the fault  of Democracy but rather citizens very angry and upset with conditions that they were living with and the views of Hitler resonated with them 

I hope this makes sense because your post could easily be misconstrued as saying " normal Democracy can lead to brutal dictatorships or autocratic leadership  " 

You wont see the likes of Hitler  in modern Democracies because of  things like independent courts, Constitutions that are  the bulwark to government overreach and most important when governments deliver jobs and services citizens wont look for extreme alternatives like a Hitler type dictatorship 

Sure. Let me put it this way: I think the only reason we'll (probably) have a peaceful transfer of power right now is that the conditions are not that bad. I mean they suck, sure, but they don't worldwide-depression, end of a world war, runaway inflation, nations collapsing suck.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

12 hours ago, Achilles said:

Most people are probably quick to associate this brand of media with Alex Jones, but Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh have been peddling the crazy for decades. Not just you. Not just now.

I had Michael Savage in mind, but yeah they've all been going down the rabbit hole for quite a while. You can definitely trace parts of it back to the Southern Strategy as well, which predates most (if not all) of the big organs of right-wing media.

11 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

I think the difference is that while that crap was popular among a large segment of the rank and file voters, the top of the party itself (i.e. party leaders and actual politicians) was relatively unaffected for a long time. That's been changing in a large way since Trump, we're now seeing the party more strongly reflect the feelings of its voters. ...Which, in theory, sounds like a good thing in a democracy (and is something the Democratic Party could benefit from in some areas), but when it's fascism and hatred and disenfranchisement of others...well, not so much, not unless you're one of them.

Yeah, it's the result of decades of dog whistles to drum up votes only to be surprised that the dogs* are in charge. Republicans have long benefitted from such rhetoric/policy/entertainment pushing votes to them, if not outright running them due to the incestuous nature of media hacks and political players, and didn't try to divorce themselves too much so they could keep a reliable group of voters. It's hard to take cries of some Republicans and republican-adjacent folks seriously about the ascendancy of alt-right ideology in the Republican party when they were comfortable enough to incubate it because it benefitted them.

*Apologies to dogs by comparing them to the new/alt-right

[BruceVC]

What do you guys want from the Georgia senate elections tomorrow? I dont think a complete Democrat victory is the best way forward because of the total control the Democrats will have over the House and Senate

Some commentators are saying its " critical Democrats win so Biden can implement the policies he has committed to deliver " and " the success of the Biden presidency is dependent on this " ....it sounds ominous 

But I am not sure what policies require this total control of the Congress? Does  anyone know what policies the Democrats plan to implement that cannot be implemented if they dont control the Senate ?

[Gfted1]

^Hopefully many programs that results in socialistic-ish policies that removes the burdens of healthcare, education and living expenses. I recently came to the insight that I am tore up with 3 "mental health issues" that would be completely solved with the mere wave of a pen. What are we waiting for?

[BruceVC]

4 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

^Hopefully many programs that results in socialistic-ish policies that removes the burdens of healthcare, education and living expenses. I recently came to the insight that I am tore up with 3 "mental health issues" that would be completely solved with the mere wave of a pen. What are we waiting for?

Sometimes I am honestly not sure if you joking about wanting these "socialist " policies

Of course we would all love our governments to deliver free services like  you mentioned for all , its just not realistic or sustainable in most cases in the majority of countries that  include the USA  ..sorry my friend 

[Amentep]

31 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

What do you guys want from the Georgia senate elections tomorrow?

The end of getting 5-10 circulars a day and 2-5 cold calls a day from groups affiliated with both parties reminding me to vote.  And 2-3 polling groups calling to ask my opinion on who I'm going to vote for. And the hand written letters about why its important to vote for a candidate sent from out of state. And 99% of all ads on all media being attack ads for the candidates, oftentimes leading to 5-6 political ads per commercial break or period.  Although it is a bit funny with the attack ads when one of the candidates has an "I'm X and I approve this message" at the beginning of their ad, but their ad precedes a PAC attack ad against them that caries no disclaimer, so it makes it sound like the candidate approved the ad attacking them for a few seconds.  Its just not enough to want it to continue.

[rjshae]

41 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

What do you guys want from the Georgia senate elections tomorrow? I dont think a complete Democrat victory is the best way forward because of the total control the Democrats will have over the House and Senate

Some commentators are saying its " critical Democrats win so Biden can implement the policies he has committed to deliver " and " the success of the Biden presidency is dependent on this " ....it sounds ominous 

But I am not sure what policies require this total control of the Congress? Does  anyone know what policies the Democrats plan to implement that cannot be implemented if they dont control the Senate ?

Unlike many people, I can live with a split Congress. At least they can't screw things up too badly. Given the way the Republicans have been behaving with this election though, they deserve a solid kick in the brovaries.

[BruceVC]

5 minutes ago, Amentep said:

The end of getting 5-10 circulars a day and 2-5 cold calls a day from groups affiliated with both parties reminding me to vote.  And 2-3 polling groups calling to ask my opinion on who I'm going to vote for. And the hand written letters about why its important to vote for a candidate sent from out of state. And 99% of all ads on all media being attack ads for the candidates, oftentimes leading to 5-6 political ads per commercial break or period.  Although it is a bit funny with the attack ads when one of the candidates has an "I'm X and I approve this message" at the beginning of their ad, but their ad precedes a PAC attack ad against them that caries no disclaimer, so it makes it sound like the candidate approved the ad attacking them for a few seconds.  Its just not enough to want it to continue.

Apparently the amount of money spent in Georgia on exactly what you talking about is in the hundreds of millions of dollars and unprecedented and people in Georgia are all sick of it ...well many are so I hear you

1 minute ago, rjshae said:

Unlike many people, I can live with a split Congress. At least they can't screw things up too badly. Given the way the Republicans have been behaving with this election though, they deserve a solid kick in the brovaries.

I tend to agree with you around the outcome of a split congress but then I also agree the way Trump has been handling his defeat it may send an effective message 

 My real concern is what would this message mean around actual Democrat policies that could be implemented? But then I consider Biden to be in middle of  the left and right political spectrum of the USA so I cant imagine him doing something extreme if they control the whole Congress?

I guess we will have to wait and see but the main objective will be dealing with the pandemic and maybe control of the Congress will make that critical objective easier ?

[Gfted1]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

Sometimes I am honestly not sure if you joking about wanting these "socialist " policies

 

 

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

Of course we would all love our governments to deliver free services like  you mentioned for all , its just not realistic or sustainable in most cases in the majority of countries that  include the USA  ..sorry my friend 

Why is it unrealistic/unsustainable? Weve never tried it so maybe it would work? We can borrow ideas from the Scandinavians; Step 1: tax the rich (natch)...Step 2: make those corporate fatcats pay...Step 3: create a whopper of a VAT system...Step 4: ???...Step 5: Profit!

 

[HoonDing]

[BruceVC]

28 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

 

 

Why is it unrealistic/unsustainable? Weve never tried it so maybe it would work? We can borrow ideas from the Scandinavians; Step 1: tax the rich (natch)...Step 2: make those corporate fatcats pay...Step 3: create a whopper of a VAT system...Step 4: ???...Step 5: Profit!

 

Well that is definitely true, it has never been implemented before in the USA so you never know 

[Hurlshort]

In November, I didn't really think there was much of a chance of the democrats winning both seats in Georgia. But I'm getting the impression that Trump's behavior over the past month has done more to hurt the Republicans running than I thought possible. Crazy times. Doesn't help that Mitch basically looked like the hatchet man for the $2k payments. 

[Bartimaeus]

6 hours ago, rjshae said:

Unlike many people, I can live with a split Congress. At least they can't screw things up too badly. Given the way the Republicans have been behaving with this election though, they deserve a solid kick in the brovaries.

I normally wouldn't mind a split Congress, but these are unusual times (and also, at best, it'd be a 50-50 split so nothing too radical for the Democratic agenda with the few more conservative senators like Manchin still around). There's nothing more I'd like to see than that ghoul McConnell lose Senate Majority Leader.

Edited January 6, 2021 by Bartimaeus

[Bartimaeus]

NYT (which tracks where the results are coming from and models their ongoing prediction of who will win based on who's over- or under-performing where - correctly predicted Biden barely winning Georgia a few months ago very early into the race based on the same kind of early returns even when Biden was down big) gives both Democratic candidates about a ~1 point lead right now. Other election experts saying they favor the Democrats as well at this point.

(e): Inching closer and closer towards Democrat Warnock winning, currently sitting at an 80% chance with what's left - just about the margin of error. Democrat Ossof is still doing well as well, but not quite as much as Warnock, at about a 65% chance.

Edited January 6, 2021 by Bartimaeus

[Bartimaeus]

A few experts have already called it for Warnock, and Ossof is looking better and better as well. Looking pretty likely to be a 50-50 Senate. Wow, Georgia!

(e): Warnock at over a 90% chance now, Ossof just outside of 80% (the margin of error). Could thankfully have this settled by tonight.

Edited January 6, 2021 by Bartimaeus

[Elerond]

At least Trump knew it already year ago.

[BruceVC]

Its looking like a slight Republican Senate victory, I think this is overall the best outcome

I can agree Trump has been a major disruptor on certain levels but the USA lurching to the left as a result of anger and frustration due to the Trump presidency wont be  in the best interests of the USA in the long term and also much of the rest of the world 

Guys please remember why many non-Americans follow and are concerned with the reality and  sustainability of the USA economy and political environments , its in bad taste now but their is an old adage that goes " when America sneezes the world catches a cold " 

This is always true, now more than ever. So when Hurlshot asked a question a while ago "why would a person in Poland have an interest in the USA " I initially thought he was joking as I assumed everyone realized why many of us have a vested interest  in the events of the USA

The USA has a massive influence, both directly and indirectly, in numerous world developments and sets certain precedents that the rest of the world follows or is guided by. This is never going to change, at least not in our life times

So you Americans are struck with the rest of the world always being concerned and supporting different outcomes and realities that occur within the USA....we like one big, happy, strained family 

Lets have a group hug as that always helps  

[BruceVC]

9 minutes ago, Elerond said:

At least Trump knew it already year ago.

Is this true? Everything I have seen and heard is that the VP role is purely ceremonial and he cannot  legally block the electoral college recognition today of Biden