Politics - Episode 9: The Lurking Fear

[Gfted1]

Lets think of the bright side. In 3 more months, theres only 36 more months of Trump. /highfive

[Bartimaeus]

Uh...plus the other ~3 months that you're missing, yes.

Edited July 30, 2017 by Bartimaeus

[Orogun01]

Lets think of the bright side. In 3 more months, theres only 36 more months of Trump. /highfive

What if he gets reelected?

[Gorgon]

nahh, they have definitely had enough. 

[Gorgon]

I mean, try to imagine him even more senile. 

[Guard Dog]

No, a Trump re-election is not unrealisitc. There are pleny of flawed Democrats who could go in there is completely screw this up. And if they didn't they would be in office and we would be no better off. 

 

This two party system we have become stuck in is quckly becoming a binary death trap. Who was the last major party nominee that was not seriously flawed? George HW Bush? And going back to 2008 & 2012. Had McCain or Romney won their elections does anyone really think they would have done anything different than Obama did? Two tribes fighting tooth and nail because each want's "their" chief to be the one to do what either will do. 

 

And the tragedy of it is we are only stuck with it because we think we are. 3rd party candidates only lose because people think they are wasting their vote. If enough people decide enough is enough those votes won't be wasted, they will change things. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/emmanuel-macron-france-approval-ratings-drop-never-save-the-centre-a7859041.html

 

I'm predicting Trump holds on in 2020, the dems are too busy wanking over the radical centre to figure out why they lost in 2016. With only a little more than half the electorate showing up to vote in 2016, I feel safe in saying "abstain" will win the popular vote.

[Bartimaeus]

No, a Trump re-election is not unrealisitc. There are pleny of flawed Democrats who could go in there is completely screw this up. And if they didn't they would be in office and we would be no better off. 

 

This two party system we have become stuck in is quckly becoming a binary death trap. Who was the last major party nominee that was not seriously flawed? George HW Bush? And going back to 2008 & 2012. Had McCain or Romney won their elections does anyone really think they would have done anything different than Obama did? Two tribes fighting tooth and nail because each want's "their" chief to be the one to do what either will do. 

 

And the tragedy of it is we are only stuck with it because we think we are. 3rd party candidates only lose because people think they are wasting their vote. If enough people decide enough is enough those votes won't be wasted, they will change things. 

 

I mean, in terms of the presidency, there's not much that can be done until we move on from first past the post. Even if a major third party did rise, it would just cannibalize the others and likely lead to Congress selecting the winner. For non-presidential elections, sure, third party candidates can work. For the presidency, we're in need of election reform before it becomes realistic, though. And quite frankly, hardly anyone seems to care about this issue, so things aren't likely to change anytime soon.

Edited July 30, 2017 by Bartimaeus

[redneckdevil]

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/emmanuel-macron-france-approval-ratings-drop-never-save-the-centre-a7859041.html

 

I'm predicting Trump holds on in 2020, the dems are too busy wanking over the radical centre to figure out why they lost in 2016. With only a little more than half the electorate showing up to vote in 2016, I feel safe in saying "abstain" will win the popular vote.

I agree also the Republicans are in a nice position that they have the scapegoat of Trump because he's not a republican, just went under the ticket of one. Just like the Democrats would be if Bernie got elected.

 

I just don't wanna have another 2016 election.....hell year period.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Well David Bowie can't die twice so it's safe to say there will never be another 2016.

[Guard Dog]

 

No, a Trump re-election is not unrealisitc. There are pleny of flawed Democrats who could go in there is completely screw this up. And if they didn't they would be in office and we would be no better off. 

 

This two party system we have become stuck in is quckly becoming a binary death trap. Who was the last major party nominee that was not seriously flawed? George HW Bush? And going back to 2008 & 2012. Had McCain or Romney won their elections does anyone really think they would have done anything different than Obama did? Two tribes fighting tooth and nail because each want's "their" chief to be the one to do what either will do. 

 

And the tragedy of it is we are only stuck with it because we think we are. 3rd party candidates only lose because people think they are wasting their vote. If enough people decide enough is enough those votes won't be wasted, they will change things. 

 

I mean, in terms of the presidency, there's not much that can be done until we move on from first past the post. Even if a major third party did rise, it would just cannibalize the others and likely lead to Congress selecting the winner. For non-presidential elections, sure, third party candidates can work. For the presidency, we're in need of election reform before it becomes realistic, though. And quite frankly, hardly anyone seems to care about this issue, so things aren't likely to change anytime soon.

 

 

Even taking enough electoral votes to force a House election would be enough to establish a legitimate 3rd party. Winning a governorship and a few seats in Congress would too. IMO that is where the focus and assets should go right now and the LP seems to be embracing that strategy. The ides should be less about winning now than setting the table for the future.

[Rosbjerg]

 And the tragedy of it is we are only stuck with it because we think we are. 3rd party candidates only lose because people think they are wasting their vote. If enough people decide enough is enough those votes won't be wasted, they will change things.

 

You'd be taking about direct democracy 'changing things' if you lived in a multiple party system. We do - and it's the same bull****, albeit on a smaller scale.

 

Voting blocks graviate towards an effective two party system anyway. The problem is systemic to power itself.

 

I can recommend this book for a good dose of cynisism

https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1328737207l/11612989.jpg

[Blarghagh]

Yeah, here it always ends up being party A vs party B. Which parties are A or B varies, but the issues of the day and who most easily takes advantage of that generally cause an unintended two party some time before the election.

[redneckdevil]

For splitting up the 2 party monopoly, I say we get rid of the winner take all process when it comes to electoral votes. Let each candidate take their full spoils instead of whoever gets the most gets all of a state. I think the best way right now without any real challenges, is to just give every candidate what they got, everyone's got a voice this way.

Edited July 30, 2017 by redneckdevil

[Elerond]

 

 And the tragedy of it is we are only stuck with it because we think we are. 3rd party candidates only lose because people think they are wasting their vote. If enough people decide enough is enough those votes won't be wasted, they will change things.

You'd be taking about direct democracy 'changing things' if you lived in a multiple party system. We do - and it's the same bull****, albeit on a smaller scale.

 

Voting blocks graviate towards an effective two party system anyway. The problem is systemic to power itself.

 

I can recommend this book for a good dose of cynisism

https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1328737207l/11612989.jpg

 

 

Gravitation towards two party system comes from government vs. opposition arrangement, but what I like in multiparty system is that it is usually easier predict how unified or divided government or opposition is towards certain issues.

[Guard Dog]

For splitting up the 2 party monopoly, I say we get rid of the winner take all process when it comes to electoral votes. Let each candidate take their full spoils instead of whoever gets the most gets all of a state. I think the best way right now without any real challenges, is to just give every candidate what they got, everyone's got a voice this way.

 

It's a nice idea. The problem is there are only two ways to make it happen. Constitutional Amendment or Constitutional Convention. Trust me... you do NOT want the latter and the former would require at least five states with less than 10 electoral votes to agree to marginalize themselves. It's a hard sell.

[Guard Dog]

Throughout our history we have gone through periods of political tribalisim rivaling what we see today. I can think of at least two times it was worse. But what we have now is the worst of my lifetime. It's getting to the point where a special prosecutor is appointed the day each new President takes office and impeachment proceedings are drawn up before the plates are cleared from the inagural lunch. It amazes me to see the Democrats howl when Trump does the same kind of thing they praised Obama for doing. When Barack Obama was increasing warantless wiretaps and data mining on everyday Americans the Republicans howled but they were the same ones who voted for the Patriot act and the FISA changes that permitted it.

 

It's fascinating to see but there really does seem to be a reaction of folks who favor the Democrats thinking everything the Democrats to is good and everything the Republicans do is bad. And vice versa. It's a political absolutism that, hell I've never seen it like this. I am a card carrying Libertarian and a paid member of the party but even I only agree with them on about 80% of their platform. I guess that means I'm that because I'm closer to being that than anything else. But this... thing we see here now. A refusal to even acknowledge a moral correctness in any stance of the political opposition or even a small a moral incorrectness in our own is troubling. 

 

To quote Thomas Jefferson "I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent."

 

Just my $.02

[Malcador]

 

List out how you are effectively standing up to MS-13.

You... you mean that acting tough on the internets isn't enough?

 

brb need to rethink my life

 

Nope you have to listen to death metal and power lift, as well.

[Wrath of Dagon]

In a multi-party system, parties have to compete much more for voters, thus there's less corruption, which is the main problem with our two party system. Changing that would take a Constitutional Amendment, which is very difficult since both parties would be against that. There is a small chance that a mass movement could accomplish that, but the underlying problem here is the ignorance and apathy of voters.

[Raithe]

So, Scaramucci has offered his resignation?

 

Is Trump's White House basically running "Survivor; The Real Life Season" ?

[Wrath of Dagon]

Apparently Kelly fired him.

[Leferd]

http://www.newyorker.com/news/ryan-lizza/anthony-scaramucci-called-me-to-unload-about-white-house-leakers-reince-priebus-and-steve-bannon/amp

 

This is nuts.

 

Part of me is hoping Scaramucci can last until SNL starts up again in the Fall. If Spicer is comedy gold for them, Mooch will be a goldmine.

Darn.

[Raithe]

The big question is this....

 

When someone gets fired in Trump's Oval Office.. do Oompa Loompas do a song and dance routine?

[Raithe]

TRUMP: "I'm the best at appointing people. No one has ever appointed more people to the same office than I have."

[HoonDing]

Scaramucci is not like Trump. He has no issues finding his own ****.