Biden's presidency

[CMRivdogs]

1 hour ago, John_Brian_K said:

So you like the idea of big corporations running the country?  Because with "campaigning" that is what you get.  With pork in bills, this is what you get.

Corporations are people too. Wasn't that the mantra of conservative corporative's not that long ago. Also affirmed by the Supreme Court when they ruled in favor of Clarence Thomas' wife in Citizen's United.

Actually, the country has always had a history and problem with corporations. That's how unions gained some control back in the day.

I would love to see public financing of campaigns. You get X amount of $$ and can spend no more. The Pols will always find a way around it. The reality is even with that there will always be lobbyists pimping for their overlords.

I'm also in favor of bring back horse trading.

And reinstalling stocks for offenders of election lawa.

 

[Mr.TaterSalad]

If you're interested in curbing corporate power and gaining real control than read about The Meidner Plan in Sweden from the 1970s. A democratized workplace with strong unions is the best way forward to curb corporate power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehn–Meidner_model

[mtutiger]

1 hour ago, oblong said:

The issue is we are a nation of states.  The House represents the people and they have certain roles.  The Senate represents the states and they have cerrtain roles.   If we make congress strictly democratic representation then there's no need to have two houses in our legislature.... and at that point why we even have states?  The idea is that states are more than geographical boundaries.  Why do we have one Montana or Wyoming or Idaho but two Dakotas?  I'm sure there were political reasons behind that, allowing the overall region of Dakota to have 4 senators instead of 2, maybe having to do with slavery?  I don't know the history but it wouldn't shock me.

This would require changing the constitution which requires the states to agree to it.... won't happen.  They're not going to give up power.  IT's also why the only real way to change the electoral college is through the popular vote pact that states are individually signing on to, which will also be challenged in court as soon as it's implemented, if it ever reaches that point.

This is all correct, of course. But it doesn't really make the system any less corrosive.

People focus on the Electoral College in terms of outcomes (ie. 2016), but I sort of hate how it just distills all national campaigns down to less than 10 states and how it creates this system where people judge states based on how they vote electorally.

Not directed at anyone in particular, but all the people who trash Texas or Florida and say "they deserve it" whenever something bad happens in either state seem to act like how the states voted in a particular election is a statement on the actual population of those states. When some 46% of Texans and 48% of Floridians (ie. damn near half in each state) didn't vote for Trump in 2020.

I know it's not going to change, but it's just corrosive as hell. And all the arguments in favor of it that argue about how it helps protect the interests of small states are just crap.... if anything, it makes it easier to ignore the 40+ states that aren't competitive.

Edited January 5, 2022 by mtutiger

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, Motown Bombers said:

One of the biggest things I would change is the senate. No way Wyoming, which has 575,000 people, should have the same number of senators as California which has 39 million people. California has multiple cities larges than Wyoming. 

Yet another compromise, this one to mollify the small states in the union who were used to the one colony-one vote scheme under the Articles of Confederation.

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, oblong said:

but how do you change that without the states that would cede power cooperating and why would they?

I'm not saying it's the right way... but it's the way it is and its not going to change.  You cant change the senate without an amendment.  We will never pass another constitutional amendment.

If the old South States keep sliding back into Jim Crow, a state like CA might decide to pass a serious secession plan. That would precipitate a crisis that would force the rest of the country's hand. Or the northern states House delegations might someday bring the issues to crises by refusing to approve transfer payments into the 'consumer' states - just stopping the Federal government.

But they could at least get back closer to some political balance if they would admit DC and Puerto Rico and then increase the size of the House to 500 to dilute the EC imbalance. None of that would require an amendment but would get us closer to where the idea of amendments would be back on the table.

 

[Motown Bombers]

5 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

This is all correct, of course. But it doesn't really make the system any less corrosive.

People focus on the Electoral College in terms of outcomes (ie. 2016), but I sort of hate how it just distills all national campaigns down to less than 10 states and how it creates this system where people judge states based on how they vote electorally.

Not directed at anyone in particular, but all the people who trash Texas or Florida and say "they deserve it" whenever something bad happens in either state seem to act like how the states voted in a particular election is a statement on the actual population of those states. When some 46% of Texans and 48% of Floridians (ie. damn near half in each state) didn't vote for Trump in 2020.

I know it's not going to change, but it's just corrosive as hell. And all the arguments in favor of it that argue about how it helps protect the interests of small states are just crap.... if anything, it makes it easier to ignore the 40+ states that aren't competitive.

It also goes the other way. Trumpers want to shit on California when Trump got more votes out of California than any other state including Texas. 

[Motown Bombers]

And Texas had the 7th lowest voter turnout in the country so it deserves everything it has coming to it. 

[Motown Bombers]

Speaking of Texas, I have been watching King of the Hill recently and have been taken by how the Republican party moved from the party of Hank Hill to Dale Gribble. I think Q is Dale Gribble. 

[oblong]

I didn't read it but I saw a tweet referring to the TV show Lost and its potential impact on the rise of the Q crowd.  It conditioned people to think about hidden meanings and all of that.  I never watched the show.

 

[CMRivdogs]

24 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

 

But they could at least get back closer to some political balance if they would admit DC and Puerto Rico and then increase the size of the House to 500 to dilute the EC imbalance. None of that would require an amendment but would get us closer to where the idea of amendments would be back on the table.

 

And increase the size of the House to an actual proportional size. For example if you used the same calculation for house members based on proportional population. California's delegation should be 68 members vs Wyoming's 1. 

 

[Mr.TaterSalad]

28 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Speaking of Texas, I have been watching King of the Hill recently and have been taken by how the Republican party moved from the party of Hank Hill to Dale Gribble. I think Q is Dale Gribble. 

[buddha]

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

If the old South States keep sliding back into Jim Crow, a state like CA might decide to pass a serious secession plan. That would precipitate a crisis that would force the rest of the country's hand. Or the northern states House delegations might someday bring the issues to crises by refusing to approve transfer payments into the 'consumer' states - just stopping the Federal government.

But they could at least get back closer to some political balance if they would admit DC and Puerto Rico and then increase the size of the House to 500 to dilute the EC imbalance. None of that would require an amendment but would get us closer to where the idea of amendments would be back on the table.

 

a return to jim crow is an extreme exaggeration.

and in another generation or two, population movements could turn a lot of the old industrial midwest into "consumer states," so be careful what you wish for.  

[buddha]

1 hour ago, mtutiger said:

This is all correct, of course. But it doesn't really make the system any less corrosive.

People focus on the Electoral College in terms of outcomes (ie. 2016), but I sort of hate how it just distills all national campaigns down to less than 10 states and how it creates this system where people judge states based on how they vote electorally.

Not directed at anyone in particular, but all the people who trash Texas or Florida and say "they deserve it" whenever something bad happens in either state seem to act like how the states voted in a particular election is a statement on the actual population of those states. When some 46% of Texans and 48% of Floridians (ie. damn near half in each state) didn't vote for Trump in 2020.

I know it's not going to change, but it's just corrosive as hell. And all the arguments in favor of it that argue about how it helps protect the interests of small states are just crap.... if anything, it makes it easier to ignore the 40+ states that aren't competitive.

not directed at 75% of this board that talks about any part of the country that isnt bright blue as a bunch of racist gun toting teeth missing uneducated white redneck hicks?  😉

[Motown Bombers]

9 minutes ago, buddha said:

a return to jim crow is an extreme exaggeration.

and in another generation or two, population movements could turn a lot of the old industrial midwest into "consumer states," so be careful what you wish for.  

I mean, they're burning books, banning teaching race, and purging election boards of people of color. I don't think it is an exaggeration. 

[Motown Bombers]

7 minutes ago, buddha said:

not directed at 75% of this board that talks about any part of the country that isnt bright blue as a bunch of racist gun toting teeth missing uneducated white redneck hicks?  😉

West Virginia has the most toothless seniors and is also ruby red. If the dentures fit...

[Tigeraholic1]

1 hour ago, oblong said:

I didn't read it but I saw a tweet referring to the TV show Lost and its potential impact on the rise of the Q crowd.  It conditioned people to think about hidden meanings and all of that.  I never watched the show.

 

Really? I am a huge Lost fan and don't see it. There is an invisible monster running around but thats about it to me.

[mtutiger]

48 minutes ago, buddha said:

not directed at 75% of this board that talks about any part of the country that isnt bright blue as a bunch of racist gun toting teeth missing uneducated white redneck hicks?  😉

I mean, we have our share of hard right wingers in this state.... but there are parts of Dallas or Houston that are as Democratic in how they vote as anywhere else in the country (not to mention the Austin/SA corridor). Just as there are places in Pennsylvania who are as Republican as a number of counties here.

The Electoral College tends to obscure that.... people (on both sides, I might add) just write places off because of a few percentage points one way or another. Just setting aside everything else about the EC, it's just corrosive IMO

[Mr.TaterSalad]

Why am I supposed to feel sympathy for people who routinely vote against their own economic self interest in red or blue states? My dad does it all the time when he votes for Republicans and he lives off of Social Security and Medicare. I feel more anger for him that a rotten system set him up to fail through two recessions and multiple stock market crashes. But at some point, he keeps voting for a political party and candidates that would gut the very Social Security and Medicare he now lives off of and I have to stop feeling bad at some point. Republicans would tell my dad to kick rocks and eat rats all in the name of privatizing Social Security and getting rid of Medicare. If you think that is me being hyperbolic, just look at what the prior Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, wanted to do. Privatize Social Security and end Medicare.

He's a big boy though, he is smart, he knows how to read. He just choses to rot his brain out by reading poorly sourced books, falling pray to chain emails, and watching Fox News everyday. He could chose to listen to NPR and watch PBS News Hour, Frontline, and Vice News as I do. He could choose to read read Economic Policy Institute, Center for American Progress, Washington Post, NYT, the Intercept, and reputable, sources as I do. Instead he choses chain emails, memes, Fox News, and books like The Bell Curve. If Republicans do gut Social Security and Medicare one day, what should I say to my dad and the tens-of-millions of Republicans like him besides "I told you so" and "thanks a lot".

Edited January 5, 2022 by Mr.TaterSalad

[romad1]

16 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Why am I supposed to feel sympathy for people who routinely vote against their own economic self interest in red or blue states? My dad does it all the time when he votes for Republicans and he lives off of Social Security and Medicare. I feel more anger for him that a rotten system set him up to fail through two recessions and multiple stock market crashes. But at some point, he keeps voting for a political party and candidates that would gut the very Social Security and Medicare he now lives off of and I have to stop feeling bad at some point. Republicans would tell my dad to kick rocks and eat rats all in the name of privatizing Social Security and getting rid of Medicare. If you think that is me being hyperbolic, just look at what the prior Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, wanted to do. Privatize Social Security and end Medicare.

He's a big boy though, he is smart, he knows how to read. He just choses to rot his brain out by reading poorly sourced books, falling pray to chain emails, and watching Fox News everyday. He could chose to listen to NPR and watch PBS News Hour, Frontline, and Vice News as I do. He could choose to read read Economic Policy Institute, Center for American Progress, Washington Post, NYT, the Intercept, and reputable, sources as I do. Instead he choses chain emails, memes, Fox News, and books like The Bell Curve. If Republicans do gut Social Security and Medicare one day, what should I say to my dad and the tens-of-millions of Republicans like him besides "I told you so" and "thanks a lot".

Tater...there is a lot going on here.  This time of year brings it out, doesn't it?

[Tiger337]

2 hours ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

Really? I am a huge Lost fan and don't see it. There is an invisible monster running around but thats about it to me.

The invisible monster is probably a communist  

[mtutiger]

29 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Why am I supposed to feel sympathy for people who routinely vote against their own economic self interest in red or blue states?

Not sure if you are addressing my point, but if you are, the point is rather that there are still people in those "irredeemable" states like Texas and Florida and others who aren't Republicans. Florida and Texas, in that order, were 2 and 3 respectively in terms of raw vote delivered to Joe Biden (behind California). The EC, and the subsequent coverage of politics in this country that results from it, IMO, really obscures that for a lot of people.

It'd be nice for people to remember that when they are busy talking how we deserve natural or manmade disasters, or how they'd be OK if Texas seceded. When I hear people talk like that that, I perceive it as they don't care about everyone who is here who maybe isn't in step with the governments here or how the states vote at the Presidential level. And they're talking about a lot of people for whom this is their home and maybe they don't have the desire or privilege to just up and leave because they don't like the politics of where they live.

To be fair, both sides do this (Rs do this with California, New York and Illinois as well), but it doesn't make it any less of a turn off in these conversations.

Edited January 5, 2022 by mtutiger

[Tiger337]

2 hours ago, buddha said:

not directed at 75% of this board that talks about any part of the country that isnt bright blue as a bunch of racist gun toting teeth missing uneducated white redneck hicks?  😉

Where I live, the blue voters are vaguely racist Irish Catholic males who love Reagan, cops and the New England Patriots.  They live in boring middle class suburbs and have all their teeth.  They don't like Trump, but they voted voted for him twice because he is better than any Democrat and he did some good things.   

[Motown Bombers]

Texas is consistently one of the lowest voter turnout states. I don't know anyone here who cheerleads for disasters to hit Texas, but when the government starts taking away rights like abortion passing unpopular gun laws, and failing to address their unstable power grid, the people of Texas deserve it. Keep in mind, Texas senator Ted Cruz, tried to deny disaster assistance to New Jersey because it was a blue state. Sorry, I have no sympathy for the pull yourself up by the bootstrap state and the don't mess with Texas. 

[buddha]

1 hour ago, mtutiger said:

I mean, we have our share of hard right wingers in this state.... but there are parts of Dallas or Houston that are as Democratic in how they vote as anywhere else in the country (not to mention the Austin/SA corridor). Just as there are places in Pennsylvania who are as Republican as a number of counties here.

The Electoral College tends to obscure that.... people (on both sides, I might add) just write places off because of a few percentage points one way or another. Just setting aside everything else about the EC, it's just corrosive IMO

i agree with you about the electoral college and i think it should be discarded.  not because it will enshrine a temporary democratic party majority as some here seem excited about, but because i dont see what purpose it really serves anymore.

as for the comments on the south, i think there are just as many stupid people in the north and in big cities who vote democrat as there are rural white people in the south who vote republican.

if you want to see a banana republic one party state full of fraud, dirty tricks, and corruption, led by people who arent very bright but think theyre better than you, look no further than the great city of chicago and the thousands of lemmings who line up and vote for the democrats every year and get nothing for it. 

i know, because i am one of them.

 

[Motown Bombers]

2 minutes ago, buddha said:

i agree with you about the electoral college and i think it should be discarded.  not because it will enshrine a temporary democratic party majority as some here seem excited about, but because i dont see what purpose it really serves anymore.

as for the comments on the south, i think there are just as many stupid people in the north and in big cities who vote democrat as there are rural white people in the south who vote republican.

if you want to see a banana republic one party state full of fraud, dirty tricks, and corruption, led by people who arent very bright but think theyre better than you, look no further than the great city of chicago and the thousands of lemmings who line up and vote for the democrats every year and get nothing for it. 

i know, because i am one of them.

 

People want to enshrine a Democratic majority because Democrats represent 40 million more people in the senate than Republicans. Republicans have exactly one popular vote win in the past 32 years and yet have won 3 election. This minority government just appointed 3 supreme court justices. Don't you think we shouldn't be led by a minority party?