Jump to content

US Politics: The Transition Continues


Altherion

Recommended Posts

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Kalbear,

I think Urban areas already have a high concentration of power.  That's were the big electoral vote numbers are (California and it's big cities, the same with Texas and Florida).  On that basis they shouldn't be ignored.  

But they have a disproportionate lack of power relative to their size. And you want to enshrine that. Even though it's far more risky to alienate them than it would be to alienate this supposed rural voting bloc that you've still not really stated as to what they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

But they have a disproportionate lack of power relative to their size. And you want to enshrine that. Even though it's far more risky to alienate them than it would be to alienate this supposed rural voting bloc that you've still not really stated as to what they do.

No, I want to dilute that power by increasing, significantly, the number of Representatives in the House of Representatives.  Most of those new Representatives are going to be in Urban areas where populations are concentrated.  Every new house member dilutes the relative power of the One Representative in small population states.  That translates through to the existing system as the Number of Electors is based on the number of Senators and Representatives they have in the House of Representatives.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

No, I want to dilute that by increasing, significantly, the number of Representatives in the House of Representatives.  Most of those new Representatives are going to be in Urban areas where populations are concentrated.  Every new house member dilutes the relative power of the One Representative in small population states.  That translates through to the existing system as the Number of Electors is based on the number of Senators and Representatives they have in the House of Representatives.  

But you've been arguing for days now about how you don't want to alienate rural voters because reasons. How does your plan stop the farmers from revolting with pitchforks and torches?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

But they have a disproportionate lack of power relative to their size. And you want to enshrine that. Even though it's far more risky to alienate them than it would be to alienate this supposed rural voting bloc that you've still not really stated as to what they do.

clearing quote  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

But you've been arguing for days now about how you don't want to alienate rural voters because reasons. How does your plan stop the farmers from revolting with pitchforks and torches?

Kalbear,

I've been arguing for modifications in the EC from the start (eliminating gerrymandering adopting Maine/Nebraska apportionment) the point about increasing the number of electors really hit me today.  The reason the relative impact is so out of wack is the freeze on the House of Representatives.  I've argued that needs to be made larger for some time now (without any relation to the EC).  

This retains the benefit to smaller states but significantly reduces the relative power of those smaller states.  I see it as splitting the baby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pontificating about rural voters and the electoral college, with all due respect, doesn't seem like a high priority right now. Particularly not as more indications of Trump's likely agenda emerge.

First, you have Trump telling off the press as Wert notes above. Then you have Kris Kobach showing what appears to be his pitch document for the job of heading up the Department of Homeland Security: plans that appear to include classifying as a criminal any non-resident alien even arrested for a crime, and also 'gang members' (however that's to be defined). Refusing to accept any Syrian refugee from any side of the conflict for any reason. Using the PATRIOT act as a tool to reduce immigration.

These are not Trump's own plans but they're clearly what Kobach thinks he wants to hear - and since Kobach is under serious consideration for a job, that would appear to be a reasonable assumption.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article116223378.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Commodore said:

other than the protectionism (which is hopefully mostly rhetorical), this is all very encouraging

 

Further strengthening my last post, thanks. It's a mixture of regressive policies, environmental destruction, economic damage, ridiculous and arbitrary tokenism and windy bullshit. I have no idea why you'd think the protectionism is rhetorical: it's the centrepiece of that little missive and he's pledging to take specific actions about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kalbear said:

And in actual political news instead of this Prairie Home Companion redux, Tulsi Gabbard - the oft-beloved poster child for Bernie supporters of who should run in 2020 - is meeting with Trump to likely discuss a role in his administration

I really don't know what to make of this. Why would she even consider a position if she's so Sandersesque? 

Then again, reading this I'm really confused why she would be supported by Sanders fans at all. She's against refugees, against refugees, didn't want to condemn Assad's violence against citizens, thinks the US is at war with Islam, and is apparently fairly friendly with Putin (or at least Russian papers like her). 

 

She supported Sanders because she saw it as a fast track to power, since she jumped on board around the peak of Sanders-mania in the primary.

She was supported by Sanders fans because she backed Sanders and nothing more. They didn't know anything about her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kalbear said:

At first I thought I got sniped but I think this might actually be a different neo-nazi gathering from this one:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/richard-spencer-speech-npi/508379/

All related to the Orwellian named "National Policy Institute".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

What in the fuck is wrong with people?

They support Trump. What, did you think this wasn't what his support looked like?

"Working class whites from the heartland" baby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Mom, the kids won't be coming home for Thanksgiving this year.  

Quote

However, some millennials, particularly the more liberal ones, are choosing to opt out of the festivities this year — their wounds too fresh. Their fears about the consequences of a Trump presidency, as well as a general disdain for family members who voted for him, are still very real.

I don't do holidays with the fam and haven't for years, and mostly for all the reasons that lead them to enthusiastically vote for Trump. One of my friends is opting out this year and says that out of everything, she's most devastated by the fact that her parents just don't give a single shit about her future or the future of their grandchildren and are so willing to tear it all down for reasons that barely make sense.  I thought it was a good way to put it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Watched Kellyanne flat out refute this on MSNBC a little bit ago...I was not able to believe her.  She alsomseemed to make a threat to the media to not discuss the meeting at all, if one were inclined to do so.  If one asks, "is this something you could see Trump doing?", the only answer is yes. 

Would Obama do this? Either Bush? I can't see that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Kalbear,

I think Urban areas already have a high concentration of power.  That's were the big electoral vote numbers are (California and it's big cities, the same with Texas and Florida).  On that basis they shouldn't be ignored.  

That's not urban areas, that's people. Urban areas are not concentrated power, they are concentrated people.

People, Scot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump's policy about removing two regulations for every new one is just goofy.  It doesn't take into account the merits of new regulations but just assumes they must be bad.  You may as well just ban adding new regulations if that's your belief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shryke said:

They support Trump. What, did you think this wasn't what his support looked like?

"Working class whites from the heartland" baby.

I remember back in the day, when Jonah Shitbird, in a conservative hissy fit, wrote Liberal Facism.

Now who has the fascism or Nazi problem now? It sure in the hell ain’t liberals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...