Jump to content

Wethers

Members
  • Content count

    194
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Wethers

  • Rank
    Squire
  • Birthday 08/28/1970

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0
  • Yahoo
    tbardhan

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    San Francisco, CA, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

2,011 profile views
  1. So now you know what they are actually against.
  2. Wethers

    u.s. politics: sundowning on the american empire

    Sure, but current reality is that targeted voter suppression is essentially a given if Republicans (maybe even Democrats, don't know) win full control of the state. So it's not really a step, just nature taking its course, or am I overstating things? And due to the 100% politicization of the SCOTUS nomination process, it is essentially also automatic that if a party controls the Senate they will block any nomination they don't want, and if they also have the Presidency, they will ram through politically favorable nominations to SCOTUS. So saying Gerrymandering is 3 steps from gaining SCOTUS seats is (to make an extreme analogy) sort of like saying no it wasn't the extra dry brush and twigs I threw on the small fire in the forest that caused the giant forest fire. It was the person that caused the initial spark or dropped something that was lit. Then later, it was the fact that the dry grass was adjacent to dry trees and acres of dry brush which caused the fire to spread. And much of that only happened due to warmer climates and death of trees due to attack from a larger insect population thriving in warmer temperatures. My adding kindling was just one among many steps. Gerrymandering is the adding of kindling in this (admittedly tortured) analogy. Sure it is just one step, but it is a significant contributor to the overall end result.
  3. Wethers

    u.s. politics: sundowning on the american empire

    I'm not sure I understand. If a party gains full control of state legislature (and other offices), could they not use that for targeted voter suppression? Part of accomplishing this is winning the state legislature (via gerrymandering). Wouldn't voter suppression then affect Senate and Presidential elections? If you reduce the ability for those who would vote for the opposing party to vote it has an effect on the state-wide totals... Close polling stations and so on. Makes it easier for one party to win the Senate seat and the electoral votes for the state. So gerrymandering to help gain full control of the state enables techniques (like voter suppression) to influence Senate and Presidential elections by suppressing turnout by opposing voters in subsequent elections.
  4. Wethers

    u.s. politics: sundowning on the american empire

    What do you mean? Gerrymandering doesn’t impact US Senate elections and impacts only two states out of 50 in Presidential Elections. I am definitely not Bonnot. But might there be a way for gerrymandering to indirectly affect things it does not directly affect, especially if you have a swing state that can go either way for state-wide votes? In swing states, might gerrymandering make it easier for a party (usually Republicans) to get full control of the state legislature that they might not otherwise have had, which, if combined with a governor or other state-wide executives of the same party, allow accelerated targeted voter suppression measures in that state which otherwise would not have happened? This targeted voter suppression would then affect subsequent Senate and Presidential elections, which would in turn affect the SCOTUS. (Edited to add: and also cement the state-wide control by the gerrymandering party so that voter suppression and other such measures become effectively permanent). Certainly not my area of expertise so someone correct me if I'm wrong.
  5. Not that it will matter, but kind of funny on Fox and North Korea: Juxtaposition of Fox's coverage on talking with North Korea over the years CNN and MSNBC are news networks with a bias towards Dems. By contrast, Fox isn't a news network with a bias towards Republicans. They truly are a GOTV operation for the Republican Party. They will make sure Trump (probably legitimately) wins in 2020.
  6. That scenario you laid out is one that I've thought about as well - repeat of 2016 except Dems win Pennsylvania and Michigan, but can't flip Wisconsin or Florida or any others - so Trump wins 270-268. It's what makes me think, sadly, that Trump has a great chance of getting re-elected even without shenanigans. Dems really have to win Pennsylvania, Michigan AND Wisconsin. Aside: what if your scenario unfolds, but Dems also pick up the lone elector in NE-2 (or the one they lost in Maine)? 269-269 Of course, besides PA, WI, MI, Dems should compete hard in other close blue (MN, NV, NH) and close red (FL, AZ, NC, IA) states. Really they should compete in all 50 states, especially because the race is not just for President. But frankly if Texas goes blue in 2020 (extremely unlikely), then it won't matter for the Presidential race - the Dem candidate will already have won it based on other states. Basically, the chances of Texas being the "tipping point" state (shout out to thread title) in the 2020 Presidential election are vanishingly small. PA, MI and WI are probably the tipping point states, with an outside chance of the other close states I outlined being the tipping point. Obviously Florida swinging blue would be huge, but it probably won't happen without some of the other close states also going blue and making it moot. The key significance of Texas getting bluer would be the possibility of Dems eventually picking up more house seats and maybe (probably not in 2020) even a Senate seat someday. Maybe state legislature gains too. Still, I'll believe it when I see it.
  7. Wethers

    Happy Metric Day!

    Thanks - and thanks for not pasting a lmgtfy.com link. I should have looked it up myself.
  8. Wethers

    Happy Metric Day!

    I know this is trolling and not looking for a serious answer, but as an American, I'm curious: don't China and Russia use the metric system? They've walked on the moon too, I thought. Or was that before they switched to metric, at least officially?
  9. Wethers

    Terrorist Attack at New Zealand mosques

    Also wanted to belatedly say that the words from both Ardern and Waleed set exactly the right tone after this attack.
  10. Wethers

    Terrorist Attack at New Zealand mosques

    Canterbury Cavalry or Cavaliers? Chargers? Could keep most of the logo. At some point, why not get a new name? I mean almost no one would think a sports team named, say, the “Riyadh Jihadists” would be a good idea even though it flows off the tongue. Why is Canterbury Crusaders any different? (And yes having a NFL team called the Washington Redskins is not good - saying this as a huge American football fan).
  11. Wethers

    US Politics: Paradise Lost

    Yep, with the Utah-4 pickup (by less than 1k), and assuming the 2 NY seats split as expected (Dem Brindisi wins NY-22 and Rep Collins, ugh, wins NY-27 where each lead their races by a couple thousand votes), that would be a +39 pickup for Dems, 234 total. It's true GA-7 has yet to be called too, and (R) Woodall's margin is less than 1k votes over (D) Bourdeaux, but it seems like a longshot given that it's Georgia (area northeast outside of Atlanta) and late-counted votes may not swing blue. Another that has been "called" already for Republicans but is going down to the wire with the even-stronger-than-usual late/absentee surge by Democrats in California is CA-21 (Fresno/Bakersfield). Incumbent (R) David Valadao had a bigger lead when the race was called, but his margin over (D) T.J. Cox has now been whittled down below 1k votes. So in summary, Dems +39, 234 total, with a chance to get to +40, 235 if either GA-7 or CA-21 flip. Underdogs in both, but I think CA-21 is maybe slightly more likely given the late-counted vote demographic in CA.
  12. Wethers

    US Politics: Paradise Lost

    I’m thinking KB meant that the thing that’s scary is that most states aren’t overwhelmingly Democratic given the state of the Republican Party. Not that most states are polarized one way or the other, which is what Scot seemed to be saying was scary. Dunno what a good analogy is. Maybe pre-Civil War saying “man it’s so scary that there are pockets of the North that seem polarized against slavery.” The real scary part was not that, but rather that there was so much of the South willing to go to war to defend slavery when the voting turned against them.
  13. Wethers

    US Politics: Dead Pimps Need Not Apply

    Arizona Senate race update as of 6:30pm Arizona time (MST) as the mail-in ballot count continues: Sinema's lead grows to a bit under 30k. Tons of ballots still remain but I'm starting to feel good about this one. Kyrsten Sinema (D): 1,048,655 (49.53%) Martha McSally (R): 1,018,823 (48.12%) As an aside, the Arizona Dem Secretary of State candidate (Hobbs) was trailing by tens of thousands a few days ago and is now within 2k of the Rep candidate (Gaynor). https://results.arizona.vote/#/featured/4/0
  14. Wethers

    US Politics: Dead Pimps Need Not Apply

    Yep. I am just one state over from Zona (Cali) and of course have been to Maricopa county many times. It has some blue parts and some very red parts, so the next batch could easily be heavily Republican. Just sayin’ to quell my early optimism...
  15. Wethers

    US Politics: Dead Pimps Need Not Apply

    Sinema now up to a 8-9k lead with more votes counted on the same site the tweet lists. (It was only a 2k lead at the time of the tweet).
×