Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
A Horse Named Stranger

US Politics: A small step from going viral to going postal

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Horza said:

Not with that attitude there isn’t.

Yeah, you clearly don't understand how closed off even the prospect of this is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

Yeah, you clearly don't understand how closed off even the prospect of this is. 

I understand it quite well because for as long as I’ve argued on this board people have thrown the formal barriers to making your electoral system work up as an objection to trying to do something about it. I found that bafflingly naive back in the early 2010s when Citizens United and Shelby Country had yet to really sink their teeth in but now as you guys rush headlong to a constitutional crisis this response sounds more like learned helplessness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Horza said:

I understand it quite well because for as long as I’ve argued on this board people have thrown the formal barriers to making your electoral system work up as an objection to trying to do something about it. I found that bafflingly naive back in the early 2010s when Citizens United and Shelby Country had yet to really sink their teeth in but now as you guys rush headlong to a constitutional crisis this response sounds more like learned helplessness. 

Okay, you clearly understand it well. Where do we start? Can you provide a blue print? If we're all the "learned helpless," then please, provide us a means of doing this. It sounds like you have an answer, so share it. 

Edited by Simon Steele

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Horza said:

Oh, geez damn, if only I knew how much work it  would take to dismantle the scaffolding of centuries of institutionalised white supremacy.

Not even work, you're getting ahead of yourself, how would it be possible? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Simon Steele said:

Okay, you clearly understand it well. Where do we start? Can you provide a blue print? If we're all the "learned helpless," then please, provide us a means of doing this. It sounds like you have an answer, so share it. 

This is the other defensive position. I didn’t say what I said above to enlist everyone in my monomaniacal master plan to reform the US electoral system and you aren’t seriously asking for one. This is swatting off the presumptuous foreigner with “what’s your plan egghead?” and it’s feeble. 
 

My point was that as long as everyone’s position on the awful American electoral system is that it’s unchangeable and so nothing can be done, nothing will be done. All that this point asks is that people stop thinking about it like that, there’s no blueprint without that first step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Horza said:

This is swatting off the presumptuous foreigner with “what’s your plan egghead?” and it’s feeble. 

No, it's not. It's you arguing that we should just do away with a built in feature of our electoral process and us asking you, "How?" It's an argument that sounds a lot better at parties than it does in real life.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

No, it's not. It's you arguing that we should just do away with a built in feature of our electoral process and us asking you, "How?" It's an argument that sounds a lot better at parties than it does in real life.

 

I don’t recall saying it could just be done away with. That’s your spin on it so you can continue treating the US electoral system like an immutable constant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

And you ignored the point, twice made, that over half the votes went to Hillary. So be mad at those Trumpers, I don't give a shit, but this whole notion that people have the free will to truly decide anything outside the hegemony is just fairy tale BS. We're not special. Nor are you. Had you lived in the US, the outcome would have been the same, whether you voted for Trump, Hillary, or didn't vote at all. It sure is easy to point your finger at the "stupids" for this mess, but this mess is way more complex than what you're arguing. Trump was inevitable. And this is not the first time in history where a country in decline put a demagogue in power. That indicates a systemic issue within society, not an issue with people getting what they deserve.

The sad fact is a lot of people don't think he is racist, because he thinks and says the same thing as them, and they don't see themselves as racist. It's the old "I have black friends, I hire black people to work in my company, I have a beer with them, I don't complain that there are black people in the bar I go to. They are more violent and have lower IQ than white people, but that's just fax man, truth can't be racist. I don't support Neo-Nazis or Stormfront types." kind of thing. Probably same with him being sexist. If you think your attitude is normal and natural and Trump aligns with that, then ipso facto Trump isn't sexist. Not really sure how one can parse "grab 'em by the pu$$y" but I guess some people find a way.

Edited by The Anti-Targ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Horza said:

I don’t recall saying it could just be done away with. That’s your spin on it so you can continue treating the US electoral system like an immutable constant.

It's not spin, just quoting you. You're the one who said we allow this system to continue, but then offered no actual way to fix it. That's a bullshit argument, because we all know it won't change, or do you think the Republican party will just give up one of their last few levers of power as the times slip like sand between their fingers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Horza said:

I understand it quite well because for as long as I’ve argued on this board people have thrown the formal barriers to making your electoral system work up as an objection to trying to do something about it.

I think there's an important difference between saying it's not worth trying to do something about it and recognizing that it's very hard to make structural changes in this country - even when you're trying to do something about it.  There are plenty of proposals out there that many people have spent a very long time devoting countless efforts to - the national vote plan, aggressive reform of the judicial system from top to bottom, DC and Puerto Rican statehood, pushing against the ocean on campaign finance reform, transparency, and the revolving door...and of course abolishing the filibuster (which I disagree with, but emphatically agree with reforms).  All of these are like like pushing molasses up a sandy hill.  And it's important to recognize that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The easiest way to do it is to have states worth 270 electoral votes agree to put their votes towards the person who wins the popular vote. This requires no federal constitutional change and probably doesn't require much state ones. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kalibear said:

The easiest way to do it is to have states worth 270 electoral votes agree to put their votes towards the person who wins the popular vote. This requires no federal constitutional change and probably doesn't require much state ones. 

Just be clear, even if we get to 270 - and I think it will happen eventually - the national vote plan has a discouraging future going through the current courts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DMC said:

Just be clear, even if we get to 270 - and I think it will happen eventually - the national vote plan has a discouraging future going through the current courts.

Then pack the shit out of the courts until we win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

Then pack the shit out of the courts until we win.

In the past quarter century, the Dems have only been in a position to do that from 2008-2010, and understandably Obama was preoccupied with other things at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, DMC said:

Just be clear, even if we get to 270 - and I think it will happen eventually - the national vote plan has a discouraging future going through the current courts.

I'm curious, how does it work with this?

Edited by Tywin et al.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

It's not spin, just quoting you. You're the one who said we allow this system to continue, but then offered no actual way to fix it. That's a bullshit argument, because we all know it won't change, or do you think the Republican party will just give up one of their last few levers of power as the times slip like sand between their fingers?

Interesting way of quoting me by not actually quoting me.
 

Though I did say “allow” because I did have in mind people who don’t like the system but bristle and use words like “impossible” and “unrealistic” about changing it when someone suggests it might be an enduring blemish on America’s standing in the court of world history as well as a clear and present danger.  Isn’t the fact that the system is a cudgel in the hands of the Republicans reason enough to abandon the objections about process and possibly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'm curious, how does it work with this?

I'm not sure I understand the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Simon Steele said:

See, this is what I mean. This is pure nonsense. Most people eligible to vote do not have to cast a ballot for Trump, and he can still win. So they deserve it? For voting for the Dems? For not being able to vote due to voter suppression? To be under so much financial pressure that taking a night off work to vote would cause real harm? 

You are individualizing it and I'm speaking collectively. We are a stupid country if Trump is richly rewarded for killing 200 k Americans. All those conditions you mention are present in every election and we still manage at times to hold leaders accountable at the ballot box at times. And this is an unusual situation to say the least. You'd have to nuke a country or start a civil war to be a worse President than the current one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw that the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeal has overruled a lower court and said that Florida requiring felons to pay off Court fines and fees “is not a poll tax” at all, no siree, it’s just a way “To promote full rehabilitation of returning citizens and ensures full satisfaction of the punishment imposed for the crimes by which the felons forfeited the right to vote”.

No voting for you, you bastards!

Like I said in the previous thread, or the thread before, and you guys call yourself a democracy? The leading light for all other countries in the world!

:rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DMC said:

In the past quarter century, the Dems have only been in a position to do that from 2008-2010, and understandably Obama was preoccupied with other things at the time.

I sure hope they don't make the same mistake twice then, because they will have plenty to keep them occupied, but that's still not an excuse.

As the ruling by the 11th Circuit shows on the Florida felon voting case, Trump has packed the courts enough to slow everything down until the 2022 elections, so even if Dems do get the trifecta, they're going to spend two years fumble-fucking around while they hem and haw about bullshit "minority rights" when it comes to abolishing the filibuster. 

McConnell won't be Majority Leader forever; how quickly would Hawley or Cruz pull the trigger to get rid of the filibuster. Republican Senators have already shown they're willing to fall in line. Even if Trump loses, the descent into fascism will have only been paused. People like Hawley or Cotton are walking proof of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...