Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Fury Resurrected

US Politics- Roger Stoned to Death

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, aceluby said:

No I'm not.  My argument is that getting over the 5% threshold in a presidential election is meaningless.

Oh, my mistake, thanks for clarifying.

Share this post


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

McConnell over McGrath is fine, because McGrath was never going to win that race in Kentucky, and the sooner Democrats focus on winnable senate races like SC, KS, MT, and IA, the better. 

McConnell lives in the void where his constituents don't like him, but they hate Democrats even more.

The SC race is getting funny now with Graham demanding Harrison's taxes. 

Share this post


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

There are provisional votes that are allowed at many polling places that can later be checked. But it's not just the rolls - that was shorthand and I apologize. The specific registered voter rolls are (usually) decently guarded, though apparently not in Kentucky. 

For mail in voting to work, they have to check the rolls, then they have to go to other databases that have things like the voter signature, address, name and other bits of data on record. These are often handled by the DoL of that state and are VERY open. And these can be easily modified. They're somewhat designed to be easily modified, as any DoL office needs to be able to do so. But that leaves them open to vulnerability. And from there you can change all sorts of things - the valid signature, the contact information in case of a discrepancy, the actual record of a person being alive...it's all problematic. In that way, mail-in voting has a weakness that in-person does not. 

If I can submit my taxes via mail or online, I'm pretty sure we can figure a way to do ballots.  The fact that we don't just shows how little we care about the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There appears to be a fair bit of vote splitting going on, so its reasonable to ask whether there is a non-trivial probability that Trump wins the EC, but Dems hold the House and retake the Senate. That would definitely soften the blow of a second Trump presidency some. I think it is somewhat likely but not an overwhelming probability

Share this post


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

so its reasonable to ask whether there is a non-trivial probability that Trump wins the EC, but Dems hold the House and retake the Senate. That would definitely soften the blow of a second Trump presidency some. I think it is somewhat likely but not an overwhelming probability

I think it's a possibility Trump wins the EC and the Dems take the Senate, sure, but I'd put the chances at less than 5 percent.

Share this post


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

There appears to be a fair bit of vote splitting going on, so its reasonable to ask whether there is a non-trivial probability that Trump wins the EC, but Dems hold the House and retake the Senate. That would definitely soften the blow of a second Trump presidency some. I think it is somewhat likely but not an overwhelming probability

In my opinion that is about the worst thing that could happen.  Trump has already shown that he has zero respect for the checks and balances.  He would simply be further emboldened without having to pay lip service to the rest of the GOP in the Senate.  And without them to backstop him, he'd just do what he wants.  i doubt there's any scenario where the democrats get enough seats to actually remove him from office, so we'd just see Trump do more and more extreme things to get his way until the whole system fell apart.

Share this post


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

In my opinion that is about the worst thing that could happen.  Trump has already shown that he has zero respect for the checks and balances.

If nothing else it would curb his judicial nominations.

Share this post


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

If nothing else it would curb his judicial nominations.

Or he would just declare that they were judges and we could start that particular constitutional crisis.  Congress has been proved to have no method of enforcement.  At this point the President can pretty much do whatever he wants, if he really really wants to.  What are they going to do, send the Sergeant at Arms to arrest the President?  Have to get past the Secret Service first.

Share this post


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

The biggest reason is that your actions define you, not the results of your actions.   By actively participating in the democratic process you define a portion of your contribution to your society.  If you don't. . . you don't. 

Or how about do you only do what's right when it affects things?  Or do you do the right thing even when it doesn't make a difference?

Or how about the fact that the presidential election isn't the only damn thing on the ballot.  What about Mayors, Judges, sheriffs, all the other things on the ballot that affect you even more locally?

There's a lot other reasons, but those are the big ones to me personally.

I agree with you but I also think there is at least a small practical reason to vote no matter what. People love data and analysis and looking at the numbers of how many people voted for each candidate, even in safe states, could help to inform the direction of policy. Maybe just a tiny bit. I feel like margin of victory could be a good indicator of whether or not policy platforms are hitting home or not. I’m currently in a state that is likely pretty safe for Biden but that doesn’t mean I don’t want to help run up the score. I’ll take any victory at all, but I think that in this election an emphatic victory is more important than its ever been - if we can get it.

Imagine Trump isn’t just defeated but is crushed, routed. I don’t know how to send a clearer picture to the Republicans that there’s no winnable national path without going back to the drawing board and finding a way to edge back towards sanity. A close loss doesn’t do much to dissuade them from current behaviors, IMO. You don’t want their strategists to be thinking ‘ah well, we’ll get em next time!’ you want them to be thinking ‘wow, we can’t keep going like this.’

That’s my incentive to vote anyway. I can help, at least in my state, to run up the score. I’m showing up to spike the football and do and end zone dance. 

re: advertising - I have seen several Biden commercials during football games, both college and NFL. I would guess that if the election were only ‘football fans’ Trump would likely win, but it’s a large audience and probably an expensive slot so I was glad to see Biden’s face instead of Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I was just about to post that SC poll. Note that Trump is only running +6 in SC per Qpac, so it isn't that hard to see their polls showing a very competitive Senate race. At any rate, its good to see Graham squirm after he hitched his wagon to Trump (seriously, after being a McCain friend for so long, it makes no sense to me).

Other polls out of SC show slightly better news for Graham, but those were in August. Anyway, regarding Collins I think she's in real trouble.

Trump being up 6 in SC seems believable.  He won it in 2016 by 14 points, and that was without a competitive senate race bringing Dems to the polls.  Plus, SC has a fair number of college educated Republicans who might be ready to flip. 

11 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

There appears to be a fair bit of vote splitting going on, so its reasonable to ask whether there is a non-trivial probability that Trump wins the EC, but Dems hold the House and retake the Senate. That would definitely soften the blow of a second Trump presidency some. I think it is somewhat likely but not an overwhelming probability

It's not impossible, but it is very, very unlikely.  Remember that if Trump wins, they need 51 seats, just winning NC+ME+CO+AZ wouldn't do it (unless Jones hangs on...).  Trump would have to improve ~ 4 points across the board to squeak out an EC victory.  At that point Cunningham probably loses unless NC is unusually competitive (it was 3 points more Republican than the tipping point state in 2016).  So Democrats need to go 4/4 in their pickup opportunities, PLUS pick up one of the reach opportunities in SC/MT/KS/IA, all while Trump is overperforming?  I don't see how that is possible.

Edited by Maithanet

Share this post


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

I agree with you but I also think there is at least a small practical reason to vote no matter what. People love data and analysis and looking at the numbers of how many people voted for each candidate, even in safe states, could help to inform the direction of policy. Maybe just a tiny bit. I feel like margin of victory could be a good indicator of whether or not policy platforms are hitting home or not. I’m currently in a state that is likely pretty safe for Biden but that doesn’t mean I don’t want to help run up the score. I’ll take any victory at all, but I think that in this election an emphatic victory is more important than its ever been - if we can get it.

Imagine Trump isn’t just defeated but is crushed, routed. I don’t know how to send a clearer picture to the Republicans that there’s no winnable national path without going back to the drawing board and finding a way to edge back towards sanity. A close loss doesn’t do much to dissuade them from current behaviors, IMO. You don’t want their strategists to be thinking ‘ah well, we’ll get em next time!’ you want them to be thinking ‘wow, we can’t keep going like this.’

That’s my incentive to vote anyway. I can help, at least in my state, to run up the score. I’m showing up to spike the football and do and end zone dance. 

re: advertising - I have seen several Biden commercials during football games, both college and NFL. I would guess that if the election were only ‘football fans’ Trump would likely win, but it’s a large audience and probably an expensive slot so I was glad to see Biden’s face instead of Trump.

That is a good reason to vote.  

I don't think you can send any messages to the GOP, they've been completely taken over by the Trump Cult..  They're electing insane fringe conspiracy theorists now, and the people they appoint to leadership positions go on facebook and rant about secret cabals (just like dear leader). 

The rational part of the party has either fled or is holding the Trump tiger by the tail.  I don't have any sympathy for them, they fed that tiger, poked its bars, pointed at their "enemies" and opened the cage door.  The fact that it turns around and eats them too sometimes is only a tiny taste of karma.

Share this post


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

Or he would just declare that they were judges and we could start that particular constitutional crisis. 

I meant future nominations.  If they aren't confirmed by the Senate they don't get to serve, there is no constitutional crisis there.  Presidents can get around this with Cabinet and Senate-confirmable executive officials - and Trump has abused that quite thoroughly even with a GOP Senate - but there's no way to do that with judges.

2 minutes ago, argonak said:

At this point the President can pretty much do whatever he wants, if he really really wants to.  What are they going to do, send the Sergeant at Arms to arrest the President?  Have to get past the Secret Service first.

This is a rather ridiculous statement.  Trump can't do whatever he wants.  He has broad authority with controlling federal law enforcement and obviously foreign policy, but he already can't get any legislation through.  In terms of his unilateral action, he's pretty much par for the course in terms of pushing the envelope on EOs.  The only thing he's done that's extraordinary there is deregulation (although Reagan did that too).  Trump gets away with a shitload of shit, sure, but it's absurd to suggest he can do anything he wants if he really really wants to.  That doesn't reflect reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, argonak said:

That is a good reason to vote.  

I don't think you can send any messages to the GOP, they've been completely taken over by the Trump Cult.. 

For now, yes. But one of many reasons I’m hoping for a convincing Biden victory is to observe how quickly Republicans distance themselves from Trump. I think if he can be held to a single term he’ll be viewed as a failure, even among Republicans, rather than a Reaganesque figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, S John said:

Imagine Trump isn’t just defeated but is crushed, routed. I don’t know how to send a clearer picture to the Republicans that there’s no winnable national path without going back to the drawing board and finding a way to edge back towards sanity. A close loss doesn’t do much to dissuade them from current behaviors, IMO. You don’t want their strategists to be thinking ‘ah well, we’ll get em next time!’ you want them to be thinking ‘wow, we can’t keep going like this.’

Agreed 100%.  This election is maddening, because Trump's Electoral College advantage throws everything out of line.  If Biden wins the popular vote by 3, it could easily be Trump 279, Biden 259.  If Biden holds more or less steady at +7, then it's probably Biden 335, Trump 203.  Not exactly a blowout, that's basically Obama 2012.  But if Biden beats his polls by just a little bit, say 2 points, that could realistically go to Biden 413, Trump 125 (that's all the swing states plus TX, OH, IA and GA).  At that point, it would be safe to say that Trump didn't just lose, he was firmly rejected.  I've no doubt that a portion of the Republican party will want to continue down the anti-science, quasi-fascist path, I also think there's a group that would abandon Trump as a loser very quickly and want to go a different way. 

Which of those factions will emerge victorious in steering the Republican party of the 2020s?  Hard to be optimistic about that, but at least there would be a chance that Republicans like Hogan and Romney might have real influence, rather than than the current crew of grifters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

 At that point Cunningham probably loses unless NC is unusually competitive (it was 3 points more Republican than the tipping point state in 2016).  So Democrats need to go 4/4 in their pickup opportunities, PLUS pick up one of the reach opportunities in SC/MT/KS/IA, all while Trump is overperforming?  I don't see how that is possible.

I agree it looks difficult (although I'd throw in GA as well in the list). I would note that some of the Senate candidates are running worse than Trump (like Graham and I think Tillis to a certain extent), so it would be a fine needle to thread. The best you could hope for is a tie

Share this post


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

I agree it looks difficult (although I'd throw in GA as well in the list). I would note that some of the Senate candidates are running worse than Trump (like Graham and I think Tillis to a certain extent), so it would be a fine needle to thread. The best you could hope for is a tie

I'm pretty pessimistic about GA just because of the 50% rule they have.  Although I suppose in the event that Trump wins reelection and the Georgia Senate race is determining Senate control, then MAYBE Democrats could get motivated to show up while some Republicans either rest on their laurels or accept another check on Trump being an OK thing.    I doubt it, but I suppose it's not impossible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I've no doubt that a portion of the Republican party will want to continue down the anti-science, quasi-fascist path, I also think there's a group that would abandon Trump as a loser very quickly and want to go a different way. 

If there's one thing the modern GOP is consistent about, it's about disposing their leaders once they're no longer of any use.  I don't, however, think that will alter the extreme rightward shift of the GOP.  If anything there will be plenty of those on the right that will assert Trump didn't go far enough.

13 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I'm pretty pessimistic about GA just because of the 50% rule they have.

Agreed, was gonna say the same thing.  I find it doubtful a Dem can get to 50%, especially due to the depressed turnout in runoffs and, in this case, Trump not being on the ballot.

Share this post


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

If there's one thing the modern GOP is consistent about, it's about disposing their leaders once they're no longer of any use.  I don't, however, think that will alter the extreme rightward shift of the GOP.  If anything there will be plenty of those on the right that will assert Trump didn't go far enough.

There will definitely be a faction that say that, and also a faction that will no doubt agree with Trump that the election was stolen and any Democratic victory is fraudulent.  I am hoping that the other faction can wrestle them into line at least to some extent.  I know this is a faint hope, but what else can we do but hope?  No matter how decisively Trump is defeated, the GOP will regain power eventually.  And if they keep moving further and further right, that is a recipe for rigged elections, civil war, authoritarianism, etc.  It might not be too long before we're saying "At least with TRUMP he had some respect for the courts, this guy on the other hand..."

Share this post


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

I meant future nominations.  If they aren't confirmed by the Senate they don't get to serve, there is no constitutional crisis there.  Presidents can get around this with Cabinet and Senate-confirmable executive officials - and Trump has abused that quite thoroughly even with a GOP Senate - but there's no way to do that with judges.

This is a rather ridiculous statement.  Trump can't do whatever he wants.  He has broad authority with controlling federal law enforcement and obviously foreign policy, but he already can't get any legislation through.  In terms of his unilateral action, he's pretty much par for the course in terms of pushing the envelope on EOs.  The only thing he's done that's extraordinary there is deregulation (although Reagan did that too).  Trump gets away with a shitload of shit, sure, but it's absurd to suggest he can do anything he wants if he really really wants to.  That doesn't reflect reality.

Perhaps I merely worry too much.  But who is going to stop him?  He regularly ignores laws already.  What's to stop him from going further?  

To be really hyperbolic, what if Trump murdered Nancy Pelosi in the Whitehouse on live TV.  Who is going to arrest him?  Who is going to try him?  Who is going to convict him?  If the GOP wants to keep him in power, and they just ignore everything what happens?  Because that's what happens when they break laws right now.  Nothing.  Nothing happens.  Or if Trump tomorrow said Ted Cruz was on now the Supreme Court.  Wrote some executive order.  And Ted Cruz started showing up to the court, what happens?  If the Republicans on the SC say "yes, he's now on the SC, he's with us."  What happens?  The Left leaning court members stop showing up, but then the SC just meets anyway?  

So much of our society relied on people following norms.  There's only one real method of enforcement for breaking those norms it turns out, and it happens once every four years.

Share this post


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

If there's one thing the modern GOP is consistent about, it's about disposing their leaders once they're no longer of any use.  I don't, however, think that will alter the extreme rightward shift of the GOP.  If anything there will be plenty of those on the right that will assert Trump didn't go far enough.

Agreed, was gonna say the same thing.  I find it doubtful a Dem can get to 50%, especially due to the depressed turnout in runoffs and, in this case, Trump not being on the ballot.

I'm not so sure they'll dump Trump.  He's become this weird iconic figure for them.  Not even Reagan had it like this.  Its like religion to some of them.

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...