US Politics: Electoral College Votes (12/14/2020)

[OnionAhaiReborn]

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

You do understand the GOP was the controling party and the Party of Lincoln during the American Civil War, so, technically they’d be getting their teeth kicked in for the first time.

It would be substantially the same part of the country, geographically, in rebellion though.

[Myshkin]

1 hour ago, argonak said:

On a side note, yesterday I was reading a discussion on reddit between two conservatives.  Both were saying the red states should secede.  one was crowing about how good it would be not to send their money to support blue states anymore, while the other (who like i said, had also supported secession), was trying to explain to him how that was wrong, and that blue states actually contributed more.   They then proceeded to get into a slap fight about it where one called the other an idiot, and the other called the "intelligent" one a liberal.  I just don't know  what can be done with these people at this point. 

How do you fix so much reckless hate and stupidity?

I have seen this argument play out several times as the rare, somewhat informed Reddit conservative attempts to explain that blue states tend to be wealthier than red states, and that without the payor blue states the payee red states will face significant economic hardship. The most common response is that red states grow all the food so the dumb libs are all gonna starve without them. These people have apparently never heard of the San Joaquin Valley, which produce something like 10% of all food grown in the US. Nope, to them California is LA and SF, and nothing else.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

33 minutes ago, OnionAhaiReborn said:

It would be substantially the same part of the country, geographically, in rebellion though.

Not really, the Great Plains States, most of the Mountain West, and most of the Mid-west (if they chose to bolt based on their support of Trump) would be among the group leaving.  It’s a much larger “Confederacy” than last time.

Truthfully though if it comes to blows it’s worse simply because this is about political loyalties not about State loyalties.  It will be neighbor against neighbor all over the US...

[argonak]

23 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Not really, the Great Plains States, most of the Mountain West, and most of the Mid-west (if they chose to bolt based on their support of Trump) would be among the group leaving.  It’s a much larger “Confederacy” than last time.

Truthfully though if it comes to blows it worse simply because this is about political loyalties not about State loyalties.  It will be neighbor against neighbor all over the US...

Agreed.  And the cities in the red states are relatively blue, while the rural areas in blue states are relatively red.  We'd most likely see escalating levels of small scale violence (like we're already seeing) morphing into insurrection combined with civil disobedience and intimidation tactics.

Regardless, the US military would be the determining factor.  Which ever side it supports will control the result.  Whereas before the civil war, the federal military was very weak and unable to be the deciding factor.  

[Fragile Bird]

Alabama's ceremony is overseen by a guy dressed as Uncle Sam? Alabama?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

4 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Alabama's ceremony is overseen by a guy dressed as Uncle Sam? Alabama?

You’re kidding, aren’t you?

[Fragile Bird]

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

You’re kidding, aren’t you?

No, they just showed him on CNN, live!

More seriously, Republicans in states won by the Democrats are holding their very own Electoral College votes, electing Trump as president and Pence as VP, in order to preserve the votes for the day either the Supreme Court, or as is being earnestly wished, Kevin McCarthy leads the charge against Biden and Harris and some guy does the same in the Senate.

Ain't that gonna be a pretty picture!

 

[Zorral]

52 minutes ago, OnionAhaiReborn said:

It would be substantially the same part of the country, geographically, in rebellion though.

But there's a lot more territory now, as some of the most venomous of those howling for rebellion had nothing to do with the first wawh, not being states at the time.  But the among the rabid of the time, starting even before it was a state even, Kansas next to Missouri.  There it is where the shooting War of the Rebellion really started.

~~~~~~~~~~~

I think we're going to be seeing real violence again in the House, as was frequently seen back in the early Republic and increasingly so as the 1830',. 40's and 50's progressed.

 

[Maithanet]

So I've thought about it and come to the conclusion that the electoral college is really stupid.  What we ought to do, is allocate electoral college votes by letters.  "A" states of Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas and Alabama will all combine their votes and then whoever gets more will select the "A" electors, all 29 of them.  In this case, Donald Trump carries A thanks to impressive margins in Alabama and Arkansas.

But unfortunately, Democrats seem to have a significant gerrymandering advantage since they easily won the big letters of M (67 evs), N (72 evs) and C (71 EVs).  If Trump wanted to win the election, he would have needed to take the key swing letters of I (41 evs), W (30 evs) and G (16 evs).  But even that would only put him at 266 electoral votes, so I guess he'd also need to flip Rhode Island or Hawaii for the final 4 evs. 

You might say that allocating electoral votes by first letter is stupid, but it's the system we have!  Anyone who wants to change it probably just hates America and the alphabet.   

[Corvinus85]

2 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Not really, the Great Plains States, most of the Mountain West, and most of the Mid-west (if they chose to bolt based on their support of Trump) would be among the group leaving.  It’s a much larger “Confederacy” than last time.

Truthfully though if it comes to blows it’s worse simply because this is about political loyalties not about State loyalties.  It will be neighbor against neighbor all over the US...

 

1 hour ago, argonak said:

Agreed.  And the cities in the red states are relatively blue, while the rural areas in blue states are relatively red.  We'd most likely see escalating levels of small scale violence (like we're already seeing) morphing into insurrection combined with civil disobedience and intimidation tactics.

Regardless, the US military would be the determining factor.  Which ever side it supports will control the result.  Whereas before the civil war, the federal military was very weak and unable to be the deciding factor.  

I'm not familiar with the Spanish Civil War 1936-39, but any serious conflict here would probably be more like that than the U.S. Civil War.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

16 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

 

I not familiar with the Spanish Civil War 1936-39, but any serious conflict here would probably be more like that than the U.S. Civil War.

Yes.  

[Zorral]

29 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

 

I'm not familiar with the Spanish Civil War 1936-39, but any serious conflict here would probably be more like that than the U.S. Civil War.

What some people say, looks the case, pretty fairly -- as far as it goes:

"The South isn't red, it's voter repressed.  It's the West that is red."

As so much of it was settled primarily -- at least among the what became the capital, elite, power, ruling classes of those states were confederates, now associated in business with the northern capitalists through family connection, Harvard classes, etc., whether in mining consortiums, railroads,s etc, and even the short era of the Big Ranches. Recall Theodore Roosevelt even wrote out of his own experience as  Big Rancher, or he called it, A Stockman, there was nothing like being at the top of such an outfit except in the old days of owning one's own plantation down in the South -- which his mother's family did in Georgia.  Her relatives played a huge role in the CSA naval operations, from seeking European financing to actually capturing Union ships at sea.

These are states that specifically wrote rules and laws to keep out African Americans. Oregon and Washington's are famous to this day.  Not just 'sundown' towns, but entire states.  Never forget Owen Wister's (excellent friend of Theodore Roosevelt), The Virginian, who declares in the eponymously titled novel (we do learn the Virginian's name finally, like on the last page):

"The West is White Man's country. All of it."

Even for Union men, it was for the Union = White Men.

I've read state documents filed around the sales of homesteading and settlement plots for the Red River Valley (North Dakota), around the railroads and so on. They are very sneaky about the wording but they essentially say, "No Negroes."  I read an account of the horror that arrived when a deal had essentially been long-distance, via mail and so on.  Then the directors for the settlement came to inspect the land -- their reception was such that they immediately requested out of the deal and 'sell it elsewhere, it doesn't meet our needs at this time."

 

 

[Fragile Bird]

This sounds kind of dumb, but could it be true? I’m beginning to think that Trump believes that all those lawsuits to overturn election results were going to overturn votes cast for Democrats only, and Republican votes would stand because “there were no fraudulent Republican votes”. 
 

“Could he be that dumb” is a stupid question, but could it be true?

[Centrist Simon Steele]

@DMC

From the last thread. You wrote, "I'd say, then, if you spent over an hour and a half watching that shit just to complain about Biden that says a hell of a lot more about you than it does about Biden. "

This is consistent with how you argue--you try to tear down the other person as deficient in some way instead of dealing with the argument head on. Let me pick up on this after the next quote.

"Well, wouldn't a "stats guy" be best equipped to judge how to efficiently spent time?  I do find it amusing you're referring to me as a stats guy - and even more amusing you think that's some type of burn for some reason."

Two things: 1.) it's not intended to be a burn. You made assumptions about how I spent my time (to just complain about Biden as opposed to not taking the leaked quotes out of context and drawing my own conclusions from the entire text, so to speak)--I want to illustrate that dragging people down for the boring things they do (even without creating false reasons why they do those boring things) is ridiculous. 2.) I thought you worked within political science and polling data based on your prior contributions to politics threads. That said, much of polling is probability--a cornerstone of statistics and research methods. My apologies if that's not what you do.

"So...statisticians - which, to be clear, I'm not - don't know how to spend time well?  Ok, that's a random and weird insult. 

I looked at your "evidence," and it amounted to Biden taking notes then having the temerity to check his watch in a very boring zoom session in which all participants demonstrated boredom.  You've yet to provide any more beyond your own interpretation, which is quite demonstrably, inherently and gravely biased.  (Not to mention your apparent expert reading of Biden's "body language" and "sighing" when it's clear neither can be well discerned from watching that video.)  As for ad hominems and pettiness, awesome self-parody, well done!"

1.) Statisticians do know how to spend their time. 2.) You looked at a brief two minute window of my evidence. In academia, you should know that when we insert evidence to support our assertions, we also assume that those who read/respond are familiar with the entire text. You are not. I used a window of a few minutes to provide specific evidence for my conclusions, which is normal. 3.) As noted above, I sometimes respond in kind to ad hominin attacks, but I won't instigate it. I always regret when I lower myself to those tactics. 

"Not only is that article three and a half months old, the study it's describing appears to be full of stats!!!"

I know I said it already, but to further assert the usefulness of stats--I also am in a statistics and research methods based PhD program. Again, I was using that as an example to point out your distinction of taste in how people spend their time, not an objective reality.

Also, what does how old the article is have to do with its findings? I am honestly perplexed by this assertion.

All of this to say, Biden isn't truly interested in these issues (criminal justice reform--which is no mystery, he's outright said it--and voting rights). He describes himself as a moderate who can reach across the aisle, which according to the article, is indicative of conservative beliefs. We hear a lot about how "socialism" hurt down ballot races, despite being told that Biden would help down ballot races. In reality, Biden tried to build a coalition with the never-Trumpers which he feels more in common with than the left. But if that's your approach to winning, then the liberal core should not complain they lost down ballot. If a solid group of never-Trumpers put Biden over the edge, it is logical to assume they did not also vote democrat down ballot. It should not be assumed they would. So, if this is the strategy, losing down ballot is not a loss, but more opportunities for Biden to reach across the aisle and heal the nation, or whatever.

Had Biden focused more on the left, it's possible he turns out more left leaning voters who impact down ballot races positively. But this just isn't who Biden is.  

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

14 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

This sounds kind of dumb, but could it be true? I’m beginning to think that Trump believes that all those lawsuits to overturn election results were going to overturn votes cast for Democrats only, and Republican votes would stand because “there were no fraudulent Republican votes”. 
 

“Could he be that dumb” is a stupid question, but could it be true?

I'd say it's a combination of stupidity, being surrounded by sycophants and the inability to keep his mind trained on a consistent thought.   

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

@Simon Steele

A sincere question: when you have the Republican Party attacking the very underpinnings of the United States Government and seeking to undermine its legitimacy thereby, do you really think attempting to undermine Biden from the Left is a particularly good idea?

[IheartIheartTesla]

Wonder if this is what Miller and the rest of his jackbooted fascists were talking about: https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/12/14/arizona-groups-fake-electors-try-cast-11-electoral-votes-trump/6536056002/

Quote

Copies of the documents obtained by The Arizona Republic show a group that claimed to represent the "sovereign citizens of the Great State of Arizona" submitted signed papers casting votes for what they want: a second term for Trump and Vice President Mike Pence.

Mesa resident Lori Osiecki, 62, helped created a facsimile of the "certificate of ascertainment" that is submitted to formally cast each state's electoral votes as part of an effort to prevent what she views as the fraudulent theft of the election.

"We seated before the legislators here. We already turned it in. We beat them to the game," she said.

To prevent what they considered fraud, they made up fraudulent documents. You cant make this sh*t up.

[Larry of the Lawn]

6 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

@Simon Steele

A sincere question: when you have the Republican Party attacking the very underpinnings of the United States Government and seeking to undermine its legitimacy thereby, do you really think attempting to undermine Biden from the Left is a particularly good idea?

this is kind of rich considering the left was told to fall in line and vote for Biden, and then hold him accountable and push him left after the election.  What's Simon's doing isn't hurting Biden.  It should be considered a normal part of having elected representatives.

What better way to stop these nefarious, illiberal, anti-democraric actors than to stifle any criticism of our elected officials.  JFC 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

8 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

@Simon Steele

A sincere question: when you have the Republican Party attacking the very underpinnings of the United States Government and seeking to undermine its legitimacy thereby, do you really think attempting to undermine Biden from the Left is a particularly good idea?

It's Bernie or burn it all down, you faithless poster.

To go back, to the previous thread, and calling our own Nate ( @DMC) a statistician, what about the SIOI (Simon Internet Outrage Index), did you factor that in, when calculating Biden's electoral chances, Mr. Scientist.

[Larry of the Lawn]

3 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

It's Bernie or burn it all down, you faithless poster.

To go back, to the previous thread, and calling our own Nate ( @DMC) a statistician, what about the SIOI (Simon Internet Outrage Index), did you factor that in, when calculating Biden's electoral chances, Mr. Scientist.

this is literally just ad hominem at this point, regardless of who started it