US Politics: He's so indicted, he just can't abide by it...

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

It doesn't have to be that way, and that's not how it works everywhere. California has jungle primaries, I think a few other places.  

You mean “playoff primaries”?

Edited August 25, 2023 by Ser Scot A Ellison

[Larry of the Lawn]

24 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

You mean “playoff primaries”?

I don't know what you mean.  I mean nonpartisan primaries, where the top whatever number of candidates go to the general regardless of party.  

 

[Gorn]

17 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

That’s just the Presidential primary.  Look at the House.  Wouldn’t Republican nominees be less likely to be radical if non-Republicans were allowed to vote in Republican Primaries?

Wouldn’t all nominees be more Likely to reflect the entire community they are being nominated to represent if they are elected by everyone in the community rather than party members or only people who choose to vote in that primary waving their right to vote in then other primary?

That would make the entire concept of political parties pointless. They are meant to represent a specific political stance and to promote it to national public, which then accepts it or rejects it.

If the House nominee ends up actually being elected, then obviously he/she is not too radical for the majority of community that he or she represents. Marjorie Taylor Green sits in the Congress because 170 000 people in GA-14 district think she is doing a great job and should keep doing it, which means that she represents what majority of voters in her district actually believe.

If you want to discuss why the Republican voters have become radicalized, that is an entirely different discussion from discussing the concept of primaries. IMO, the primaries are inherently more democratic than in most of the democratic world, where a regular voter who doesn't pay for party membership has no say in who will be on the ballot.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

15 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

I don't know what you mean.  I mean nonpartisan primaries, where the top whatever number of candidates go to the general regardless of party.  

 

That’s a playoff primary.  It allows everyone in the early round and only those at the top end up in the General Election.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

10 minutes ago, Gorn said:

That would make the entire concept of political parties pointless. They are meant to represent a specific political stance and to promote it to national public, which then accepts it or rejects it.

If the House nominee ends up actually being elected, then obviously he/she is not too radical for the majority of community that he or she represents. Marjorie Taylor Green sits in the Congress because 170 000 people in GA-14 district think she is doing a great job and should keep doing it, which means that she represents what majority of voters in her district actually believe.

If you want to discuss why the Republican voters have become radicalized, that is an entirely different discussion from discussing the concept of primaries. IMO, the primaries are inherently more democratic than in most of the democratic world, where a regular voter who doesn't pay for party membership has no say in who will be on the ballot.

Then let the fucking political parties pay for their own fucking primary elections.  If they are using public funds for their primaries all members of the public (elegable to vote) should be able to participate in these open elections.

[Gorn]

7 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Then let the fucking political parties pay for their own fucking primary elections.  If they are using public funds for their primaries all members of the public (elegable to vote) should be able to participate in these open elections.

But all members of the public are able to participate. Who is stopping you from voting in the primary? The only limitation is that you can only vote in one primary, because otherwise the concept of political parties as unified organizations whose members agree on a list of goals and stances loses all meaning.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

15 minutes ago, Gorn said:

But all members of the public are able to participate. Who is stopping you from voting in the primary? The only limitation is that you can only vote in one primary, because otherwise the concept of political parties as unified organizations whose members agree on a list of goals and stances loses all meaning.

I can only vote in one.  If I’m paying for both… why can’t I vote in both.  Allowing full participation in both primaries by everyone who cares enough to vote will counter extremism either genuine or perceived.

[Mindwalker]

I've been very happy with my choice to leave twitter* quite a while ago, but I hear the dude who surrendered yesterday is back on. Atta boy, Elon! Babbling about, get this: "Never surrender!" I'm sure his base is eating it up.

Also, he's selling t-shirts with his mugshot.

 

*God named it that at birth, I won't accept any new 'names'

 

Edited August 25, 2023 by Mindwalker

[Ormond]

4 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

 

*God named it that at birth, I won't accept any new 'names'

 

So how often do you pray to Noah Glass?

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Twitter

[Zorral]

The racketeer insurrectionist used an Atlanta Bail Bond company!  He does everything via debt! And graft, grift and theft too, of course.

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Gorn said:

the entire concept of political parties pointless.

Pretty much is the case in previous times and in this time, when it is the vastly wealthy who decide everything.  Governance by billionaires.  We're only a few steps away from merc armies and warlordism accompanyment as vastly powerful, rivalrous, billionaires usher us into the Era of Weenie Wag Wars!  Cage Fight!

In the Gilded Age they did with railroads and steam boats -- and horses.  Rivalrous millionaires who hated each other, upon encounter driving their vastly expensive racing buggies and spans of blooded horses, would go up against each other in the streets and Central Park, not incidentally killing pedestrians and destroying people's store fronts and merchandise. 

Yachts too; the Gilded Age lurved a yacht, that era's PJv (private jet in the parlance of Succession, for those who didn't watch the series).

They all had their private armies of goons too, to keep labor in line, or to wreck the rival's railroad.

 

Edited August 25, 2023 by Zorral

[A Horse Named Stranger]

14 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

It's a flattering angle. Hides his chins and wattles, and makes his diaphanous comb-over sparkle. It has a chance of looking strong and defiant instead of grotesque as a decal on the back of a coal-rolling pickup.

Now I kinda want to see that mug shot as a painting in a Grant Wood (American Gothic) style (I think Dürer might work, too).

Anybody with access to an AI image generator? Please.

[Larry of the Lawn]

2 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

That’s a playoff primary.  It allows everyone in the early round and only those at the top end up in the General Election.

Ok.  So those actually produce more moderate candidates?  Is there a reason why we should favor a system that produces more moderate and less radical candidates?  

Eta:  look at the 2022 midterms.  Most of the hardcore culture war, MAGA types lost state wide elections.  Like Gorn said the house is going to be susceptible to local flavor and popularity but other than JD Vance most of the whackjobs lost. 

Eliminating single member districts might change it up a bit.  Might also further entrench the binary duopoly and make it even more difficult to have any independents or third party MOCs.  

Edited August 25, 2023 by Larry of the Lawn

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

44 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

Ok.  So those actually produce more moderate candidates?  Is there a reason why we should favor a system that produces more moderate and less radical candidates?  

Yes.  Do you like MTG, Boebert, Gosar, Gaetz, Comer, etc.?  They are products of the “Party Primary system”.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

4 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Yes.  Do you like MTG, Boebert, Gosar, Gaetz, Comer, etc.?  They are products of the “Party Primary system”.

They are products of partisan districting and political polarization.

In a less partisan/more competitive district, they wouldn't get elected. Bobo almost lost her safe seat last time around. You want more moderates in congress, make districts competitive.

That JD Vance made it to the US senate is less a primary problem, but a Ohio moving further to the right problem.

[Mindwalker]

16 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Yes.  Do you like MTG, Boebert, Gosar, Gaetz, Comer, etc.?  They are products of the “Party Primary system”.

So these are the "radical candidates on both sides" that the system produces?

[Zorral]

So . . . he's transferred ownership of MAL to an entity owned or controlled by Don Jr.

He's been doing his joking a lot lately about running, just as he's all along invoked violence, starting back in the Iowa primary of the 2016 election which he lost, and claimed to have been stolen from him.

By now the nation should know, having seen it for itself so very often, that he always broadcasts what he's going to do, just as much as he projects on to others what he's already done or is doing.

Transferring assets is a thing to do if one feels there may be a need to run to stay out of prison.

Partner and I speculated that Saudi would be a more acceptable  location without an extradition agreement with the US to run for him than Russia, particularly with his sil's cozy relation$hip$ with the $audie$.  

OTOH, giving aid and sanctuary might screw Saudi's biz activities here in the USA? 

In any case I think we can look forward to violence provoked and performed by his followers (been happening for a long time already, only to increase) and/or if a very bad legal outcome gets close, him doing a runner.

Edited August 25, 2023 by Zorral

[Kalbear]

4 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Wouldn’t all nominees be more Likely to reflect the entire community they are being nominated to represent if they are elected by everyone in the community rather than party members or only people who choose to vote in that primary waving their right to vote in then other primary?

Is your suggestion mandatory voting then?

[Mindwalker]

11 minutes ago, Zorral said:

So . . . he's transferred ownership of MAL to an entity owned or controlled by Don Jr.

He's been doing his joking a lot lately about running, just as he's all along invoked violence, starting back in the Iowa primary of the 2016 election which he lost, and claimed to have been stolen from him.

By now the nation should know, having seen it for itself so very often, that he always broadcasts what he's going to do, just as much as he projects on to others what he's already done or is doing.

Transferring assets is a thing to do if one feels there may be a need to run to stay out of prison.

Partner and I speculated that Saudi would be a more acceptable  location without an extradition agreement with the US to run for him than Russia, particularly with his sil's cozy relation$hip$ with the $audie$.  

OTOH, giving aid and sanctuary might screw Saudi's biz activities here in the USA? 

In any case I think we can look forward to violence provoked and performed by his followers (been happening for a long time already, only to increase) and/or if a very bad legal outcome gets close, him doing a runner.

Yeah, I tend to think Saudi Arabia instead of Russia, too.

LOL, after the Kashoggi slaughter didn't screw their activities in the US, I  doubt this would!

My money is on the Georgia GOP getting rid of Fani though. They didn't enable themselves to do so for nothing. For anything else, there's always a pardon.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

4 minutes ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

Is your suggestion mandatory voting then?

Nope.  Just open primaries to everyone who wants to vote in them.