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

[JGP]

1 minute ago, Mindwalker said:

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.

Removing Fani won't make the case just go away, there'd have to be a lot more collusion to go that far.

[Kalbear]

1 hour 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?  

It doesn't, actually. It often supports more radical candidates depending on the area that is voting. 

 

[Mindwalker]

3 minutes ago, JGP said:

Removing Fani won't make the case just go away, there'd have to be a lot more collusion to go that far.

Probably not,depending on who would be her successor.

[Kalbear]

6 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

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

I don't see how that fits your goal, then. Open primaries get similar numbers to closed primaries as far as voting go, and for the most part there is no indicator that allowing non-party members to vote gives you more moderate candidates or a better representation standard. The overwhelming majority of folks who vote in primaries - open or closed - are very extreme people that are the red meat base of their parties. As an example, Ohio has open primaries and there is absolutely no indication that this helped with their candidate quality or extremism. 

Now, I have a big beef with caucuses - which are significantly more exclusionary and even more limiting to the super-base - but primaries being open or closed ain't gonna solve shit. 

[Kalbear]

2 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

Probably not,depending on who would be her successor.

Removing her would effectively end the trial for a lot of reasons - but the big one is running out the clock. Trying Trump when he's a private citizen is a very different beast than trying Trump while he is POTUS. 

[Mindwalker]

Good point about the time. However, it's still quite possible he won't win the election.

Of course, for all I know, the Georgia Republicans will try and change the law so the governor can pardon him, and the 5 years requirement will be void.

[Kalbear]

9 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

Good point about the time. However, it's still quite possible he won't win the election.

Of course, for all I know, the Georgia Republicans will try and change the law so the governor can pardon him, and the 5 years requirement will be void.

If he doesn't win then I don't think it matters other than satisfaction if he is tried and convicted. 

If he does win AND he gets convicted we have a massive constitutional crisis. (but probably he'll be able to delay that trial via appeal, so it won't matter in that case). 

[Mindwalker]

oops double post

Edited August 25, 2023 by Mindwalker

[Mindwalker]

6 minutes ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

If he doesn't win then I don't think it matters other than satisfaction if he is tried and convicted. 

If he does win AND he gets convicted we have a massive constitutional crisis. (but probably he'll be able to delay that trial via appeal, so it won't matter in that case). 

It matters to me because he's a criminal who should be held accountable. Preferably before he can do any more harm as elected president, but that's really not the only important thing for me.

And even if he got convicted before the election AND sentenced to jail, he wouldn't run out of jail, I bet he'd manage to be out while his appeal is going on.

Edited August 25, 2023 by Mindwalker

[Martell Spy]

Quote

If he does win AND he gets convicted we have a massive constitutional crisis. (but probably he'll be able to delay that trial via appeal, so it won't matter in that case). 

Yeah, I think in addition to appeals, the state of Georgia would waive extradition of a sitting President. (And possibly of an elected, but not sitting one as well) It seems extremely unlikely we get to a scenario where Georgia is demanding Trump's person be turned over and the federal government refusing to comply. You'd also have to have all appeals exhausted and (heavily conversative) courts agreeing.

[Larry of the Lawn]

3 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

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

You got me, Scot, yes, I love them very much and my goal in posting here is to generate as many reps like them as possible.  

Come on.

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

7 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

You got me, Scot, yes, I love them very much and my goal in posting here is to generate as many reps like them as possible.  

Come on.

 

Closed or limited Primaries help put these people into power.

[Tyria]

As to the thread title, what I hear when I see it is "He's so indicted! And he just can't hide it!" a la Pointer Sisters

[ThinkerX]

Something I have been wondering about for a few weeks now...

The Buildup -

1 - Republican candidates...underperformed...during the midterms. We came within a hair's breadth of a couple of surprise upsets - like a certain congressperson from Colorado. 

2 - Since the midterms, republican behavior has not improved. Indeed, it has arguably gotten worse, alienating more of the populace. Case in point, republicans lost a ballot measure lately. Every time abortion comes up for a 'peoples vote,' they lose - but republican politicians seem incapable of learning from this.

3 - A number of republican redistricting schemes have been ruled against or face severe legal challenges. If these changes actually get implemented, then republicans are in a bad spot.

4 - Been seeing more and more references in various political articles about severe campaign money issues in multiple states. Seems the usual big pocket donors are unhappy with the radical fruit-loop candidates or are otherwise less than thrilled.

The Possibility -

Taken together, the above points seem to offer the possibility of a democratic party blowout in the 2024 elections. Not just a simple D majority, but the coveted 60 vote majority in the senate and whatever it takes in the house. I don't see this as likely, but it *might* be possible.

And the Question -

Assume the political stars align, Biden wins, and the democratic party gets the 60 vote senate majority and whatever is required in the house. Now, granted, there WILL be the 'Manchin' faction to deal with, but allowing for that, what is realistically possible here? Some version of Medicaid For All? An abortion rights law? Build Back Better mark 2?

 

 

[Mindwalker]

10 minutes ago, Tyria said:

As to the thread title, what I hear when I see it is "He's so indicted! And he just can't hide it!" a la Pointer Sisters

I wanted to do that at first.

[Mindwalker]

3 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

Assume the political stars align, Biden wins, and the democratic party gets the 60 vote senate majority and whatever is required in the house. Now, granted, there WILL be the 'Manchin' faction to deal with, but allowing for that, what is realistically possible here? Some version of Medicaid For All? An abortion rights law? Build Back Better mark 2?

 

 

Bless your heart.

[Larry of the Lawn]

35 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Closed or limited Primaries help put these people into power.

Gonna need a little more evidence than that to convince me.  How about Jim Jordan?  Mark Meadows?  Last two Freedom Caucus chairs came from open primary states.  So did Madison Cawthorne.  

[Fez]

1 minute ago, ThinkerX said:

Something I have been wondering about for a few weeks now...

The Buildup -

1 - Republican candidates...underperformed...during the midterms. We came within a hair's breadth of a couple of surprise upsets - like a certain congressperson from Colorado. 

2 - Since the midterms, republican behavior has not improved. Indeed, it has arguably gotten worse, alienating more of the populace. Case in point, republicans lost a ballot measure lately. Every time abortion comes up for a 'peoples vote,' they lose - but republican politicians seem incapable of learning from this.

3 - A number of republican redistricting schemes have been ruled against or face severe legal challenges. If these changes actually get implemented, then republicans are in a bad spot.

4 - Been seeing more and more references in various political articles about severe campaign money issues in multiple states. Seems the usual big pocket donors are unhappy with the radical fruit-loop candidates or are otherwise less than thrilled.

The Possibility -

Taken together, the above points seem to offer the possibility of a democratic party blowout in the 2024 elections. Not just a simple D majority, but the coveted 60 vote majority in the senate and whatever it takes in the house. I don't see this as likely, but it *might* be possible.

And the Question -

Assume the political stars align, Biden wins, and the democratic party gets the 60 vote senate majority and whatever is required in the house. Now, granted, there WILL be the 'Manchin' faction to deal with, but allowing for that, what is realistically possible here? Some version of Medicaid For All? An abortion rights law? Build Back Better mark 2?

There's not going to be that kind of senate majority, no matter what. In the wildest fantasies of Democratic strategists, they end up with 53-47 senate majority. And that only happens if they defend every incumbent who's up successfully, and somehow flip Texas and Florida. To get to 60, they'd have to win 7 out of Utah, Nebraska (2 races), Wyoming, Missouri, North Dakota, Indiana, Tennessee, and Mississippi. It's just not happening. Not a chance

The politically stars aligning for 2024, means Biden winning the electoral college 318-220, a continued 51-49 senate majority, and re-taking the House with probably a 230ish to 205ish majority. And also flipping the Arizona state legislature while successfully defending all the legislatures they currently hold. And, maybe filpping Wisconsin's legislature if the gerrymander lawsuit is successful and there's new maps in place.

That's an extraordinarily good night. And all it does is ensure another 4 years of status quo instead of things going to utter shit. Also, it ensures the federal judiciary continues to slowly get unfucked a little more; and maybe we get really lucky and Thomas dies so the supreme court gets a little better too.

[Maithanet]

7 minutes ago, Fez said:

The politically stars aligning for 2024, means Biden winning the electoral college 318-220

I agree with most of your post, but I would put Biden's best case (but still realistic) a bit higher than that.  Texas is definitely flippable if we're talking about a great night for Dems.  It is moving left pretty fast, and if (as some of election twitter insists is the case) Latino voters generally prefer incumbents over challengers, that could make a huge difference.  If Biden does 5% better with Latinos than 2020, he's basically won Texas. 

[Fez]

18 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I agree with most of your post, but I would put Biden's best case (but still realistic) a bit higher than that.  Texas is definitely flippable if we're talking about a great night for Dems.  It is moving left pretty fast, and if (as some of election twitter insists is the case) Latino voters generally prefer incumbents over challengers, that could make a huge difference.  If Biden does 5% better with Latinos than 2020, he's basically won Texas. 

To me, flipping Texas in 2028 is a great night. Flipping it in 2024 seems unrealistically optimistic. Especially since Democratic performance among Latinos is generally getting worse, not better. Growth in the Latino population is still helpful, since it is more Democratic than not. But the state flips when the suburbs get blue enough, and they aren't there yet.

If we're looking for any states to flip blue beyond North Carolina (which remains the most likely despite it continually not happening except in 2008), I think it's a small, idiosyncratic state that is already open to electing Democrats statewide. Like Kansas or Alaska, pulling off a 2008 Indiana kind of thing.