US Politics: A democratic election Prospect Theory and practice

[Ormond]

39 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

If they wanted to actually move America more towards bipartisanship, then they ought to do it by fighting in the primaries of both parties, rather than fielding 3rd party candidates with no chance of winning.  If they supported people like Hogan in Maryland, Collins in Maine, Dolan in Ohio, and Tester in Montana, that would help make bipartisan deals in the Senate a bit more possible.  You could do ever better in lower profile races in the house, to help fund more mainstream candidates against the edges of both parties. 

I'm not saying that would be a particularly exciting or impactful effort (those "mainstream" candidates are typically well funded anyway), but it would probably show some results and successes would at least be possible.  Instead, they're trying to win the hardest race in the country first, without even a ghost of a chance of actually succeeding. 

Personally I think for a bipartisanship or "moderate" movement to really work we need to get every state to adopt something like "ranked choice" voting as now exists in Alaska and Maine, or something similar that would lessen the problems with "first past the post" elections. 

I would certainly be in favor of moving to a national vote total Presidential election rather than the electoral college. But my worry about that is that it might encourage people to run as third party candidates even more than the present system, and that would make a Trump-like demagogue even more likely to come out with the highest % of votes even if well over 50% of the voters are actually rejecting them. So if we go to a national popular vote system, I want ranked choice or some other system that makes such an outcome less likely as part of it. 

Edited April 5 by Ormond
add missing word

[A Horse Named Stranger]

1 minute ago, Ormond said:

I would certainly be in favor of moving to a national vote total Presidential election rather than the electoral college. But my worry about that is that it might encourage people to run as third party candidates even more than the present system, and that would make a Trump-like demagogue even more likely to come out with the highest % of votes even well over 50% of the voters are actually rejecting them. So if we go to a national popular vote system, I want ranked choice or some other system that makes such an outcome less likely as part of it. 

You can somewhat lessen that problem by setting the threshold for presidency to 50%+ for the Presidency or run off if that bar isn't crossed (basically the French model in some shape or form).

 

[Ormond]

Just now, A Horse Named Stranger said:

You can somewhat lessen that problem by setting the threshold for presidency to 50%+ for the Presidency or run off if that bar isn't crossed (basically the French model in some shape or form).

 

Yes, that would be one of the other options as an alternative to ranked choice voting.

[The Big Stink]

47 minutes ago, Ormond said:

I would certainly be in favor of moving to a national vote total Presidential election rather than the electoral college. But my worry about that is that it might encourage people to run as third party candidates even more than the present system, and that would make a Trump-like demagogue even more likely to come out with the highest % of votes even if well over 50% of the voters are actually rejecting them. So if we go to a national popular vote system, I want ranked choice or some other system that makes such an outcome less likely as part of it. 

We wouldn't get that. We'd get a Chavez type. That's what most people want.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

This no label attach group centrism is guys like Manchin and some moderate Republican (Murkowski) going on a compromise ticket.

Which fits my point.

3 hours ago, Fez said:

He was polling in first place that spring, which may very well have been enough to overcome the "wasted vote" concern that usually sinks 3rd party bids. Your own state's experience with Jesse Ventura shows what can happen if a 3rd party bid gets enough momentum going.

Doesn't matter, he was never getting to 270 and once that failed he'd have no chance of winning. All Jesse needed was a plurality to win. 

And never forget, allofyous, my governor can beat up your governor. 

[TrackerNeil]

3 hours ago, Ormond said:

I would certainly be in favor of moving to a national vote total Presidential election rather than the electoral college. But my worry about that is that it might encourage people to run as third party candidates even more than the present system, and that would make a Trump-like demagogue even more likely to come out with the highest % of votes even if well over 50% of the voters are actually rejecting them. So if we go to a national popular vote system, I want ranked choice or some other system that makes such an outcome less likely as part of it. 

I'm not sure that direct popular vote would make that more likely than the Electoral College; in fact, the only Trump-like demagogue I can think of who actually got to the White House was put there by the Electoral College.

[Fragile Bird]

On 4/4/2024 at 10:39 AM, Zorral said:

 

~~~~~~~~~~

PlusPLUS -- 

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Ozempic Trump:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/04/donald-trump-news-2024-weight-loss-ozempic.html

 

Is anyone actually going to recognize that person as Donald Trump?

I think we should all start a rumor that Donald Trump is dead and that’s an actor pretending to be him. Worked for Kate, right?

[Zorral]

Magrats are already pushing bans on contraception.

"Screws up female brains": MAGA leaders are conditioning Republicans to back birth control bans
Charlie Kirk says the pill causes "angry, bitter young ladies" who vote for Democrats to get "free stuff"

https://www.salon.com/2024/04/05/screws-up-female-brains-maga-leaders-are-conditioning-to-back-birth-control-bans/

 

[karaddin]

I saw this claim that Biden calls someone a f***** in this video which I'm pretty skeptical of. I can't quite make out what he says, but despite my opinion of him not being the highest - homophobic slurs are not what I expect from the man even ignoring the politics of it.

I'm inclined to assume that he's either saying something else that has a similar sound in the middle, or it's a deep fake. If it's actually real I'd be more inclined to it being another indicator of cognitive decline than sincere slip of homophobia. Anyone got a more concrete read on it?

 

[DMC]

There is..a lot I’d like to respond to specifically.  Unfortunately I’m still being hobbled by the 431 mishegoss.  Plus I’m in a Chicago hotel that’s generally been pissing me off.

Anyway, the only way a third party emerges is due to one of the two main parties destroying themselves.  Again, the electoral system - along with the election rules therein - makes it rather impossible for a third party candidate to win consistently.

That goes for Perot too btw, even if he didn’t drop out then change his mind.

Two things I wanna emphasize.  One, each state can decide how they allocate their electoral votes.  So a PR system could be instituted at the presidential level by state.  Two, populism is not going to fuse the far left and far right.  This idea always fails, and is at least as hopeless as the “radical” centrists.

What a third party candidate should lean in to is being an outsider and a celebrity.  There was a politico article on this the other day I’m too lazy to cite.

[ThinkerX]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

There is..a lot I’d like to respond to specifically.  Unfortunately I’m still being hobbled by the 431 mishegoss.  Plus I’m in a Chicago hotel that’s generally been pissing me off.

Anyway, the only way a third party emerges is due to one of the two main parties destroying themselves.  Again, the electoral system - along with the election rules therein - makes it rather impossible for a third party candidate to win consistently.

That goes for Perot too btw, even if he didn’t drop out then change his mind.

Two things I wanna emphasize.  One, each state can decide how they allocate their electoral votes.  So a PR system could be instituted at the presidential level by state.  Two, populism is not going to fuse the far left and far right.  This idea always fails, and is at least as hopeless as the “radical” centrists.

What a third party candidate should lean in to is being an outsider and a celebrity.  There was a politico article on this the other day I’m too lazy to cite.

Or maybe third parties should initiate major grassroots campaigns to build up a sizable local base. That, though, might see said base coopted by one of the other two parties, or targeted for destruction via a smear campaign or some such. 

[Jaxom 1974]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

There is..a lot I’d like to respond to specifically.  Unfortunately I’m still being hobbled by the 431 mishegoss.  Plus I’m in a Chicago hotel that’s generally been pissing me off

Why did you stay at Trump International if you knew it was going to piss you off???

[karaddin]

6 hours ago, karaddin said:

I saw this claim that Biden calls someone a f***** in this video which I'm pretty skeptical of. I can't quite make out what he says, but despite my opinion of him not being the highest - homophobic slurs are not what I expect from the man even ignoring the politics of it.

I'm inclined to assume that he's either saying something else that has a similar sound in the middle, or it's a deep fake. If it's actually real I'd be more inclined to it being another indicator of cognitive decline than sincere slip of homophobia. Anyone got a more concrete read on it?

 

Replying to my own question after listening to it with better headphones and I think he said "magic" which makes a lot more sense to say to someone on the campaign trail lol. Even if his face wasn't selling the appreciation for the sub-par singing. Definitely sounds like a "gi" sound rather than "go".

[Ormond]

18 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

I'm not sure that direct popular vote would make that more likely than the Electoral College; in fact, the only Trump-like demagogue I can think of who actually got to the White House was put there by the Electoral College.

I guess whether this is more or less likely with the Electoral College or with direct popular vote isn't my main point. I still think it's a much greater possibility with first-past-the-post rather than with either a runoff system or ranked choice voting. Of course even those don't make it entirely impossible, but at least if a demagogue is elected with one of those systems we could more truly say the electorate has gotten what they deserve. 

[Zorral]

5 hours ago, karaddin said:

Replying to my own question after listening to it with better headphones and I think he said "magic" which makes a lot more sense to say to someone on the campaign trail lol. Even if his face wasn't selling the appreciation for the sub-par singing. Definitely sounds like a "gi" sound rather than "go".

Also AI generated voices and faces of celebrities -- and non --  etc. are now rifely in use for any and every nefarious reason, including scamming money from distraught parents whose 'children' tell them they've been kidnapped, to porn, and of course, immediately, for political propaganda / lies.

[Guy Kilmore]

5 hours ago, karaddin said:

Replying to my own question after listening to it with better headphones and I think he said "magic" which makes a lot more sense to say to someone on the campaign trail lol. Even if his face wasn't selling the appreciation for the sub-par singing. Definitely sounds like a "gi" sound rather than "go".

It sounds like Thank You to me....

[karaddin]

30 minutes ago, Guy Kilmore said:

It sounds like Thank You to me....

Lol well I give up. I assume it would have gotten more play time in the last 18 hours if he actually said it so I'm going to happily file it under incorrect hearing/claim.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

11 minutes ago, karaddin said:

Lol well I give up. I assume it would have gotten more play time in the last 18 hours if he actually said it so I'm going to happily file it under incorrect hearing/claim.

I can't see the clip you linked, but if he did say it recently it would have made the news. The only thing that comes up when you do a Google search is that in the past he would call his rivals that. 

[Zorral]

When a top Republican says Russian propaganda has infected the GOP
House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul is the latest to point out such a problem in his party

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/06/when-top-republican-says-russian-propaganda-has-infected-gop/

Quote

 

During the first impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump in 2019, former Trump national security aide Fiona Hill made an extraordinary plea. Seated in front of congressional Republicans, she implored them not to spread Russian propaganda.

“In the course of this investigation, I would ask that you please not promote politically driven falsehoods that so clearly advance Russian interests,” she told them. She was referring to comments they had made during her earlier deposition breathing life into a baseless, Trump-backed suggestion that Ukraine, rather than Russia, interfered in the 2016 U.S. election.

“These fictions are harmful even if they’re deployed for purely domestic political purposes,” she added.

Republicans on the committee blanched at the suggestion that they had served as conduits for Russian misinformation, but Hill refused to back down.

Five years later, Republicans are starting to grapple more publicly with the idea that this kind of thing is happening in their ranks.

The most striking example came this week. In an interview with Puck News’s Julia Ioffe, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Tex.) — none other than the GOP chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee — flat-out said that Russian propaganda had “infected a good chunk of my party’s base.”

McCaul suggested conservative media was to blame.

“There are some more nighttime entertainment shows that seem to spin, like, I see the Russian propaganda in some of it — and it’s almost identical [to what they’re saying on Russian state television] — on our airwaves,” McCaul said.

He also cited “these people that read various conspiracy-theory outlets that are just not accurate, and they actually model Russian propaganda.”

Asked which Republicans specifically he was talking about, McCaul said it was “obvious,” before staff intervened and asked that the conversation go off the record.

These comments are the most significant to date, but they’re not the only ones. ....

 

 

[Wilbur]

2 hours ago, Zorral said:

When a top Republican says Russian propaganda has infected the GOP
House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul is the latest to point out such a problem in his party

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/06/when-top-republican-says-russian-propaganda-has-infected-gop/

 

If you ever wanted to know what a real RINO was, just check to see if they are parroting Russian propaganda / cashing Russian checks.