hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 492 of 552 FirstFirst ... 392442482489490491492493494495502542 ... LastLast
Results 9,821 to 9,840 of 11032

Thread: US Politics Thread, 2.0

  1. #9821
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post

    So you want all State Assembly seats awarded on a statewide popular vote, and not based on the votes of the districts each seat represents then?

    I get the distinct feeling that many FHC members would like all Government below the Federal-level abolished in the United States, and all Federal offices to be won only by National Popular vote, with 100 % of offices awarded to the winning party of that vote.
    If you can't be trusted to draw up districts by any method which doesn't deliberately disenfranchise millions of voters for partisan purposes then it may be time to consider whatever you think is the 'second best' system.

    I think that generally you foster healthier democracies when the people with the most votes win elections, but maybe that's a radical and controversial position to take.
    The people with the most votes did win the elections. In their districts.

    The people with the most votes also won their elections. For statewide offices.

    If you favor a system without districts, with no local government, and popular votes determining the party 100% in charge (hmmm, sounds familiar), that's fine. I can see why Democrats (or those to the left of them) would favor such a system, where three to six large American cities in three or four States decide the entire government of the country, and the rest of the people have no voice at all. They're the bad 49% anyway.

    Maybe we should just have a Ruling Council system, where the Mayors of New York, San Francisco, LA, Chicago, Boston and DC elect the President and answer to the Council.
    Last edited by Alistair; May 22 2020 at 01:55:22 PM.


  2. #9822
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    21,593
    If you want geographic representation but gerrymander the fuck out of districts all the time then I suggest you think of an alternative method of representation or removing it completely. Unless you think gerrymandering is done in the spirit of democracy?
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  3. #9823
    Dorvil Barranis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 18, 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    5,865
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Alternatively the dems could legislate for fairer elections instead of complaining about russian interference all the time.
    With a state legislature that they don't control?
    "Those who are skilled in combat do not become angered, those who are skilled at winning do not become afraid. Thus the wise win before they fight, while the ignorant fight to win." - Zhuge Liang


  4. #9824
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    If you want geographic representation but gerrymander the fuck out of districts all the time then I suggest you think of an alternative method of representation or removing it completely. Unless you think gerrymandering is done in the spirit of democracy?
    Do you ever ask any question without setting it up as a "so how long have you been beating your wife" type thing?

    I do not like nor support political gerrymandering. I prefer a system of district drawing by non-partisan board or by the Courts using data, not party loyalty.

    Please note, here in VA the Dems made a strict promise to do just the above should they take power. Then they took power. Now that they have it, they're going to gerrymander and chose not to use a non-partisan board. So yeah, "both sides".

    Of course, most folks know it's "both sides" on this one, it's only partisans who try and claim only one side does it.

    2. Yes, I want local government. Yes, I want state government. And yes I want Federal government. I like the basis of our governmental system, with three levels of government and authority doing different things. Gerrymandering of districts being eliminated would help this system quite a bit.


  5. #9825
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    21,593
    It becomes a sensible electoral strategy to gerrymander if your opponents are doing it. It is a competitive race to the bottom once the issue becomes structural rather than procedural.

    If representation at the district level is considered important there must be alternative ways which eliminate the structural advantages of gerrymandering. I suppose one 'feature' is that gerrymandering builds very fragile majorities over time. Am I right in thinking that was the case in VA where basically all the gerrymandered districts fell in a single election cycle?
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  6. #9826
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    It becomes a sensible electoral strategy to gerrymander if your opponents are doing it. It is a competitive race to the bottom once the issue becomes structural rather than procedural.
    Your defense of Dems is "I know you are, but what am I? MOM, THEY STARTED IT!!!!"

    Am I right in thinking that was the case in VA where basically all the gerrymandered districts fell in a single election cycle?
    The Dems won the VA statehouse despite any gerrymandered districts.

    Now that they are in power, during a census time, the Dems will get to re-draw the districts next year.


  7. #9827
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    21,593
    I'm hardly one to white knight the Dems its just an example of strategy and electoralism. The GOP are the masters at sensible (self serving) electoral strategy, it isn't an endorsement of them.


    I did just google VA gerrymandering and found this: Democratic Majority in Virginia Strips Itself of the Power to Draw District Lines
    The State Legislature, controlled by Democrats, voted to put a constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would let an independent commission draw district maps.


    Its a paywalled article but suggests either the Dems are shooting themselves in the foot to appear righteous or they are confident they don't need to gerrymander to win future elections.
    Look, the wages you withheld from the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves for slaughter.

  8. #9828
    Ruri's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Exclamation, USA
    Posts
    2,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Its a paywalled article but suggests either the Dems are shooting themselves in the foot to appear righteous or they are confident they don't need to gerrymander to win future elections.
    The cause of "democracy reform" has centered independent commissions for redistricting all over the country, partially because it should never have been done by legislators in the first place, but also because it does improve representation by eliminating the ludicrous degrees of party lock-in traditional gerrymandering supplied.

    Here in PA the latest district map is far, far more logical and allowed the moderate Democrat Connor Lamb to win a congressional seat in an area that, while close to Pittsburgh, is far enough outside it that Republicans had been walking away with it for years. Now, it didn't change the makeup of the middle and norther parts of the state, but the evidence here and elsewhere does seem to show that when you draw the lines not to favor one party or the other, Dems have a better shot at winning in and around heavily populated areas.
    This is worse than I thought, there's no butter in my coffee!

    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot
    Do you even lift? Do you even post.

  9. #9829
    Lief Siddhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 15, 2011
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    7,488
    cant find that comic with democrat riding a bike, sticking a stick in his front wheel and then "fucking republicans".jpg
    I was somewhere around Old Man Star, on the edge of Essence, when drugs began to take hold.

  10. #9830
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    I'm hardly one to white knight the Dems its just an example of strategy and electoralism. The GOP are the masters at sensible (self serving) electoral strategy, it isn't an endorsement of them.


    I did just google VA gerrymandering and found this: Democratic Majority in Virginia Strips Itself of the Power to Draw District Lines
    The State Legislature, controlled by Democrats, voted to put a constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would let an independent commission draw district maps.


    Its a paywalled article but suggests either the Dems are shooting themselves in the foot to appear righteous or they are confident they don't need to gerrymander to win future elections.
    I have to apologize, looks like my own info was outdated. It appears the General Assembly did in fact pass it after some hair pulling, so it will go to the Referendum in Nov. 2020. VA HB 784.

    Again, apologies. The only votes against it were Dems it seems, Republicans (for obvious reasons) voted 100% for it.

    And yes, I think it's safe to say that (D) will run Virginia for the forseeable future, so it may be of little import now.


  11. #9831
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    3,530
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    I'm hardly one to white knight the Dems its just an example of strategy and electoralism. The GOP are the masters at sensible (self serving) electoral strategy, it isn't an endorsement of them.


    I did just google VA gerrymandering and found this: Democratic Majority in Virginia Strips Itself of the Power to Draw District Lines
    The State Legislature, controlled by Democrats, voted to put a constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would let an independent commission draw district maps.


    Its a paywalled article but suggests either the Dems are shooting themselves in the foot to appear righteous or they are confident they don't need to gerrymander to win future elections.
    Not against this approach, but Democrats have proven they're very bad at fighting for this type of reform.

  12. #9832
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post

    So you want all State Assembly seats awarded on a statewide popular vote, and not based on the votes of the districts each seat represents then?

    I get the distinct feeling that many FHC members would like all Government below the Federal-level abolished in the United States, and all Federal offices to be won only by National Popular vote, with 100 % of offices awarded to the winning party of that vote.
    If you can't be trusted to draw up districts by any method which doesn't deliberately disenfranchise millions of voters for partisan purposes then it may be time to consider whatever you think is the 'second best' system.

    I think that generally you foster healthier democracies when the people with the most votes win elections, but maybe that's a radical and controversial position to take.
    The people with the most votes did win the elections. In their districts.

    The people with the most votes also won their elections. For statewide offices.

    If you favor a system without districts, with no local government, and popular votes determining the party 100% in charge (hmmm, sounds familiar), that's fine. I can see why Democrats (or those to the left of them) would favor such a system, where three to six large American cities in three or four States decide the entire government of the country, and the rest of the people have no voice at all. They're the bad 49% anyway.

    Maybe we should just have a Ruling Council system, where the Mayors of New York, San Francisco, LA, Chicago, Boston and DC elect the President and answer to the Council.
    That would be far, far more fair, equitable, and good for the planet, than what we have now.
    meh

  13. #9833
    Jack Coutu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 9, 2011
    Location
    marketjacker
    Posts
    1,045
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post

    So you want all State Assembly seats awarded on a statewide popular vote, and not based on the votes of the districts each seat represents then?

    I get the distinct feeling that many FHC members would like all Government below the Federal-level abolished in the United States, and all Federal offices to be won only by National Popular vote, with 100 % of offices awarded to the winning party of that vote.
    If you can't be trusted to draw up districts by any method which doesn't deliberately disenfranchise millions of voters for partisan purposes then it may be time to consider whatever you think is the 'second best' system.

    I think that generally you foster healthier democracies when the people with the most votes win elections, but maybe that's a radical and controversial position to take.
    The people with the most votes did win the elections. In their districts.

    The people with the most votes also won their elections. For statewide offices.

    If you favor a system without districts, with no local government, and popular votes determining the party 100% in charge (hmmm, sounds familiar), that's fine. I can see why Democrats (or those to the left of them) would favor such a system, where three to six large American cities in three or four States decide the entire government of the country, and the rest of the people have no voice at all. They're the bad 49% anyway.

    Maybe we should just have a Ruling Council system, where the Mayors of New York, San Francisco, LA, Chicago, Boston and DC elect the President and answer to the Council.
    This is so dumb Alistair, that I'm impressed you let the illusion you are a more enlightened centrist down. When has anyone said "fuck it make state and local elections winner take all" or "if they don't win give them no voice!"

    Your gut reaction is spewing the same shit people on Fox News spew out. It's always telling that you don't see that the majority should I have representation equal to their votes. If Republicans win 47% of the vote, and have 54% of the seats, that's a very flawed result. No one here is saying the dumb shit you've dreamed up. THey are saying people shouldn't be stripped of a voice in reality, because they are. In a presidential election, the majority can lose easily to electoral bullshit. In a state government, it has frequently been the voice of the many drowned out by flawed district maps. In the Senate the red states are overpowering blue states. THe house is a more accurate depiction of the country as a whole. It can be lost by either side as we have seen.

  14. #9834
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    17,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Trump will lose in a landslide because of the economy, new election model predicts

    CNN

    https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/20/busin...obs/index.html
    wearyfacerub.png

    How fucking resistant can they be to accepting that the rules have changed and that trumpanzees simply don't care about reality?

    Or is this about enabling those changes and undermining efforts to resist them, idk?
    Quote Originally Posted by Isyel View Post
    And btw, you're such a fucking asshole it genuinely amazes me on a regular basis how you manage to function.

  15. #9835

    Join Date
    November 5, 2011
    Posts
    13,578
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Trump will lose in a landslide because of the economy, new election model predicts

    CNN

    https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/20/busin...obs/index.html
    wearyfacerub.png

    How fucking resistant can they be to accepting that the rules have changed and that trumpanzees simply don't care about reality?
    Like highest grade teflon pmuch.

  16. #9836
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Coutu View Post
    Your gut reaction is spewing the same shit people on Fox News spew out.
    And your gut reaction is to always attack me personally as FHC's "Right Wing Boogieman".

    It's always telling that you don't see that the majority should I have representation equal to their votes.
    Oh, but I do. You just choose to hear what you want to hear.

    If I had Godlike powers, the U.S. electoral system (at the the Federal and Statewide levels at minimum) would be more similar to the German Sie haben 2 stimmen system, with two votes, one for a person one for a party, with proportional allotment systems and ranked voting all implemented.

    So get off it mate, I'm not Rush Limbaugh ffs. Go jerk off Meester or something.


  17. #9837
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Trump will lose in a landslide because of the economy, new election model predicts

    CNN

    https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/20/busin...obs/index.html
    wearyfacerub.png

    How fucking resistant can they be to accepting that the rules have changed and that trumpanzees simply don't care about reality?

    Or is this about enabling those changes and undermining efforts to resist them, idk?
    When I read news, anywhere, that says Trump will lose, I'm all like:



  18. #9838
    Jack Coutu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 9, 2011
    Location
    marketjacker
    Posts
    1,045
    Well looks like 3.4 percent or so of the African Americans in the U.S are about to become "not black" according to Joe Biden. Once November we will have a new race of "not black" african americans

  19. #9839
    Jack Coutu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 9, 2011
    Location
    marketjacker
    Posts
    1,045
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Coutu View Post
    Your gut reaction is spewing the same shit people on Fox News spew out.
    And your gut reaction is to always attack me personally as FHC's "Right Wing Boogieman".

    It's always telling that you don't see that the majority should I have representation equal to their votes.
    Oh, but I do. You just choose to hear what you want to hear.

    If I had Godlike powers, the U.S. electoral system (at the the Federal and Statewide levels at minimum) would be more similar to the German Sie haben 2 stimmen system, with two votes, one for a person one for a party, with proportional allotment systems and ranked voting all implemented.

    So get off it mate, I'm not Rush Limbaugh ffs. Go jerk off Meester or something.
    Crying about coastal elite cities as if they are the bane of the rural areas, and not the place where most people live is Fox News style bullshit. Saying Keckers wants a liberal city council to elect things is the hyberbole garbage you love throwing around whenever your point makes zero sense. If I had a choice you'd stop playing centrist then saying later "oh but I am rather progressive". I know a fair number of people have short memories but you were the guy saying Ford was possibly making claims against now Supreme Justice Kavanaugh for monetary gains. That shit is Fox News level dumb. A lot of your stances are like that. You are willing to say outlandish shit then backpedal and "oh but I'm really for reason I just think YOU are crazy". It's a tired game, centrism is useless, if you want to be something don't flip flop every time you realize your arguement is weak.

  20. #9840
    Super Chillerator Global Moderator teds :D's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 9, 2011
    Posts
    9,233
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Huge "We're not a democracy we're a republic" scenes

    Yeah. What is the point in participating in this broken joke of a political system? Better to just stock up on ammo, tbh. Then plan how to make the Republicans die for "their" country.
    So you want all State Assembly seats awarded on a statewide popular vote, and not based on the votes of the districts each seat represents then?

    I get the distinct feeling that many FHC members would like all Government below the Federal-level abolished in the United States, and all Federal offices to be won only by National Popular vote, with 100 % of offices awarded to the winning party of that vote.
    in fairness - that removes gerrymandering district shapes and would drastically shrink the bloat that is american politics. there's probably some weighted metric you could come to (pop density per state?) that would help individual votes matter...

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •