2020 US Election (Part Two)

[Tristan_C]

To my understanding, every single Democratic candidate through this cycle has been in favour of getting money out of politics. Sanders certainly made it a centrepiece of his campaign (although his true focus was healthcare; cf Warren, whose big focus was money in politics, with healthcare being a secondary concern). But it was never unique to him during the course of this race.

If the government appoints itself the custodian of a new $3.5 trillion cash flow, the healthcare industry, it will be controlled in turn by this money. Same for controlling the sums involved in the student loan debt and the green new deal. Markets for influencing these cash flows will have emerged before legislation is even passed. That's the nature of money. It attracts more money.

So, the main policy initiatives of those campaigns are not compatible with the goal of getting money out of politics. If you are unsure about this, consider what you know about how the defense appropriations and the industry work.

 

[Estebonrober]

If the government appoints itself the custodian of a new $3.5 trillion cash flow, the healthcare industry, it will be controlled in turn by this money. Same for controlling the sums involved in the student loan debt and the green new deal. Markets for influencing these cash flows will have emerged before legislation is even passed. That's the nature of money. It attracts more money.

So, the main policy initiatives of those campaigns are not compatible with the goal of getting money out of politics. If you are unsure about this, consider what you know about how the defense appropriations and the industry work.

Omg you typed something I actually agree with, someone check on hell.

 

[Ironsided]

Money out of politics is mainly attributed to the legal bribes (masked as donations) that the American political circus feeds on. The money for healthcare running cost will be lower for the average American the more you get corruptible elements like the insurance industry out of the equation.

But it’s a hen and egg situation. You need to trust your government to do the right things. To do that you must elect sincere people like Bernie to run it.

 

[Estebonrober]

Getting money out of politics will require a dramatic reversal in SCOTUS or a constitutional amendment correcting Citizens United.

 

[Sommerswerd]

All that shows is how unreliable and flawed that index is.

Yeah I'm in agreement with the notion that the American government has a bunch of major flaws... but I'm less inclined to accept judgment on the inadequacies of American Democracy from countries that have actual Monarchies with Kings, Queens and royal families in place

 

[Zardnaar]

Yeah I'm in agreement with the notion that the American government has a bunch of major flaws... but I'm less inclined to accept judgment on the inadequacies of American Democracy from countries that have actual Monarchies with Kings, Queens and royal families in place

QEII exercises virtually no power in day to day life. She rubber stamps opening and closing of parliment. We can become a republic whenever we like.

Independent electoral commission, government funding of political parties, government funding of elections, easy to vote. Second least corrupt country on the planet.

USA doesn't even win on gdp per capita anymore. Unlike the 1980s.

 

[Gorbles]

Yeah I'm in agreement with the notion that the American government has a bunch of major flaws... but I'm less inclined to accept judgment on the inadequacies of American Democracy from countries that have actual Monarchies with Kings, Queens and royal families in place

I guess the baseline is like this (without knowing the countries you're referring to):

Voter democracies as such we're used to have a better basis for, well, democracy. Monarchies, inherently less so. But this doesn't mean that poor democracies cannot exist, nor exemplary monarchies (though personally I'd say very unlikely, unless the monarchy in question was supported by a democratic government and / or held little actual power itself).

 

[Arakhor]

Yeah I'm in agreement with the notion that the American government has a bunch of major flaws... but I'm less inclined to accept judgment on the inadequacies of American Democracy from countries that have actual Monarchies with Kings, Queens and royal families in place

As opposed to the elective monarchy you have going right now? It's all very well poking fun at people with hereditary heads of states, but they are almost entirely regulated by strict traditions, with the actual job of government done by elected officials. Not to put too fine a point on it, but how many US government ministers were appointed or approved by the Senate as of late?

 

[Zardnaar]

I guess the baseline is like this (without knowing the countries you're referring to):

Voter democracies as such we're used to have a better basis for, well, democracy. Monarchies, inherently less so. But this doesn't mean that poor democracies cannot exist, nor exemplary monarchies (though personally I'd say very unlikely, unless the monarchy in question was supported by a democratic government and / or held little actual power itself).

Constitutional monarchy. Not many left in the world and most are Commonwealth nation's.

Which includes several of the better nation's to live in.

If you elect a dumbass like Trump the Queen can theoretically fire his ass. She cultivates an above politics aura though. She stays out if it basically.

That power got used by the governor general in Australia in the 70s on his own initiative. The governor was a dumbass, ended up getting replaced and became persona non gratia in diplomatic circles.

Theoretically the queen has all sorts of powers though and is theoretically in charge of all the armed forces of the entire commonwealth. She's also above the law and can theoretically pardon herself.

So if she has a bad day she can rustle up an aircraft carrier for a private cruise and send the SAS after anyone she likes.

If she actually used a lot if these powers I suspect you would have done new republics or no monarchy.

 

[Patine]

Getting money out of politics will require a dramatic reversal in SCOTUS or a constitutional amendment correcting Citizens United.

Citizens' United (the concept that spending money is EXACTLY the same as Freedom of Speech and must be protected as such) is such a highly flawed ruling in the first place. I SUSPECT (though I'm not bold enough, or claim to have enough specific knowledge, to point the finger at any specific Justices - it just smacks of this this, given the subject matter) that this ruling helped along by members of the court being serenaded by examples of his "free speech," - again, making no accusation by name. Also, it SHOULD be an easy ruling to overturn if Supreme Court were ACTUALLY chosen for the qualities they should be - Constitutional clarity, judicial merit and achievement, and a shown LACK of bias - and not for the violation of the justice and the gross abuse and corruption of the "executive check on the judicial branch," which comes down to ideological leaning and party patronage and spoils, which, as I've said, calls EVERY Supreme Court ruling since the early 1800's suspect, and into doubt and a dubious state of judicial clarity.

 

[amadeus]

Biden is now tied with Trump on the betting markets. A dramatic change from two weeks ago, when Sanders was the huge favorite to win the democratic nomination and Trump had over 60% odds of winnning the presidency.

Of course, we don't know know how much of the change is due to betters thinking Biden is more electable and how much is due to to Corona tanking the economy.

If this had all happened six months from now with the coronavirus I’d say Trump’s political goose was cooked, but at this point there is still time to rebound from it. It’ll be harder than if it had never happened at all, certainly, but between now and November is still a long ways away politically and the whole thing could be a non-issue in a few months. For the sake of people’s health, I certainly hope it’s the case.

 

[Patine]

Constitutional monarchy. Not many left in the world and most are Commonwealth nation's.

Which includes several of the better nation's to live in.

If you elect a dumbass like Trump the Queen can theoretically fire his ass. She cultivates an above politics aura though. She stays out if it basically.

That power got used by the governor general in Australia in the 70s on his own initiative. The governor was a dumbass, ended up getting replaced and became persona non gratia in diplomatic circles.

Theoretically the queen has all sorts of powers though and is theoretically in charge of all the armed forces of the entire commonwealth. She's also above the law and can theoretically pardon herself.

So if she has a bad day she can rustle up an aircraft carrier for a private cruise and send the SAS after anyone she likes.

Actually, to be pedantic, I think the number of Constitutional Monarchies who are not Commonwealth Realms outnumber the Commonwealth Realms. There are 16 Commonwealth Realms (that includes the UK), but there's the also the Netherlands (and the Dutch monarch is head of state of three Caribbean nation through viceregal representative like all the non-British Commonwealth realms), and there's also Belgium, Luxembourg, Lichtenstein, Monaco, Spain, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark (and the Danish monarch is head of state of Greenland through viceregal representative like all the non-British Commonwealth realms), and then there's Japan, Thailand, Malaysia, and Lesotho. Swaziland, Kuwait, Jordan, Morocco, Bhutan, and Tonga all now claim to be Constitutional Monarchies, and the government apparati and electoral bodies and such are currently in place, and even recent history lends doubt to the true limits of their monarch's power if push came to shove. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Bahrain, Oman, and Brunei are Monarchies, but certainly not Constitutional in any sense of the word.

 

[Zardnaar]

If this had all happened six months from now with the coronavirus I’d say Trump’s political goose was cooked, but at this point there is still time to rebound from it. It’ll be harder than if it had never happened at all, certainly, but between now and November is still a long ways away politically and the whole thing could be a non-issue in a few months. For the sake of people’s health, I certainly hope it’s the case.

We have a sane government here and there's talk of sealing the borders for a year.

It will still be an issue in November espicially with Trump's response to it.

Actually, to be pedantic, I think the number of Constitutional Monarchies who are not Commonwealth Realms outnumber the Commonwealth Realms. There are 16 Commonwealth Realms (that includes the UK), but there's the also the Netherlands (and the Dutch monarch is head of state of three Caribbean nation through viceregal representative like all the non-British Commonwealth realms), and there's also Belgium, Luxembourg, Lichtenstein, Monaco, Spain, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark (and the Danish monarch is head of state of Greenland through viceregal representative like all the non-British Commonwealth realms), and then there's Japan, Thailand, Malaysia, and Lesotho. Swaziland, Kuwait, Jordan, Morocco, Bhutan, and Tonga all now claim to be Constitutional Monarchies, and the government apparati and electoral bodies and such are currently in place, and even recent history lends doubt to the true limits of their monarch's power if push came to shove. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Bahrain, Oman, and Brunei are Monarchies, but certainly not Constitutional in any sense of the word.

Still not many I the world though overall.

Theocracy is the rarest government form.

From memory monarchy is the most stable regime. Followed by democracy and military dictatorship on the bottom.

 

[amadeus]

We have a sane government here and there's talk of sealing the borders for a year.

It will still be an issue in November espicially with Trump's response to it.

I should clarify that a non-issue does not mean necessarily a global eradication of the coronavirus but a reduction in harm relative to other countries and a sense that the administration is handling the situation competently. I don’t mean to be morbid saying this, I just mean how he will be evaluated by the voting public.

 

[Hrothbern]

Actually, to be pedantic, I think the number of Constitutional Monarchies who are not Commonwealth Realms outnumber the Commonwealth Realms. There are 16 Commonwealth Realms (that includes the UK), but there's the also the Netherlands (and the Dutch monarch is head of state of three Caribbean nation through viceregal representative like all the non-British Commonwealth realms), and there's also Belgium, Luxembourg, Lichtenstein, Monaco, Spain, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark (and the Danish monarch is head of state of Greenland through viceregal representative like all the non-British Commonwealth realms), and then there's Japan, Thailand, Malaysia, and Lesotho. Swaziland, Kuwait, Jordan, Morocco, Bhutan, and Tonga all now claim to be Constitutional Monarchies, and the government apparati and electoral bodies and such are currently in place, and even recent history lends doubt to the true limits of their monarch's power if push came to shove. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Bahrain, Oman, and Brunei are Monarchies, but certainly not Constitutional in any sense of the word.

yes
Your post saves me the trouble to list up, and you are much faster than I am.
Do mind that Lichtenstein is a direct democracy with an absolute monarchy at the same time (the people have the voting right to ditch their monarch)

 

[Zardnaar]

I should clarify that a non-issue does not mean necessarily a global eradication of the coronavirus but a reduction in harm relative to other countries and a sense that the administration is handling the situation competently. I don’t mean to be morbid saying this, I just mean how he will be evaluated by the voting public.

Yup, I thought Trump would lose anyway I think this seals the deal.

 

[Zardnaar]

yes
Your post saves me the trouble to list up, and you are much faster than I am.
Do mind that Lichtenstein is a direct democracy with an absolute monarchy at the same time (the people have the voting right to ditch their monarch)

Not an absolute monarch as such and he rules by consent. If they don't want him they can ditch him.

Might even met him if you go there.

 

[Sommerswerd]

QEII exercises virtually no power in day to day life. She rubber stamps opening and closing of parliment. We can become a republic whenever we like.

Yes, yes, I've heard all this before... and I can't help but chuckle, cause that's what the addict always says... "I can quit whenever I like"... OK buddy, sure you can, whatever you say

I guess the baseline is like this (without knowing the countries you're referring to)

UK seems like one good example... and since I got quite a few responses from the subjects of the realm of Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith'... I think that's enough for now... no need to complicate things...

As opposed to the elective monarchy you have going right now? It's all very well poking fun at people with hereditary heads of states, but they are almost entirely regulated by strict traditions, with the actual job of government done by elected officials. Not to put too fine a point on it, but how many US government ministers were appointed or approved by the Senate as of late?

Again, America's "Democracy", such as it is... is flawed, period. Full Stop. I'm not particularly invested defending it or holding it up as being better than anyone else's Democracy.

You guys have a Queen. In this Year of Our Lord Two Thousand and Twenty... you guys still have... a Queen.. like with a Palace and crown and everything... like in Disney fairy tales... like its 1320 instead of 2020.

And the surreal part is that you guys are really trying to defend/justify it, rather than just saying "Yeah its pretty absurd and indefensible in this day and age, but its tradition what can you do?" I mean... even Best Korea has the sense to at least call their guy "Leader" instead of "King" or "Emperor" or whatever. Look, keep your Kings and Queens... its your country... you guys do you... and frankly its charming in some ways... but c'mon with the judgments, gimme a break... you know what I mean? You guys have a Queen... and that's without even getting into the whole "House of Lords" situation you've got going on.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Still not many I the world though overall.

Theocracy is the rarest government form.

From memory monarchy is the most stable regime. Followed by democracy and military dictatorship on the bottom.

Monarchy has its own form of instability.
The form of government may not be disputed but succession crisis, rebellion and civil war were hardly unknown in monarchies when monarchs had real power. Just need to look at Saudi Arabia currently to see this still going on.

 

[Patine]

Yes, yes, I've heard all this before... and I can't help but chuckle, cause that's what the addict always says... "I can quit whenever I like"... OK buddy, sure you can, whatever you say UK seems like one good example... and since I got quite a few responses from the subjects of the realm of Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith'... I think that's enough for now... no need to complicate things...Again, America's "Democracy", such as it is... is flawed, period. Full Stop. I'm not particularly invested defending it or holding it up as being better than anyone else's Democracy.

So, when will Americans take their ballot box rights, or even their "Jeffersonian" rights to hold the Government to account, and kick their habit of languishing under a corrupt, lying, malignly secretive, and criminal government that holds itself it's own laws - and protects it's own criminals from any meaningful investigation and punishment, and more interested in serving plutocratic oligarchs than it's own people? And this is both major parties here. When will the "addicts," in the United States utilize the "rights' guaranteed in their own Constitution to kick their bad socio-political addictions there - and throw the dealers in the slammer while they're at it?