2020 US Election (Part Two)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, no, the only bipartisanship that should be countenanced at this point is making Republicans accept good policies rather than taking good policies and make them acceptable to Republicans.
Perhaps I was being overly optimistic.

If Biden does win, I wonder what he will actually be able to achieve, as the GOP will likely control the senate, and the Democrats will be a long way from the magic 60 majority needed to really push things though. :think:
 
Perhaps I was being overly optimistic.

If Biden does win, I wonder what he will actually be able to achieve, as the GOP will likely control the senate, and the Democrats will be a long way from the magic 60 majority needed to really push things though. :think:

If the Republicans can do all of this in the last three years with a mere 53, so can the Dems. A supermajority would be nice, but is not wholly necessary. A defeat of Trump may be all it takes to shake a few more Reps free from that spectre and into bipartianship. Sure, Biden won't do anything revolutionary, but we don't need that right now, we just need to fix and repair the stage for the next band. The Reps are defending 23 seats while the Dems 12, while the Republicans won't be wholly defeated, it could be a game changer.
 
Perhaps I was being overly optimistic.
Yes, you were and so is a large part of the world because the ‘good chap’ theory of government, i.e. that we can afford to give extraordinary, unchecked powers to a small number of untested people because people are ultimately fine folks/good chaps who wouldn't use those powers for evil still is a mainstay of modern political thought, in spite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
 
Yes, you were and so is a large part of the world because the ‘good chap’ theory of government, i.e. that we can afford to give extraordinary, unchecked powers to a small number of untested people because people are ultimately fine folks/good chaps who wouldn't use those powers for evil still is a mainstay of modern political thought, in spite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

the only thing that stops a bad guy trampling over the Bill of Rights is a good guy trampling over the Bill of Rights
 
One of the problems for Trump is a lot of the easiest areas to attack Biden on risk backfiring on him. He could bring up the Tara Reade allegations, but then this might lead to his own infamous comments on women coming back up, plus lets us not forget Trump has entire wikepedia page dedicated to sexual misconduct allegations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

He could attack Biden on his nepotism in Ukraine. But then again that would likely bring back up Trump illegal political pressuring of Ukraine for dirt on Biden.

Even his attacks on Biden for saying a few nice things on China, may rightly be seen as part of an attempt to divert attention away from his failure to deal with Covid-19.

He could attack Biden's alleged mental decline. However as Trump is also quite old himself, and let us not forget there was a period a couple of years ago when it felt like everyone seemed to be trying to diagnose Trump with various mental disorders!

Trumps best attack may remain his original "sleep Joe" burn! As in the polls, one area Trump is still rated higher then Biden on is his activeness and energy levels!

Perhaps Trumps best choice (and this would be controversial in the current political climate) would be to focus on making himself seem positive rather then attacking Biden. As these re-election campaigns are always 95% referendums on the existing president. Which is one advantage Biden may have over Sanders, as Sanders more radical nature may have made it harder for him to attract anti Trump votes (such as from conservatives disillusioned with Trump).



This is true, but also would have been true for Sanders. The polls I saw during the primaries had both Biden and Sanders ahead of Trump (Biden also slightly ahead of Sanders) but not by large percentages. Generally presidents win their second terms, so thinking Biden might lose is not exactly a radical notion. Unless something dramatic happens, 2020 elections will be very close. It is for Trump to lose (however he has very slim margins in several states, and does not have appear to have increased in popularity since 2016).



You could say this is a good thing. Politics has become increasingly partisan and toxic (something which Trump has actively stoked). A willingness to take a step back and at least do some bipartisan things may be beneficial.



The problem I have is with a minority of Sanders voters. The whole Sanders or nothing attitude. Its like as if they went for a dream job interview, and didn't get it, and now they are like, "well I guess I just wont work!" For me, if you don't get your dream job, a decent alternative job is better then nothing. Also it is perhaps this same vocal minority who viciously attacked Warren (and let we not forget there are plenty of progressives like myself and my wife who voted for someone other then Sanders) which Warren certainly was aware of, and which perhaps influenced her decision to not endorse Sanders after dropping out. Those attacks seemed all the more unnecessary as she was pretty close to Sanders in policies, and again highlight this issue with 'Sanders or nothing.'



Out of interest which Republican rep?


I honestly wish Sanders had beaten Clinton in 2016.
1. Because his campaign can't have been worse then hers.
2. Because a president Sanders would have been awesome if it happened.
3. We could have put to bed once and for all whether a candidate as progressive as Sanders is electable, and whether all the alleged disaffected non voters he attracts would have actually come out and voted.

On the subject of Sanders, people often rag on Biden's supposed mental decline. But there were also big questions over Sanders physical health and capacity to be president this year. Sanders is 78 after all and suffered a heart attack during the campaign, and had to be told to take things easy after this.


People may say this is the dumbest thing they have heard, but I think the best chance of a truly progressive candidate coming to power would be if this happens:
Texas is supposedly becoming ever more democrat. This is based on changes in demographics, Trumps relative poor performance in 2016, Cruz only narrowly winning in 2018, and 2020 polling showing Trump only around 3 points ahead of Biden. If Texas was to sometime in the future flip to the Democrats, that would force the Republicans to move left in policies in order to have any chance of winning future elections. This would then allow the Democrats to move more left more towards their progressive side of the party.
Fred Upton. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/23/us/politics/biden-speech-fred-upton.html

Biden is not honest and will shill for anybody willing to pay him.
 
We need to scrap the Constitution and write a new one.

18th century agrarian government in a 21st century information age era. . .I think a review is long overdue.
 
the 1st and 2nd Amendments would be deleted
I Sure wouldn't want a rewrite under the current absurdly corrupt system with two parties entirely in the pocket of monied interests. Those wouldn't be the only rights we lose. They're already crushing the 4th and 5th.
There is an amendments process already in place. What would need to be added to a new Constitution, and what would you strike out of it now?
A way for normal voters to impose more direct democracy. Trusting legislators to get things right while they are handed sacks of money to act against their constituents is a pretty absurd system to call a democracy. They'll never make an amendment banning those sacks of money.
 
Last edited:
Unless something dramatic happens, 2020 elections will be very close.
Isn't it sad that a massive pandemic and economic collapse wasn't enough to completely crater him?

Bush the Dumber squeaked by for re-election based on fear but by the time his second term was up, support for the Repubicans in Congress collapsed and paved the way for Obamacare. People saw what a terrible job the GOP had done and turned on them. Now, we have a GOP engaging in the worst sort of governance imaginable yet we are so polarized that this does not matter to 45% of the electorate.

Can't the 60 vote filibuster just be thrown out by the leader of the Senate? They've already thrown it out for judge appointments.
 
Isn't it sad that a massive pandemic and economic collapse wasn't enough to completely crater him?

Bush the Dumber squeaked by for re-election based on fear but by the time his second term was up, support for the Repubicans in Congress collapsed and paved the way for Obamacare. People saw what a terrible job the GOP had done and turned on them. Now, we have a GOP engaging in the worst sort of governance imaginable yet we are so polarized that this does not matter to 45% of the electorate.

Can't the 60 vote filibuster just be thrown out by the leader of the Senate? They've already thrown it out for judge appointments.
That 45% still voted for McCain. It's the swing voters that matter. The mistake people make is believing swing voters are somewhere in the middle. They don't really have an ideology and mostly vote for personal interests.I

Yeah the filibuster can be nuked but the current democrats are such weaksauce bipartisan loving wimps it's unlikely they'd ever do it.
 
the only thing that stops a bad guy trampling over the Bill of Rights is a good guy trampling over the Bill of Rights
‘Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun.’
 
A Brit looks at Trimp.

British Writer Pens The Best Description Of Trump I’ve Read
  • Apr. 24th, 2020 at 11:38 AM

“Why do some British people not like Donald Trump?” Nate White, an articulate and witty writer from England wrote the following response:

A few things spring to mind. Trump lacks certain qualities which the British traditionally esteem. For instance, he has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no compassion, no wit, no warmth, no wisdom, no subtlety, no sensitivity, no self-awareness, no humility, no honour and no grace – all qualities, funnily enough, with which his predecessor Mr. Obama was generously blessed. So for us, the stark contrast does rather throw Trump’s limitations into embarrassingly sharp relief.

Plus, we like a laugh. And while Trump may be laughable, he has never once said anything wry, witty or even faintly amusing – not once, ever. I don’t say that rhetorically, I mean it quite literally: not once, not ever. And that fact is particularly disturbing to the British sensibility – for us, to lack humour is almost inhuman. But with Trump, it’s a fact. He doesn’t even seem to understand what a joke is – his idea of a joke is a crass comment, an illiterate insult, a casual act of cruelty.

Trump is a troll. And like all trolls, he is never funny and he never laughs; he only crows or jeers. And scarily, he doesn’t just talk in crude, witless insults – he actually thinks in them. His mind is a simple bot-like algorithm of petty prejudices and knee-jerk nastiness.

There is never any under-layer of irony, complexity, nuance or depth. It’s all surface. Some Americans might see this as refreshingly upfront. Well, we don’t. We see it as having no inner world, no soul. And in Britain we traditionally side with David, not Goliath. All our heroes are plucky underdogs: Robin Hood, Dick Whittington, Oliver Twist. Trump is neither plucky, nor an underdog. He is the exact opposite of that. He’s not even a spoiled rich-boy, or a greedy fat-cat. He’s more a fat white slug. A Jabba the Hutt of privilege.



And worse, he is that most unforgivable of all things to the British: a bully. That is, except when he is among bullies; then he suddenly transforms into a snivelling sidekick instead. There are unspoken rules to this stuff – the Queensberry rules of basic decency – and he breaks them all. He punches downwards – which a gentleman should, would, could never do – and every blow he aims is below the belt. He particularly likes to kick the vulnerable or voiceless – and he kicks them when they are down.

So the fact that a significant minority – perhaps a third – of Americans look at what he does, listen to what he says, and then think ‘Yeah, he seems like my kind of guy’ is a matter of some confusion and no little distress to British people, given that:
• Americans are supposed to be nicer than us, and mostly are.
• You don’t need a particularly keen eye for detail to spot a few flaws in the man.

This last point is what especially confuses and dismays British people, and many other people too; his faults seem pretty bloody hard to miss. After all, it’s impossible to read a single tweet, or hear him speak a sentence or two, without staring deep into the abyss. He turns being artless into an art form; he is a Picasso of pettiness; a Shakespeare of horsehocky. His faults are fractal: even his flaws have flaws, and so on ad infinitum. God knows there have always been stupid people in the world, and plenty of nasty people too. But rarely has stupidity been so nasty, or nastiness so stupid. He makes Nixon look trustworthy and George W look smart. In fact, if Frankenstein decided to make a monster assembled entirely from human flaws – he would make a Trump.

And a remorseful Doctor Frankenstein would clutch out big clumpfuls of hair and scream in anguish: ‘My God… what… have… I… created?' If being a **** was a TV show, Trump would be the boxed set.
 
^Reminds me of ‘the type of man who mistakes frankness and rudeness’ or however it was that Terry Pratchett described a certain corrupt businessman in one of the Vimes books.
 
Last edited:
There is an amendments process already in place. What would need to be added to a new Constitution, and what would you strike out of it now?

Lots of things assuring more rights on our "information". this would include recourse on everything from credit scores to health information to advertising tracking.

Public Campaign Financing
Clarification shutting down the consequences of Citizen's United.

Short list.

the 1st and 2nd Amendments would be deleted

Absolutely no. On either count. I might want a limit on the capacity of magazines themselves but not on guns overall.

A Brit looks at Trimp.

I had to share this. . .

Obama's
Better
At
Making
America
Great
And
Trump's
Embarrassed
 
Last edited:
We need to scrap the Constitution and write a new one.

If you scrap the constitution, if you do any kind of constitutional convention, then the US ends. What the civil war failed to do will be done: dissolution into sovereign states. Any opportunity to a full rewrite is also an opportunity to dump the whole thing, and there won't be agreement on a new one.
 
If you scrap the constitution, if you do any kind of constitutional convention, then the US ends. What the civil war failed to do will be done: dissolution into sovereign states.

It would make you so happy I just feel the joy oozing through the ether.
 
It would make you so happy I just feel the joy oozing through the ether.

It's another union I want to see dissolved. If you people like being masochists, it's up to you. Not my problem.

I'm just point out what should be obvious to anyone thinking of calling new constitutional convention there: the end result will be dissolution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom