|
JT Jag posted:They could probably find a way to bump him if he's not in the top 5, but if he keeps polling as well as he has they'll have to carry him. That's really risky for them. If Trump's not in the debates because he's legitimately not popular enough, they can hope his campaign will just sputter out. If he's in the debates due to his popularity, that'll suck but they've at least got the hope that he's going to self-immolate without taking out too many viable candidates in the process. If he's not in the debates in spite of his popularity, he will not shut up about it. Ever. Everything from that point forward will be about him scaring the GOP establishment and them conspiring to keep him out of the race because they're afraid of him. Maybe not for the reasons he'd like to think but it's something he can use to stir resentment against them, blame any of his failures on someone else, and justify a third party run no matter how delusional. He won't care if he's only 6% in national polls because it just proves him right about the establishment being out to get him. For the GOP, that's an unmitigated disaster because they can't win with a 6% deficit. He doesn't directly affect downticket races, but someone voting for him as a protest against the GOP is less likely to vote Republican for everything else. Not all of them but that's scant consolation for someone in a race hanging on a knife's edge.
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 02:38 |
|
|
Seriously though they just change the house to PR voting, along with massively increasing the number of seats
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
You will very likely enjoy this speech by South Carolina State Representative Joseph Neal (D-Richmond) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6ty-Osm41M
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
Supraluminal posted:Does JavaScript support this syntax? no, and why would you admit to inflicting this on the world?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
The merest possibility of a Trump/Palin ticket for 2016 is leaving me impossibly full of glee. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:The merest possibility of a Trump/Palin ticket for 2016 is leaving me impossibly full of glee.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:The merest possibility of a Trump/Palin ticket for 2016 is leaving me impossibly full of glee. imagining them actually being elected fills me with the deepest dread i have ever felt
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
I only want that to hit the general because it will be the most hilarious trainwreck in the world to watch, and I have complete faith that there is zero chance whatsoever that they'd win.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
Joementum posted:You will very likely enjoy this speech by South Carolina State Representative Joseph Neal (D-Richmond) Thanks for posting this. The part in the middle where he explains what happened when his family was brought over and split hit me pretty hard. Jenny Horne's was something else, too. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:I honestly can't think of a single presidential ticket that would be more toxic in a General Election. Zombie Hitler/The Biblical Satan
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
I'd vote for Satan
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I'd vote for Satan
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
actual jesus would probably do pretty terrible in an American political election.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
I still say we should run Nixon's corpse. The Constitution never said the president had to be alive when he was elected only what to do if he dies in office. The rest of the world would be so terrified of pissing off The Insane States of America we could do whatever we wanted. See, not only did we put a dead body in charge we picked the worst one we could find.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:actual jesus would probably do pretty terrible in an American political election.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:actual jesus would probably do pretty terrible in an American political election.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 03:51
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:actual jesus would probably do pretty terrible in an American political election. The Democrats would take one look at his "Give away everything you own to help the needy" platform and run away screaming. The Republicans would expire on the spot from a stroke.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
Pat Buchanan has a WND Op/Ed in which he likens civil disobedience with respect to treating gay people as equals and removing Ten Commandments monuments to that of MLK.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:So 6,000 people in the House? How, pray tell, do you actually manage that? Look at how China does it
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:I only want that to hit the general because it will be the most hilarious trainwreck in the world to watch, and I have complete faith that there is zero chance whatsoever that they'd win. I would have to vote for them. The lure would be too strong. Also, this talk of stupid numbers for the house is stupid. If we're going to rework the system, don't cap it at all. Every election, every candidate anywhere in the country that gets at least 50,000 votes gets to sit in the house. Furthermore, these legislators get 1 vote for every single vote they collected. Let every person have the best incentive to well and truly vote for the person who they think will best represent them in the House of Representatives, and let every Representative have power directly in relation to their support. I honestly don't see how "put a whole lot more people in the House" as the be all and end all of a major strategy is supposed to lead to better governance.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Look at how China does it I didn't take you for someone who advocated a rubber stamp "legislature" to approve the actions of the all-powerful executive.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Look at how China does it Counterpoint: Name one authoritarian single-party state where the legislature was worth anything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Look at how China does it Rampant corruption? OK, I'm in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:08
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:I would have to vote for them. The lure would be too strong. This seems like you'd have to make it illegal to advertise in any way, lest someone just hire a skywriting plane to write "VOTE FOR ROBERTA" and let name recognition do its thing on Election Day.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:18
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:I honestly don't see how "put a whole lot more people in the House" as the be all and end all of a major strategy is supposed to lead to better governance. The larger the amount of seats that are up, the smaller the electoral districts must be. The smaller they must be, the way harder it gets to gerrymander away your opponent's natural majority just because you managed to snag the statehouse for a cycle. Texas, for example, would have a much harder time gerrymandering away Democratic voters if we say expanded the size of the house to 7x, leading to them having to have 252 reps and districts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:I still say we should run Nixon's corpse. The Constitution never said the president had to be alive when he was elected only what to do if he dies in office. The rest of the world would be so terrified of pissing off The Insane States of America we could do whatever we wanted. Actually, he'd be perfect. See: Mad Man Theory
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:The larger the amount of seats that are up, the smaller the electoral districts must be. The smaller they must be, the way harder it gets to gerrymander away your opponent's natural majority just because you managed to snag the statehouse for a cycle. Pffft, 251 are districts with one guy that always votes R. The rest of the state is in #252. Problem solved!
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Pffft, 251 are districts with one guy that always votes R. The rest of the state is in #252. Problem solved! This was actually legal until 1964.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:35
|
|
|
I think that fixing congress to one congressman to every 200,000 people would be alright. 1,500 representatives is a ton, but not outright ridiculous. Hell, I'd be ok with stretching it to 250.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
Congress should just go online only. Have 10,000 representatives debate on a forum. It would be named Something Lawful.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
dpbjinc posted:Congress should just go online only. Have 10,000 representatives debate on a forum. It would be named Something Lawful. It'd look like bizarro LF. edit: also like actual LF.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Pat Buchanan has a WND Op/Ed in which he likens civil disobedience with respect to treating gay people as equals and removing Ten Commandments monuments to that of MLK. "And for those who, when young, rejected the views, values and laws of Eisenhower’s America, what makes them think that dissenting Americans in this post-Christian and anti-Christian era will accept their laws, beliefs, values?" "And Why Should They?" - Pat Buchanan referring to people after the year 2015 restoring Eisenhower's America.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
Just demolish the Capitol building and make the Verizon Center the new statehouse. Problem solved. Bonus: All the idiots in congress get to eat an Ovechkin slapshot to the face as punishment for screwing up
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
I still like the concept of the negative vote. For each race you can either vote for or against someone. If you vote against you cancel out one of their positive votes. If everyone ends up negative then no-one wins and you have a do over until someone polls positive.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
The New Hampshire lower house has 400 members, which is about one rep for every 3,000 people. This helps neo-Nazis, libertarians, and other assorted crazies win a seat in the legislature. It doesn't seem to help with good governance compared to other states.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 05:59
|
|
|
Anyone have a good article handy on the history of the Confederate flag being used as a racist symbol for the last few decades? Bonus points if it gives some concrete details on SC raising theirs in response to the Civil Rights Movement. Trying through Google and not getting much beyonds random blogs and articles whose links don't seem to go to actual sources.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 07:37
|
|
|
A Bag of Milk posted:This helps neo-Nazis, libertarians, and other assorted crazies win a seat in the legislature. And this is different from the status quo...?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 07:39
|
|
|
zeroprime posted:27 points I won't lie, I had that in mind when I revised my estimate of his ceiling from 20 to 25. I'm knocking off 2 for Trump because he's Donald Trump. Also courtesy of the primaries thread, here's Fox's one weird trick to exclude Trump from the debate. Sulphagnist fucked around with this message at 08:31 on Jul 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 08:28
|
|
|
Amergin posted:The Economist mentioned that Trump's rhetoric could be quite effective with the racist white anti-RINO folks in the party. He's never actually held public office for anything, right? Could he conceivably have cachet with the Small Government™ crowd for having "never been bought by the lobbyists"?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 08:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 02:38 |
|
|
computer parts posted:And this is different from the status quo...? Not significantly, but it's certainly not any better. I'm pretty unconvinced that increasing the size of the House would have a meaningful impact on policy. I'm not aware of any known correlations between per capita legislature/parliament sizes and quality of legislation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 09:10
|
|