|
-Blackadder- posted:Look who's shook. So it's likely going to be Biden vs. Trump in 2024, there's no way he doesn't run and try to use his candidacy to deflect this. There was no way he wasn't running, this changes nothing but is admittedly kinda funny
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 09:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 02:58 |
|
|
-Blackadder- posted:Good Lord. No, it doesn't "work with African Americans", no one needs to tell black people we're disenfranchised (least of all The Democratic loving Party), we already loving know it. I wasn't referring to anyone having to tell black people a thing, of all the people in U.S. they understand the fascist threat and the undemocratic white supremacist system of the U.S. better than anyone. Minority populations routinely vote for progressive candidates and the most progressive representatives are usually from those populations. Bishyaler posted:The whole problem is the undemocratic nature of our government and your solution is to swim upstream with electoralism to attempt to get change? If you want a Constitutional Amendment you need 3/4ths of Congress, and you need it at a time when voting rights have been sabotaged at the state level and an indeterminate (but significant) number of Democrats have revealed they love corporate money more than progress. You're talking about the biggest sea-change in political history, its effectively wishing for a mostly/all blue America. The first step is to take over the Democratic Party, then start the state game. If constitutional changes are impossible you start admitting new states. I'm pretty sure that is a simple majority vote. But we all know that if they start utilizing the judiciary in the same way as the Republicans do, the constitution is more of a recommendation, either way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 11:59
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Nobody was accusing them of anything until during a press conference they were like "we are absolutely certain we did not kill ANY children. If any kids have cop bullets in them, they were definitely already dead. We know nobody asked, we just wanted to make sure everyone knew." Honestly with the copious amount of disinformation from the initial interview, changing of stories, silence to further investigation it is looking more and more possible. This is more speculation, but if the cops initially tried going in guns blazing and accidentally harmed children then I would understand why the cops ended up holding off, regrouping, and then do nothing while the confused and devastated parents gathered outside of the school. The whole thing has been completely mishandled and no one seems to have a consistent story or timeline or plan to report because it would be unacceptable had they been so incompetent as to shoot children while rescuing them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 14:27
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:How do we even begin to fix this? That’s just it - you can’t!
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 14:33
|
|
|
As has been said about cops many times: You can't reform this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 14:44
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:The first step is to take over the Democratic Party, then start the state game. If constitutional changes are impossible you start admitting new states. I'm pretty sure that is a simple majority vote. But we all know that if they start utilizing the judiciary in the same way as the Republicans do, the constitution is more of a recommendation, either way. Take over the party that fights any progressive challenger tooth and nail, so much so that the speaker of the house will fly out for support if a conservative/moderate democrat is neck and neck with a progressive challenger. Do you honestly believe that the Democrat Party as it exists today is going add states to the US to pass their agenda? It stands to reason that they would've already done this, or they were lying about wanting to pass their agenda.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 14:50
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:Do you honestly believe that the Democrat Party as it exists today is going add states to the US to pass their agenda? It stands to reason that they would've already done this, or they were lying about wanting to pass their agenda. Is adding a new state a simple majority vote? It seems like it'd be harder than that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 14:51
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:Is adding a new state a simple majority vote? It seems like it'd be harder than that. Everything I can find says simple majority.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:00
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:Everything I can find says simple majority. lol That's pretty shameful then, I agree.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:05
|
|
|
Also where do the new states come from? You can't forcibly split up existing states. There needs to be land with people who want to become a US State to add more states.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:07
|
|
|
Personal opinion from the economic junk i'm reading, but I think May inflation numbers will surprise higher.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:13
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Also where do the new states come from? You can't forcibly split up existing states. There needs to be land with people who want to become a US State to add more states. Ostensibly Puerto Rico, but the issue of statehood vs. independence is pretty sticky from what I understand. Also no loving way Puerto Rican statehood gets through the Senate. There's no minimum population requirement for statehood, so go hog wild. Guam, the Virgin Islands, whatever. But again, no way any potential state that isn't lily-white is getting approved by the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:15
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Also where do the new states come from? You can't forcibly split up existing states. There needs to be land with people who want to become a US State to add more states. Not forcibly, but if you can find a state willing to be carved up for the sake of the party you can do it with just the consent of their legislature and Congress Texas claims to have special dispensation to subdivide itself without consent of Congress, but this is not a mainstream position
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:33
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Not forcibly, but if you can find a state willing to be carved up for the sake of the party you can do it with just the consent of their legislature and Congress Is there a state in the Union that could be split in half, with both halves remaining solid (relatively speaking) blue, without making weird fractal state borders?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:35
|
|
|
Even more hypothetically, could you theoretically have a hundred new states with a population of whatever the minimum would be to have every citizen of the state be an elected representative? And I guess whatever you'd need for federal requirements like a post office or something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:37
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Is there a state in the Union that could be split in half, with both halves remaining solid (relatively speaking) blue, without making weird fractal state borders? once you cross the border into Washington County in Rhode Island you've basically crossed over the Mason-Dixon line.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:38
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Is there a state in the Union that could be split in half, with both halves remaining solid (relatively speaking) blue, without making weird fractal state borders? Don't rule out chopping the biggest cities in half, if needed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:44
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Is there a state in the Union that could be split in half, with both halves remaining solid (relatively speaking) blue, without making weird fractal state borders? California is right there getting too big to actually govern.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:48
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Is there a state in the Union that could be split in half, with both halves remaining solid (relatively speaking) blue, without making weird fractal state borders?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:48
|
|
|
Oklahoma and Indian Territory were supposed to be admitted as two states; Indian Territory drafted its own constitution and applied for admission as the state of Sequoyah, but got told "lol no" by Congress because TipTow posted:no way any potential state that isn't lily-white is getting approved so it got smashed together with Oklahoma Territory to make Oklahoma. The statehood ceremony had this awful "marriage" between a white male and an Indigenous female, and it's even on the loving state seal I mention all this because after the McGirt decision there's been some low-level discussion about extrapolating the implications of "Indian Country" still existing. Could we still get a State of Sequoyah? Probably wouldn't help the Dems much if packing the union with "blue" states is the goal
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 15:49
|
|
|
You could probably split PA in half if you divided it carefully enough to balance the populations of the red wasteland between Pittsburgh and Philly between the two. Or take the careful route and split it into 3rds with the red wasteland off on it's own. Still a net gain of 1 blue state.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:37
|
|
|
There's also a pretty easy way to divide California into two reliably solid blue states. People would probably be leery of the idea though, because they have been knocking down "split the state" ballot measures for years from conservatives trying to carve out unpopulated desert wastelands into new states.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:43
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Not forcibly, but if you can find a state willing to be carved up for the sake of the party you can do it with just the consent of their legislature and Congress A state being willing to allow their local government to be carved up is going to be a tough find. It feels like adding more states falls into the "One crazy trick to control government that Republicans hate! They won't tell you about it!". It is possible, it works in theory, but also I think armed revolution starting tomorrow is more plausible and I'm rightfully told that armed revolution is a pie in the sky fantasy that isn't happening.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:44
|
|
|
Rigel posted:There's also a pretty easy way to divide California into two reliably solid blue states. People would probably be leery of the idea though, because they have been knocking down "split the state" ballot measures for years from conservatives trying to carve out unpopulated desert wastelands into new states. Split it just north of San Jose. You Keep both sub-states blue and wash out the much redder valley / no man's land between Santa Barbara and Gilroy. unrelated, but here's an interesting read: https://twitter.com/donmoyn/status/1531972973598588930 Also, Marco Rubio is here to tell us good news https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1531983977929756682 Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Jun 1, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:54
|
|
|
It's not a mainstream position because of all of the Texas-shaped belt buckles that would be end up meaningless.
CmdrRiker fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Jun 1, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Also, Marco Rubio is here to tell us good news Curious what he thinks the T stands for
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:05
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Also where do the new states come from? You can't forcibly split up existing states. There needs to be land with people who want to become a US State to add more states. D.C., Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands or any of the other client states... Hell you could make various Indian reservations their own states, I think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:19
|
|
|
Oracle posted:D.C., Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands or any of the other client states... Why would any of the blue dogs vote to dilute their power?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:20
|
|
|
What about merging states? Like do we really need two different Dakotas?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:24
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:Take over the party that fights any progressive challenger tooth and nail, so much so that the speaker of the house will fly out for support if a conservative/moderate democrat is neck and neck with a progressive challenger. Do you honestly believe that the Democrat Party as it exists today is going add states to the US to pass their agenda? It stands to reason that they would've already done this, or they were lying about wanting to pass their agenda. Yeah, take over said party. Maybe doing something else than just promising nice things might work towards it? Can't knock it before the left tries anything else. It's not that the left has done all it can in brutal electoral tussles and dirty political games and been blocked by the evil establishment Democrats, all it has ever done is say nice things and pay ads so more people hear them say nice things and trust in that. Gumball Gumption posted:Also where do the new states come from? You can't forcibly split up existing states. There needs to be land with people who want to become a US State to add more states. Puerto Rico, DC, Guam, U.S. Virgin Islands, U.S. Marshall Islands, American Samoa...it doesn't matter if there's three people inhabiting a rock when Wyoming stands next to California. Gumball Gumption posted:A state being willing to allow their local government to be carved up is going to be a tough find. It feels like adding more states falls into the "One crazy trick to control government that Republicans hate! They won't tell you about it!". It is possible, it works in theory, but also I think armed revolution starting tomorrow is more plausible and I'm rightfully told that armed revolution is a pie in the sky fantasy that isn't happening. it's not that it isn't happening, it's that whoever will win such a revolution won't be the left, and if it is the left it won't be the kind of left you'd prefer. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Jun 1, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:25
|
|
|
Oracle posted:D.C., Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands or any of the other client states... DC and PR want to be states already and that hasn't happened but those are at least possible. Do the virgin islands and other client states want to be States or will we just be dragging colonies further in? Are there Indian reservations and territories looking for statehood instead of what they have now? I'm not saying it won't work in theory but it's incredibly stupid in practice because it's one weird trick. Though everything we propose here is incredibly stupid in practice since in practice the current goal of leadership is to die quietly and not worry about any of this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:32
|
|
|
If you were serious about playing hardball you could easily divide California into more than just two Nobody is serious about playing hardball though
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:35
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Curious what he thinks the T stands for He knows, he's just making sure it's spelled out for the bigots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:37
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:What about merging states? Like do we really need two different Dakotas? Those two states would have to agree to that. Good luck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:44
|
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:If you were serious about playing hardball you could easily divide California into more than just two Because the only people who want to bust up California are Republicans so it’ll give them like six new senators from all the vast empty stretches of “Not LA, San Francisco, or Sacramento” that suddenly become unmoored from those aforementioned cities.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:44
|
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:If you were serious about playing hardball you could easily divide California into more than just two Its been years since I played around with California splits. You can get 2 reliable blue states, but it gets more difficult to get 3 or more unless you want to make a few small Rhode Islands. San Diego is unreliable from what I remember.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:46
|
|
|
selec posted:Why would any of the blue dogs vote to dilute their power? The senate bill for DC statehood (introduced by Carper, D-Del) had 46 co-sponsors, which leaves the usual suspects (Manchin making up bullshit about he thinks it takes a constitutional amendment, which even a cursory inspection says 'lol no', Sinema hasn't weighed in one way or another, and weirdly enough, Angus King, Independent of Maine has also said nothing). So it looks like the 'blue dogs' have largely fallen in line.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:51
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Nobody was accusing them of anything until during a press conference they were like "we are absolutely certain we did not kill ANY children. If any kids have cop bullets in them, they were definitely already dead. We know nobody asked, we just wanted to make sure everyone knew." Actually, during the press conference, a reporter asked if the kids could have been caught in the crossfire, or if they were all shot by the gunman. The spokesman said it was too early to know, but they believe that all the kids were shot by the gunman.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:12
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:Do you honestly believe that the Democrat Party as it exists today is going add states to the US to pass their agenda? It stands to reason that they would've already done this, or they were lying about wanting to pass their agenda. I don't think they're going to anything. Besides lose elections and double down on no being as horrible as the other guys. I'm not even sure what their agenda is tbh. I can read their homepage I guess but whatever. Their agenda, to the extent that I've gotten involved with it, seems to be some combination of being patient while I send them money. Not patient ABOUT sending them money, mind you, no. Just all the other poo poo I want them to do. Or try to do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 02:58 |
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:Is adding a new state a simple majority vote? It seems like it'd be harder than that. The hard parts are finding land to turn into a new state, establishing the desired population in that new state, and negotiating a political deal with the other party so they don't just do the exact same thing next time they get a majority. In particular, that kind of political horse trading is why an expected-Democratic state would sometimes be paired with an expected-Republican state, leading to them both being admitted together in a package deal. Historically, there were also various reasons that politicians might want to delay extending full US law to a territory. There haven't been any states admitted under the current political dynamics, though. Hawaii and Alaska were admitted a few years before the Civil Rights Acts, where the Solid South segregationist Democrats still played the role of a powerful swing vote in Congress, and years of negotiation and lobbying were needed to admit a state. Especially for Hawaii, which offended both their racial beliefs and their hatred for communism. But if you have the political support necessary to line up fifty votes behind chopping up existing states to create more blue senators, then you already probably have fifty votes for abolishing the filibuster, packing the courts, reforming election laws, and so on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:18
|
|