|
Pillow Hat posted:I agree with that. I'm just saying that honest pandering aside, Churchill wasn't some lunatic pick like Trin Tragula would have us believe. In fact, MLK would have been a great choice since he spoke out against the Vietnam War (among other reasons). Totally a missed opportunity. If you're picking leaders who you like foreign policywise, who they are outside baseline American disinterest knowledge is important. First of all, don't pick a Brit who oversaw an empire upon which the sun never set. Second, don't pick one that people who know anything about the guy will question your choice. Nelson Mandela was a good choice to bullshit because he has good baseline fame and didn't really do anything foreign policy wise that is going to cause someone to question you. He's not really a good foreign policy answer as far as being informative, but he's not going to hurt you when people wonder about your imperial desires. poo poo, if deadass Churhill is fair game just name drop Hadrian or another one of the other 5 Good Emperors, talk up some good aspects and let the classicists all agree that 1st/2nd century Roman foreign policy has few effective modern parallels. gently caress, just say you like Pope Francis and dare anyone to call you on it.
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
Pinky Artichoke posted:As far as changing the process for future elections, if people who are willing to put the time and effort into working towards that make it happen, great. So far I trust the outrage to last no more than 3 months. Every four years the popular but loosing candidate has a bunch of supporters who suddenly learn about Super Delegates and focus their attention to how those Super Delegates are totally going to steal the election. Then the convention happens, the Super Delegates don't steal anything and everyone forgets about them. Until the next time, when have you heard about these outrageously undemocratic Super Delegates? In 2008 Obama supporters bucked the trend by complaining about them while being the front runner, because they were totally how Hillary was gonna gently caress the world over. Super Delegates will will always favor the front runner at the beginning of the race and by the end will be squarely lined up with the winning candidate.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
The Nastier Nate posted:Voter's don't like being told their votes are wrong and that the party elders need to save them from making a terrible mistake. If a majority of the voters don't vote for the leading candidate, then it's reasonable for party leaders to step in. If you can't secure a majority of the delegates come convention you don't really have much of a leg to stand on when decrying the undemocratic selection of the other guy when arguing for your undemocratic selection.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:No, we're talking about the probable Trump scenario. What happens when your field is so split that a candidate doesn't win a majority of votes, and somehow has the most delegates even if only 30-40% of your party have voted for that person? Yes, they're there to prevent Contested Conventions and to swing the party away from potential Trumps arising from a drastically split spread of delegates resulting in a total assclown riding a plurality.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:But when super delegate endorsements are counted in the delegate horse race scoreboard, that kind of defeats the purpose of them acting as last minute power brokers in a tight nomination race, because they can just endorse early on. No, delegates can't just change their vote at the convention because that way lies madness. Super Delegate totals should absolutely be counted separately, if at all, in the media. I do agree with that. Generally the media has been much better about separating out super delegate and pledged delegate totals this cycle as opposed to previous cycles.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 02:46
|
|
|
For the Democrats, pledged delegates are not technically bound. However the campaign can change out anyone they want at any time if they think they won't vote for them at the convention. Which makes them all but bound, while still allowing for last minute thwarting of Old Man Jenkins' charade as the ghost of evil FDR. Super Delegates are free to vote for who the gently caress ever, and are in no way bound to vote for the person with the most pledged delegates. However, Super Delegates are by bast majority elected Democratic officials(Congressmen, Senators, Governors) with the minority being party officials and the super minority being ex-Presidents. The only Super Delegates immune to the backlash of DNC '68 Electric Boogaloo are the 6 guys who have already been President/Vice President. There is very little incentive to overrule the pledged delegates, and given the ability of pledged delegates to flip the script whenever they want not much room to do so either. There are certainly ways that the process the Democrats have set up could lead to mass chaos and the cackling loser being crowned nominee. To get there you need to have some crazy rear end poo poo happen similar to either this years Republican tire fire or the chaos theory in practice events of 1968. Which means that concern over the Super Delegates going rogue is vastly over stated and is itself causing more damage to the party than the Super Delegates are.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
Republican Delegates are required to vote for a given candidate for a certain number of ballots as determined by their state delegation. A handful are unbound and that is where Trump is going to try and make up the numbers if he's short. Democratic Pledged Delegates are not actually required to vote for a given candidate by any specific bylaw. However, unlike with the Republicans Democratic candidates can make sure that their delegates are people they believe are loyal to them. The ability to change delegates at near will makes the pledged delegates effectively bound. Obviously there can be shenanigans and if a candidate pulls off their Mission Impossible mask to reveal the clattering visage of Rick Scott their delegates can vote against them. Which is how it would be possible for Edwards' delegates to abandon him if he'd still been running when his affair became public while also making it exceedingly unlikely Hillary's delegates are suddenly going to feel the Bern on the convention floor.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
The Florida form asks for your DL number, FL ID number, last 4 of Social, or you can check a box that says you have none of those. Any form asking for your full Social is bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:Virginia. Virginia is for Scammers, I guess. There's no way in hell I'd fill out that registration form and hand it to some dude on the street.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
Rabbi Raccoon posted:I don't think Oliver, Colbert, and Bee are the problem themselves, but they enabled it. When you have so many people telling you Hillary is gonna win and Trump is going down over and over it makes you feel more confident in what's gonna happen and less likely to feel line your vote will really matter If you're relying on other people to go out and vote against the White Nationalist Avatar of Corruption, while you stay home or vote Jill Stein because you think The Misogynist Advocate for Global Destabilization is going to lose anyway, you're a loving idiot.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:With such a small number of votes deciding the election, you can pretty much blame the rainfall in the northern quadrant as a reason for the loss. Because the deciding margin was so close, thanks to the Electoral College, everyone's theory about who is really to blame for the country accidentally voted in the worst possible option is at least partially right. Like, if New York society could have just brought itself to quietly and unenthusiastically humor Trump we wouldn't be in this situation. Sometimes you've just got to let the wrong one in and put up with their gauche presence for the greater good.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 00:21
|
|