All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[Tami]

The thing that makes me upset as a Republican is that the gop cant see or refuse to believe that they are hurting the party they claim to love by backing Trump. The party cant be fixed while Trump and Mitch are major players. I get wanting to back your president and show support for your party but this has gone too far. It is really making me question if I will even be a Republican any more. The only problem is I disagree with many of the Democratic candidates on a lot of things. I dont know what to do.

Many ex-Republicans are now moving to the Non-affiliated group. I surmise those that do are hanging out there until after Trump leaves office and the Republican Party becomes somewhat more saner.

[zinderel]

It's a fair point, but what's the right way to determine which state goes first?

There are some suggestions for a national primary all on the same day, but that's going to favor the initial frontrunners and wouldn't have the potential winnowing effect as we get down to a handful of finalists.

Change it up. One election year, the state primaries happen in alphabetical order. The next year, reverse it. The next year, it goes by chronological order of when the state entered the Union. The following election, reverse it.

Shake it up, so it is less predictable. Stop making only four or five states matter.

Also, do away with the Electoral college for the same reason.

[Rob Allen]

One longtime Republican whose blog was called "GOP Lifer" left the party when Trump took it over. His new blog is https://www.politicalorphans.com/ and I find it well worth reading.

[Tami]

It's a fair point, but what's the right way to determine which state goes first?

There are some suggestions for a national primary all on the same day, but that's going to favor the initial frontrunners and wouldn't have the potential winnowing effect as we get down to a handful of finalists.

I favor squeezing the primaries into Two Months, May and June.

The problem with winnowing is that it doesn't encourage independent thought in terms of voting. Many voters, for various reasons, are simply going to vote for whomever the other states vote for. I think it's best to make people give serious thought to whom they vote fro and to vote without being influenced by others.

Still, the best compromise is to limit the primaries to two months.

[Dalak]

The Independent way is the way I am really thinking of going. I will vote Republican with a few candidates that I feel I can support. And I will vote Democrat after reaching them and making sure they are not too far left. I have been giving it a lot of thought the last few months and have to go the independent route. Most Republicans are just too far gone.

If the few GoP candidates you support talk a good game but vote in lockstep with the others 85% or more of the time, then they are probably supporting what you obviously don't and you shouldn't vote for them. Make sure to research anyone you intend to vote for if at all possible.

[Mister Mets]

The thing that makes me upset as a Republican is that the gop cant see or refuse to believe that they are hurting the party they claim to love by backing Trump. The party cant be fixed while Trump and Mitch are major players. I get wanting to back your president and show support for your party but this has gone too far. It is really making me question if I will even be a Republican any more. The only problem is I disagree with many of the Democratic candidates on a lot of things. I dont know what to do.

What do you think McConnell is doing wrong?

The guy's approval rating is so low that if it was a girl's age Roy Moore would be interested, so there may end up being a lot of answers to that one, but I'm interested in your take.

Meanwhile, from the perspective of the Democratic party, even moderate Republicans are getting called white nationalists.

https://www.baltimoresun.com/politic...319-story.html

Holy f***. Schiff just hits the gavel to close out the open hearing and Yovanovitch gets a spontaneous standing ovation from Democrats and the gallery as a GOP rep bellyaches about not getting to respond to Schiff's closing statement after the hearing is adjourned.

Two hearings over the past three days, and the witnesses are being heralded as heroes.

GOING GREAT FOR YOU, PARTY OF TRUMP.

Is anyone heralding the witnesses as heroes who wasn't already on their side?

The Independent way is the way I am really thinking of going. I will vote Republican with a few candidates that I feel I can support. And I will vote Democrat after reaching them and making sure they are not too far left. I have been giving it a lot of thought the last few months and have to go the independent route. Most Republicans are just too far gone.

The best course for party registration may depend on what type of state you live.

Would you still want the ability to have an impact in the primaries?

When first started his show he tried to pretend he would be all about seeking the truth and being open to discussing any and all ideas. But after a while it became clear that he was really pushing one particular agenda.

With the question of whether Rubin should have been seen as a journalist and whether suggesting otherwise is a burn, there seems to be a bit of a category error. The distinction between a journalist and a commentator is more about what they do than what they believe.

Someone can write an article for Mother Jones without being open to Republican ideas, but still meet rigorous fact-checking standards. The difference will mainly come to the finished type of product.

I don't think anyone ever expected Rubin to do weeks of independent research on something that might end up being a false lead, which journalists often end up doing.

[Gray Lensman]

It's a fair point, but what's the right way to determine which state goes first?

There are some suggestions for a national primary all on the same day, but that's going to favor the initial frontrunners and wouldn't have the potential winnowing effect as we get down to a handful of finalists.

I prefer a system that was proposed a few years ago, where the primaries are over the course of several weeks, starting with the least populated states and working their way up until the really big ones are all at the end - unless there is already a runaway winner early on, then even the people at the end of the process would still matter.

[BeastieRunner]

It's a fair point, but what's the right way to determine which state goes first?

There are some suggestions for a national primary all on the same day, but that's going to favor the initial frontrunners and wouldn't have the potential winnowing effect as we get down to a handful of finalists.

The current primary system was designed to get all the votes across the country to the convention at the same time. News was pretty slow back then.

We now know answers to things pretty instantaneously. I can't see a reason to not have a national primary outside of, "but that is how it was always done." In the end, it appears the motives of party are more important than the will of the people.

[Mister Mets]

The current primary system was designed to get all the votes across the country to the convention at the same time. News was pretty slow back then.

We now know answers to things pretty instantaneously. I can't see a reason to not have a national primary outside of, "but that is how it was always done." In the end, it appears the motives of party are more important than the will of the people.

There are a few reasons not to have a national primary. It is going to favor people who have high name recognition.

With a national primary, Obama would probably not have been the Democratic party's nominee in 2008, since Hillary led in national polling, typically by more than 12 points, until Obama won Iowa, which made the numbers closer.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...191.html#polls

There are some workarounds. There could be a ranked choice system. There could also be a two-step election, where if someone doesn't have a majority, there will be a runoff between the top two contenders.

There would still be some potential complications. In a national primary, there would need to be some uniform standards. Right now, some states have caucuses while others have primaries. Some have open primaries while others have closed. Registration lengths vary.

A positive benefit of uniform standards would be an arms race to have as many people voting as possible. Under current rules, it doesn't matter if a state has high turnout. That would change if the popular vote were what mattered.

Change it up. One election year, the state primaries happen in alphabetical order. The next year, reverse it. The next year, it goes by chronological order of when the state entered the Union. The following election, reverse it.

Shake it up, so it is less predictable. Stop making only four or five states matter.

Also, do away with the Electoral college for the same reason.

I have no problem with changing it up.

One way to do it might be to go with a state that most clearly resembled the national popular vote in the previous election. In 2000, it was Oregon. In 2004, it was Ohio. In 2008 and 2012, it was Virginia. In 2016, it was Minnesota.

It's an improvement since there aren't two states with a culture of influencing national elections so early but it doesn't assure that the early primaries will be in diverse states (although the possibility can be preferable to the certainty of no change.)

[Farealmer]

The guy's approval rating is so low that if it was a girl's age Roy Moore would be interested, so there may end up being a lot of answers to that one, but I'm interested in your take.

That's the first time i've seen you post a joke. And it's a fairly funny one at that.

[babyblob]

What do you think McConnell is doing wrong?

The guy's approval rating is so low that if it was a girl's age Roy Moore would be interested, so there may end up being a lot of answers to that one, but I'm interested in your take.

To be honest I dont know much about current Mitch. I have to do more research. My anger at him comes from his constant support of Trump and Bevin. And His bad voting history on Gay rights and his harsh anti abortion stance.

I have been doing more reseach on differant political figures and watching more news programs. I watch meet the press, cnn, and even fox news. I want to be as informed as I can be before I vote next ear. I wasnt always involved in politics and didnt really care. I didnt care when I was younger and then I was in prison so ther was no point.

Then I was told by my caseworker in my halfway house that as felon i couldnt vote. That turned out to be her telling the men at the house they were not allowed to vote if she found out they wernt voting for Clinton.

[numberthirty]

Worth taking note of...

- https://slate.com/business/2019/11/e...e-for-all.html

Elizabeth Warren Admits That She Isn’t Really Going to Pass Single Payer

[Gray Lensman]

Worth taking note of...

- https://slate.com/business/2019/11/e...e-for-all.html

The first words after the headline are "and that's ok"

[PwrdOn]

To be honest I dont know much about current Mitch. I have to do more research. My anger at him comes from his constant support of Trump and Bevin. And His bad voting history on Gay rights and his harsh anti abortion stance.

I have been doing more reseach on differant political figures and watching more news programs. I watch meet the press, cnn, and even fox news. I want to be as informed as I can be before I vote next ear. I wasnt always involved in politics and didnt really care. I didnt care when I was younger and then I was in prison so ther was no point.

Then I was told by my caseworker in my halfway house that as felon i couldnt vote. That turned out to be her telling the men at the house they were not allowed to vote if she found out they wernt voting for Clinton.

The only thing you need to know about the GOP is that their one and only interest is preserving the wealth and power of the plutocrat class, everything else they say or do is just deflection. Now if you think that one day you'll be a billionaire yourself and want to be able to party on yachts and pass money to your brood of entitled brats without paying for the public services that helped you get to where you are, then by all means vote for Republicans. Otherwise, you're just shooting yourself in the foot.

And yes, in many respects the Democrats aren't much better, but they are better.

[numberthirty]

The first words after the headline are "and that's ok"

In that writer's opinion, sure.

Meanwhile, the fact of it is that today's move won't exactly get more trust out of anyone that's left of "Actual Center".