All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[babyblob]

Here is some cool, new on the Corona Sports front. Nba players are donated money to hourly workers effected by layoffs.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/13/us/nb...rnd/index.html

[Jack Dracula]

I don't think it's necessarily true that people who support the republican candidate are racist, sexist, or homophobes. It can simply be a matter of fiscally conservative people who frankly want to pay less in taxes and protect their assets. I'm sure there are plenty of seniors who may be apathetic or even against some of Trumps retoric but still prioritize their retirement nest egg.

Except the idea that the Republican party supports fiscally conservative policies is obviously a fallacy. I think in most cases anyone touting that as their reason for supporting the GOP is only saying it to cover up their actual reasons which they may not be comfortable saying out loud.

[XPac]

Except the idea that the Republican party supports fiscally conservative policies is obviously a fallacy. I think in most cases anyone touting that as their reason for supporting the GOP is only saying it to cover up their actual reasons which they may not be comfortable saying out loud.

If it's at least fiscally conservative to the point where you're likely going to pay less taxes, that's probably good enough.

I think certain issues like abortion, illegal immigration, and gay marriage don't really effect a lot of americans on a day to day level. I think many people who end up voting red may (or may not) sympathize with people who are effected by those issues... but not necessarily to the point where it's a priority when you're voting. But that's not necessarily the same thing as actually agreeing with Trump on those issues.

In a 2 party system, it's almost inevitable that people in either party will end up voting for a candidate they don't necessarily agree with or even like. I know PLENTY of people personally who weren't fans of either Trump or Hillary back in 2016. Voting becomes less about agreeing with what that person stands for and more about choosing between the lesser of what they perceive as 2 evils.

If Biden wins the nomination (and it looks like he will) I know quite a few people who have spent weeks bashing Biden who will almost certainly end up voting for him in November. Point of the story being you can only read so much into who a person votes for in a two party system. It's not that black and white.

[Malvolio]

In a two party system like ours, when one votes third party or refuses to vote at all, what that person is really saying is, "Whatever the rest of you decide, I'm cool with it." Because the truth is, only one of two things will happen in November: Donald Trump will be reelected, or the Democratic nominee will be elected. That's it. No third party candidate has the necessary foundation to get an electoral victory, and even if the majority of Americans decide not to vote, you can't put "None of the Above" into office.

[XPac]

In a two party system like ours, when one votes third party or refuses to vote at all, what that person is really saying is, "Whatever the rest of you decide, I'm cool with it." Because the truth is, only one of two things will happen in November: Donald Trump will be reelected, or the Democratic nominee will be elected. That's it. No third party candidate has the necessary foundation to get an electoral victory, and even if the majority of Americans decide not to vote, you can't put "None of the Above" into office.

I'm probably in the minority here, but I actually don't mind a 2 party system. I fully acknowledge the downsides... but overall I appreciate the relative stability it brings. Either side winning means it's not that different... but it's also relatively speaking not that bad compared to what we previously had. Nothing will drastically change for the better... but nothing will drastically change for the worse.

To me at least, it's a bit more preferable to the chaos we get in the more diverse political system of other countries. And yes, I fully acknowledge that's easy for me to say as a guy with a roof over my head and food on the table. A person more disadvantaged than me understandably might feel less comfortable championing the status quo.

[TheDarman]

I can't blame that one on Russia though. If Bidden forgets the day of the week

I did debate to get over my fear of public speaking and it was difficult not to mix things up, especially the day of the week when I had been on school break.

what he's running for,

He knows what he is running for. Again, even to this day, I have trouble not letting my mouth get ahead of my brain and find myself misspeaking, particularly in large crowds and when I did events without prepared speeches.

and mixes up his wife and sister then he's going to get hammered in an election.

This was something that continues to circulate despite being taken completely out of context. They went into the stage together, on opposite sides of him then what they ultimately ended up on. This isn’t even a stutter thing (like we all know he has). This is a “could happen to anyone” moment in politics. Besides, I thought people hated the polish of establishment politicians and wanted ones that made real mistakes and acted less like an ideal person and more like a regular person. Well, there you go.

There's no sugar coating that at this point in the race. Frankly I'm MORE suprised that he's not getting hammered by it quite as hard as he is.

Nah. It’s making a big deal out of things that are way more symptomatic of people with a public speaking exacerbated stutter. Any unbiased individual who can look at the key symptoms and how much is needed to establish even Mild Cognitive Impairment would tell you that Biden would be acting way worse than he is and with nowhere near the amount of awareness that he has over his mistakes to make fairly immediate corrections about them.

Bernie I think is just that nice a guy. Maybe almost too nice for his own good, at least in the context of running for office.

Yeah. He’s so nice that he is staying in a race that is mathematically going to be eliminated from on Tuesday. Look, I had a lot of concerns about Biden—and still do about the way he puts his foot in his mouth—but those things aren’t emblematic of the problems that people insist are the root cause. I always knew Biden had a habit of this, even back to 2008 when he ran against Obama. But Sanders is probably right to keep his campaign facts focused. And if Biden is such an awful candidate, you don’t need to exaggerate or “dig deeper” to find something wrong.

[babyblob]

In a two party system like ours, when one votes third party or refuses to vote at all, what that person is really saying is, "Whatever the rest of you decide, I'm cool with it." Because the truth is, only one of two things will happen in November: Donald Trump will be reelected, or the Democratic nominee will be elected. That's it. No third party candidate has the necessary foundation to get an electoral victory, and even if the majority of Americans decide not to vote, you can't put "None of the Above" into office.

A two party system is not perfect. But do we really want a system where there are 50 parties. Think of all the confusion and misinformation from just two parties. What would it be like if we had four or five?

[Jack Dracula]

I'm probably in the minority here, but I actually don't mind a 2 party system. I fully acknowledge the downsides... but overall I appreciate the relative stability it brings. Either side winning means it's not that different... but it's also relatively speaking not that bad compared to what we previously had. Nothing will drastically change for the better... but nothing will drastically change for the worse.

To me at least, it's a bit more preferable to the chaos we get in the more diverse political system of other countries. And yes, I fully acknowledge that's easy for me to say as a guy with a roof over my head and food on the table. A person more disadvantaged than me understandably might feel less comfortable with the status quo.

Does actually bring much stability though? It may seem stable to certain economic, regional and racial demographics but the system has deserted everyone else. Often these are the most vulnerable in our society and suffer so that the rest can live in relative stability.
The constant political gaming makes their lives worse.

[XPac]

I did debate to get over my fear of public speaking and it was difficult not to mix things up, especially the day of the week when I had been on school break.



He knows what he is running for. Again, even to this day, I have trouble not letting my mouth get ahead of my brain and find myself misspeaking, particularly in large crowds and when I did events without prepared speeches.



This was something that continues to circulate despite being taken completely out of context. They went into the stage together, on opposite sides of him then what they ultimately ended up on. This isn’t even a stutter thing (like we all know he has). This is a “could happen to anyone” moment in politics. Besides, I thought people hated the polish of establishment politicians and wanted ones that made real mistakes and acted less like an ideal person and more like a regular person. Well, there you go.



Nah. It’s making a big deal out of things that are way more symptomatic of people with a public speaking exacerbated stutter. Any unbiased individual who can look at the key symptoms and how much is needed to establish even Mild Cognitive Impairment would tell you that Biden would be acting way worse than he is and with nowhere near the amount of awareness that he has over his mistakes to make fairly immediate corrections about them.



Yeah. He’s so nice that he is staying in a race that is mathematically going to be eliminated from on Tuesday. Look, I had a lot of concerns about Biden—and still do about the way he puts his foot in his mouth—but those things aren’t emblematic of the problems that people insist are the root cause. I always knew Biden had a habit of this, even back to 2008 when he ran against Obama. But Sanders is probably right to keep his campaign facts focused. And if Biden is such an awful candidate, you don’t need to exaggerate or “dig deeper” to find something wrong.

As a former Senator and VP he's been speaking in public for a very very long time without making these sort of mistakes. This isn't a member of the debate club in school. At his level, running for the office in the country he can't constantly be making those sort of mistakes without consequence. Especially if he wasn't making those sort of mistakes with anywhere near the frequency he did in the past. His speaking skills, if not his mental state, has declined to a degree. Or at least that's a fair perception to make given what we've seen. Point being, it's fair game. This is a presidential election, and if Trump or Bernie made the same mistakes in the same manner they would be called on it too.

But he can put those fears to rest one way or the other in the next debate with Bernie. If he can pull that off and even do NOT terrible, it'll go a long ways towards convicning people the democrats haven't made a huge mistake.

[Jack Dracula]

A two party system is not perfect. But do we really want a system where there are 50 parties. Think of all the confusion and misinformation from just two parties. What would it be like if we had four or five?

Four or five sounds likely. To some extent it's what we actually have when you consider the current situation.

At times I've wondered if the founders originally intended a multi-party system to emerge?

[XPac]

Does actually bring much stability though? It may seem stable to certain economic, regional and racial demographics but the system has deserted everyone else. Often these are the most vulnerable in our society and suffer so that the rest can live in relative stability.
The constant political gaming makes their lives worse.

While that's certainly happening, I'm not sure the same can't be said to a large extent by pretty much any political system on the planet that's anywhere near as large and diverse as ours.

[ed2962]

I'm probably in the minority here, but I actually don't mind a 2 party system. I fully acknowledge the downsides... but overall I appreciate the relative stability it brings. Either side winning means it's not that different... but it's also relatively speaking not that bad compared to what we previously had. Nothing will drastically change for the better... but nothing will drastically change for the worse.

To me at least, it's a bit more preferable to the chaos we get in the more diverse political system of other countries. And yes, I fully acknowledge that's easy for me to say as a guy with a roof over my head and food on the table. A person more disadvantaged than me understandably might feel less comfortable championing the status quo.

Which was?

[jetengine]

Which was?

A parliment and a monarch?

[XPac]

Which was?

What I meant was if a republican candidates beats a democratic incumbant or vice vesa, things won't be that different. You're to a large extent getting more of the same. And there's an inherent stability in that.

For all the devisiness we have in the country, democrats and republicans in large part are relatively speaking on the same page when you look at the overall political spectrum. It's not so much an issue of liberals and conservatives, so much as democrats are conservative and republicans are slightly more conversative.

[PaulBullion]

The timing of that would probably be a bit off though. Knocking bidden just means more support for Bernie (or Gabbard I guess) in theory. They're still in the game.

I think the time to try something like that would be after Bernie drops from the election (which likely will happen if Biden doesn't self destruct after their first debate). That's where some may decide to not bother choosing between the lesser of 2 evils (not that I look at them in that way... just saying I believe that's how some disillusioned voters might).

Why would the timing be off? Russian bots supported Sanders against Clinton in 2016, they're doing it again this year because they think he is the weakest opponent of the likely candidates in the Democratic primaries. That's been established.