This Post Contains No Artificial Intelligence. It Contains No Human Intelligence Either.
This Post Contains No Artificial Intelligence. It Contains No Human Intelligence Either.
She can want to run all she wants.
She'll be running in quicksand.
I think you called it right there. No one with a shred of common sense thinks this idiot will ever be President, but it's possible that she could throw a wrench into the next election.
That being said, I never thought an idiot like Trump could get elected, and yet here we are....
That doesn't make sense with her previous record.
She kept a relatively low profile during her first two years in the Senate, largely avoiding the national media.
It seems to me that she's not taking the steps that a Senator running for President would take. She didn't spend 2020 auditioning to be Joe Biden's running mate. She doesn't have a book deal. She's not endorsing candidates. From my understanding, she's not making many notable media appearances, or seeking out alternate media. Any Sunday morning or late night show would be happy to book her, as would centrist podcasts.
Whatever her agenda is, she's not acting like someone prepping a presidential run.
Sincerely,
Thomas Mets
Trump won Republican voters over by defending and doubling down on his racism when he spoke.
Sinema infuriates everyone whenever she actually does go to a microphone, and her theatrics and hypocrisy on votes on policies that both parties' voters support, like a minimum wage increase, will not sway anyone to come under her banner. Nobody is going to rally to her. Her one point of demographic win is she's bisexual, and that's gonna alienate anyone who leans right.
She will have all the influence of Tulsi F***ing Gabbard, except that if she's lucky, Sinema will parlay any loss forthcoming in 2024, be it presidential race or Senate race into a cable news gig or slotting herself in on The View.
X-Books Forum Mutant Tracker/FAQ- Updated every Tuesday.
https://www.latimes.com/california/s...d-gavin-newsom
Thank you Governor Newsom for denying the parole of Sirhan Sirhan, who has still neither shown remorse nor taken responsibility for his actions.
Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday refused to parole the man convicted of gunning down Robert F. Kennedy in Los Angeles, a brazen assassination of a presidential candidate that scarred the nation and altered the course of American politics during the turbulent 1960s.
Six memers of the late Robert Kennedy family are also against the parole.
Gerrymandering does not appear to be that big a deal right now.
A look at the current congressional map suggests that it's not helping out Republicans running for the House as much as you would expect. There had been some earlier concerns that Republicans might be able to take back the House just be gerrymandering, but this doesn't seem to match current plans. I'll note that this was about gerrymandering as a net advantage. There may be states where Republicans make small gains, but that can be made up by Democrats gerrymandering.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021...stricting.html
I do think the bill has problems. It is an effort to take away local control from elections, when they haven't really made the case for that.There are a few reasons why things didn’t work out as progressive pessimists had feared. One is that — contrary to partisan stereotypes — Democratic trifectas have arguably mustered more ruthless party discipline in redistricting than Republicans have. Illinois, Oregon, and New York have all pursued aggressive partisan gerrymanders that have subordinated the job security of some incumbents to maximizing the overall number of Democratic-leaning seats. By contrast, Texas Republicans took the opposite approach, opting to fortify their incumbents’ hold on power, at the cost of leaving 13 Democratic-leaning seats on the map. Meanwhile, many red states have no room to improve on existing gerrymanders.
To be sure, blue states have probably left more gerrymander-able seats on the table than red ones, simply because some of the nation’s most Democratic states have outsourced redistricting authority to independent commissions. Fortunately for Team Blue, California’s nonpartisan commission is poised to finalize a quite pro-Democratic map. As of this writing, California’s House map is likely to feature 44 seats to the left of the country, and eight to its right. If Democrats boasted full control over California redistricting, they probably could have produced a 50-to-2 Democratic gerrymander. But still, not a bad haul.
Two major provisions are establishing Election Day as a federal holiday, and swapping gerrymandering with independent commissions. I'll repeat what I've said on those.
The effort to make Election Day a national holiday seems to be about more voters choosing whether a Republican or Democrat represents them in office, rather than which individual represents them in office. Most elections are not decided in November, but in the primaries, which can have varying dates (some states will have one primary; others may have multiple rounds.) There are also various individuals who would prefer having low-turnout primaries, so this push seems self-serving. If you want more people choosing their next members of Congress, we should make it easier to vote in primaries. If your main concern is about making it easy to vote in November, it's probably more about perceived partisan advantage, and all other arguments are pretext.
I think the idea that legislatures get to choose their voters is a highly flawed one, but I am suspicious of the lack of clear directives for independent commissions. The main response is to get an independent commission, but there's little consideration about what criteria they should be judged by, to make sure that any independent commissions are a backdoor for partisans to gerrymander with a veneer of respectability. There can be havoc with an unelected group interpreting vague statutes, especially when reasonable people may want different outcomes and not realize there's any debate about what the final map should like. One person might want to keep communities of interest together, while another might want to increase the number of swing seats, and another might want to have the composition in the legislature reflect the outcome of the vote. Obviously partisans want to maximize their own vote, although that gets complicated as district populations change. Republicans have an advantage from geographic sorting, so Democrats need gerrymandering more than Republicans do, or they need pressure independent commissions to make decisions that favor them.
Sincerely,
Thomas Mets
If you're talking about the orange guy, he's been a player in politics for a while. He had a lot of media attention, and helped out Republicans by sandbagging Pat Buchanan's Reform party bid in 2000.
I would guess Sinema's more informed on issues than Trump, but she doesn't seem to be doing anything to get her views out to America voters.
Sincerely,
Thomas Mets
X-Books Forum Mutant Tracker/FAQ- Updated every Tuesday.