All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[The Cool Thatguy]

Like many people, I'm still traumatized from 2016.

And we can't rule out a Trump win. My paranoia won't allow me too.

Same.

God, I hate how that if it weren't for COVID, Trump would likely be heading towards an easy win. And still might despite his BS

[Celgress]

It really should just be the popular vote. I mean, why is it not the majority of americans who get to decide who their president is? It's absurd and it has cost us dearly several times.

Just because we now look back fondly on the "quiet dignity" of Dubya, doesn't mean he was a good president who didn't win a stolen election.

If republicans want to win, maybe they should run on policies that appeal to more voters! And if you can't win that way, maybe your politics are outmoded. What a fucking wild idea!

While we're at it, lets do away with gerrymandering districts. Just cut that **** out completely.

The reason the Electoral College was created is so one or two big cities could not disenfranchise the countryside, which made sense when America was a mainly rural nation not so much now.

Our problem is that many career politicians hold the Founding Fathers in such reverence they can't bring themselves to change anything the guys did forgetting that much has changed since the 18th Century.

As an aside. I can't take anyone seriously who talks about Dubya in such terms (not you). "Quiet dignity" my ass. The guy was a war criminal. His decisions destroyed millions of lives, mainly innocent Iraqis.

[Mister Mets]

It really should just be the popular vote. I mean, why is it not the majority of americans who get to decide who their president is? It's absurd and it has cost us dearly several times.

Just because we now look back fondly on the "quiet dignity" of Dubya, doesn't mean he was a good president who didn't win a stolen election.

If republicans want to win, maybe they should run on policies that appeal to more voters! And if you can't win that way, maybe your politics are outmoded. What a fucking wild idea!

While we're at it, lets do away with gerrymandering districts. Just cut that **** out completely.

The 2000 election wasn't stolen. The electoral college was the established rules.

It's also not immediately clear that if we did away with the electoral college that the candidates who won that way wouldn't be able to win under the new rules with different campaigning/ strategy.

I'll note that I can appreciate the wisdom of switching to a presidential popular vote, but there are significant hurdles in getting the popular vote from fifty different jurisdictions, that have their own regulations (at what point is someone allowed to vote? what third party presidential candidates are allowed on the ballot?) There are potential fixes to all of this, including a nationalization of voting procedures and regulations, but it can be messy.

The biggest potential problem is what happens when there's a major third party candidate. In 1992, Bill Clinton won the popular vote with 43 percent. His dominance of the electoral college helped him have more credibility.

As for gerrymandering, I think the effects have been greatly exaggerated, but it is bad policy to allow legislators to choose their constituents. One of my concerns is the lack of clearly defined alternatives. The main idea is to give it to an independent body, although this could easily be abused, if partisan hacks are given control adding a veneer of respectability without any potential pushback from voters. We really need to come up with some standards about how districts should be formed, so that we can determine if the independent body is doing its job. In the political discussions on this, I don't see much consideration of what those standards should be.

[The Chou Lives]

The reason the Electoral College was created is so one or two big cities could not disenfranchise the countryside, which made sense when America was a mainly rural nation not so much now.

Our problem is that many career politicians hold the Founding Fathers in such reverence they can't bring themselves to change anything the guys did forgetting that much has changed since the 18th Century.

As an aside. I can't take anyone seriously who talks about Dubya in such terms (not you). "Quiet dignity" my ass. The guy was a war criminal. His decisions destroyed millions of lives, mainly innocent Iraqis.

Yeah the original founding fathers are nothing like the current stuff. Women could not vote, weed was legal, the majority were slave owners/farming barons and how they became America.

America was due to our ancestors being so pushed off at a government that abused power over them, treating them stupid, and taxing them.

Hell the Trump tariffs is the same damn thing as what a George 3 did then. Yet these people are too ignorant or uncaring to look this **** up.

[Celgress]

Same.

God, I hate how that if it weren't for COVID, Trump would likely be heading towards an easy win. And still might despite his BS

If Trump does win, which I still predict will happen, I think "Hunter Biden's Laptop" will have played a decisive role by tipping enough independents his way and supercharging his base. It is Weiner all over again.

[ChangingStation]

If Trump does win, which I still predict will happen, I think "Hunter Biden's Laptop" will have played a decisive role by tipping enough independents his way and supercharging his base. It is Weiner all over again.

Yeah. Except of course that scandal happened a little later, right now, they've played their hand a little early, (as in before the last Debate instead of the two week interval), combined with the Impeachment and Biden's pre-existing damaged reputation, scepticism is going to be higher.

It could work, make no mistake, but there was a perfect storm to rely on last time.

[PaulBullion]

Here's the obvious problems with the way you are framing this...

- Not wanting the most corrupt version of things does not mean having to accept a less corrupt version of thing as something workable. It isn't.

- "Perfection..." is usually what folks haul out when they are trying to avoid actually discussing just how much a less corrupt Democratic Party could get done if they made an even slight move towards being better public servants. No one is saying "I Would Like Perfection..." That said, "I Would Like A More Upright Democratic Party That Is Doing More To Look Out For John/Jane Public..." is something that it is always odd to see people just run from discussing.

What you are doing, we call "putting lipstick on a purity pig" here in my neck of the woods.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

It's also not immediately clear that if we did away with the electoral college that the candidates who won that way wouldn't be able to win under the new rules with different campaigning/ strategy.

Getting rid of the Electoral College isn't about Trump-proofing the election system. It's about fairness and integrity.

A candidate like Trump might well have won the popular vote with a different kind of campaign in the same way right-wingers like Narendra Modi in India won the popular vote, or Ronald Reagan won the popular vote both times in the '80s with large margins, or the way that Brexit won the popular vote in 2016 referendum. The fact however is that the Republican Party's policies have consistently failed to win a significant part of the popular vote for the last 20 years.

In the case of George W. Bush, he lost the popular vote, and his electoral college win was decided by the SCOTUS by a 5-4 Conservative Partisan judiciary who voted to halt the recount. It's likely if that recount went ahead, Gore might have won the election anyway. Alternatively the recount went ahead and Bush won anyway. As such it's fair to characterize it as a stolen election because the decision wasn't decided fairly. In 2004, George W. Bush won the popular vote with a thin majority over John Kerry compared to the larger margins which Obama won. He edged out at 62mn votes ahead of Kerry's 59mn votes.

[Celgress]

Yeah. Except of course that scandal happened a little later, right now, they've played their hand a little early, (as in before the last Debate instead of the two week interval), combined with the Impeachment and Biden's pre-existing damaged reputation, scepticism is going to be higher.

It could work, make no mistake, but there was a perfect storm to rely on last time.

We'll see. I think the polls are grossly underestimating Trump's support, here's why -

1.) Frankly, many people are ashamed to admit they support him to pollsters. These are the so-called "shy Trump supporters".

2.) Another segment of Trump supporters greatly distrust the "Media" so they won't talk to pollsters.

3.) Another segment of Trump supporters are trolls who enjoying f'ing with pollsters so they claim they support Biden.

4.) "Hunter's Laptop" Effect

Edit - Once my model predicts this election correctly We plan on selling it to the highest bidder. I'm very excited as this will be the sixth election it has correctly prediction (once Trump wins).

[ChangingStation]

We'll see. I think the polls are grossly underestimating Trump's support, here's why -

1.) Frankly, many people are ashamed to admit they support him to pollsters. These are the so-called "shy Trump supporters".

2.) Another segment of Trump supporters greatly distrust the "Media" so they won't talk to pollsters.

3.) Another segment of Trump supporters are trolls who enjoying f'ing with pollsters so they claim they support Biden.

4.) "Hunter's Laptop" Effect

Of course you're right. Though I should note that shy Trumpers are just as likely to answer honestly online polls due to anomynity.

[Celgress]

Of course you're right. Though I should note that shy Trumpers are just as likely to answer honestly online polls due to anomynity.

True, online polls and questionnaires are two of the methods by which I'm getting the raw data for my model. I can't reveal all of my methods here because the university where I work has invested a great deal of capital in my model and myself since the 2016 General Election (when I proved how effective it is). I don't want to jeopardize my research grants.

[ChangingStation]

True, online polls and questionnaires are two of the methods by which I'm getting the raw data for my model.

I feel I should point out that only a comparitive few pollsters are trustworthy. Your Data Model is going to have to be carefully selected from those that are open about the questions asked. How many were answered. Ect. Ect.

And the problem with Trafalgar's method to find shy Trumpers for example is that the asking about neighbours can just as easily be used to air paranoia about neighbours.

[Celgress]

I feel I should point out that only a comparitive few pollsters are trustworthy. Your Data Model is going to have to be carefully selected from those that are open about the questions asked. How many were answered. Ect. Ect.

Indeed, I'm aware of this but as I wrote that's only a small part of my methodology. After the election, I'll be more willing to share.

[Username taken]

If Trump does win, which I still predict will happen, I think "Hunter Biden's Laptop" will have played a decisive role by tipping enough independents his way and supercharging his base. It is Weiner all over again.

I don't think the laptop will play any role at all.

If anything, it's making Biden sound like a very kind and loving father.

The story falls apart even further because folks that pushed this story can't even defend it. It seems to be backfiring more than anything else.

[ChangingStation]

I don't think the laptop will play any role at all.

If anything, it's making Biden sound like a very kind and loving father.

The story falls apart even further because folks that pushed this story can't even defend it. It seems to be backfiring more than anything else.

What makes you say that?