The General 'Murican Politics Thread

[Meta77]

Doubt popular vote will ever go through.  that's why electoral was set up. To prevent states like California and New York deciding how they think the nation should run. Correct?

[Candescence]

The electoral college frankly has its own ridiculous issues that make that a moot point, though. Using the national popular vote is a better metric at this point.

[Tani Coyote]

1 hour ago, Meta77 said:

Doubt popular vote will ever go through.  that's why electoral was set up. To prevent states like California and New York deciding how they think the nation should run. Correct?

Because Florida and Pennsylvania deciding the winner is so much better.

And no. The Electoral College was set up to help slave owners. They wanted to have an impact on the Presidency. A popular vote would have basically erased the political power of the South. The three-fifths compromise and Electoral College worked together so Southern slavers could have their cake and eat it too, harvesting a political advantage from their large non-white populations without giving them a say in things. The Senate was set up to help small states.

Popular vote is most likely coming. Even red states are getting on board. Even some swing states are.

And the best thing about this? Even conservative pundits think it's a good idea increasingly. Florida is shifting blue, and if the Electoral College rules continue, the GOP is basically guaranteed to never win another damned election. Plus a popular vote would mobilize conservative voters in blue states.

The popular vote is ultimately a net benefit for the health of American democracy. This focus on states is frankly 19th century nonsense. It's about parties now.

And, to conclude, the idea it helps small states is hilariously inaccurate. On paper, yes, it gives more weight to small states. But in practice, most small states lean one way or the other, so candidates don't care what they think. They're hitting up Nevada, Arizona, Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, etc. They don't care about Delaware or North Dakota or Wyoming.

[Harkofthewaa]

2 hours ago, Meta77 said:

Doubt popular vote will ever go through.  that's why electoral was set up. To prevent states like California and New York deciding how they think the nation should run. Correct?

Yeah, about how like Chicago decides what goes here in Illinois.

[Meta77]

3 hours ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

Because Florida and Pennsylvania deciding the winner is so much better.

And no. The Electoral College was set up to help slave owners. They wanted to have an impact on the Presidency. A popular vote would have basically erased the political power of the South. The three-fifths compromise and Electoral College worked together so Southern slavers could have their cake and eat it too, harvesting a political advantage from their large non-white populations without giving them a say in things. The Senate was set up to help small states.

Popular vote is most likely coming. Even red states are getting on board. Even some swing states are.

And the best thing about this? Even conservative pundits think it's a good idea increasingly. Florida is shifting blue, and if the Electoral College rules continue, the GOP is basically guaranteed to never win another damned election. Plus a popular vote would mobilize conservative voters in blue states.

The popular vote is ultimately a net benefit for the health of American democracy. This focus on states is frankly 19th century nonsense. It's about parties now.

And, to conclude, the idea it helps small states is hilariously inaccurate. On paper, yes, it gives more weight to small states. But in practice, most small states lean one way or the other, so candidates don't care what they think. They're hitting up Nevada, Arizona, Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, etc. They don't care about Delaware or North Dakota or Wyoming.

Interesting.Do you have an article stating it was to help slave owners. A legit soure. I tried to wiki article links but i have not read anything about it being set up for slave owners.

[Tani Coyote]

1 hour ago, Meta77 said:

Interesting.Do you have an article stating it was to help slave owners. A legit soure. I tried to wiki article links but i have not read anything about it being set up for slave owners.

http://time.com/4558510/electoral-college-history-slavery/

Here you go. A national popular vote was actually proposed at the Philadelphia convention. James Madison, a Virginian (Virginia being a slave state and arguably the slave state), was quick to recognize the South would never accept that because it would mean the North's expansive suffrage would let them win every race. Extra noteworthy: Madison actually liked the idea of a popular vote, but he understood it was impractical.

This piece of history is often lost by the right and left alike. The three-fifths compromise, for example, is often focused on as a racist clause (which it appears as at face value, but let's consider the context I'm about to describe), rather than the fact it diluted the power of the South. The best possible thing we could have done as a country would have been to not count slaves at all for representation, only free citizens, so the South would be marginalized. But had we done that, there's no way in Hell they would have ratified the Constitution.

Our first several decades of a country were spent kowtowing to slaveholders because we didn't want a civil war. The Electoral College and the three-fifths compromise are as much part of this legacy as is the half free, half slave convention.

[Candescence]

While you should never take polls for granted, this is pretty big:

 

The midterms are gonna be fun as hell, no matter who wins.

[Tani Coyote]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/17/politics/trump-economy-poll/index.html

Something to consider going beyond the midterms.

Trump has broken another strong trend: despite a roaring economy, he is deeply unpopular. People are not giving the GOP credit for the economy's performance, even though historically the ruling Party and President are given credit no matter what.

Let's unpack this a little: if Trump and the GOP are looking at bad prospects with a booming economy, just picture what happens if it busts in the next two years. He won't just be a one term President... the GOP will end up getting absolutely massacred at the polls. If the Democrats do well, really well, this year, there's actually a chance they could come out of 2020 with a sixty seat majority in the Senate. It is steadily becoming apparent Trump is dragging the GOP down among median voters.

Maybe Trump is doing some unintentional good by breaking shit after all. We're seeing Democrats make serious ground in the South. We're seeing Democrats stop taking their Great Lakes constituents for granted. We're seeing Democrats revisit economic populism as alternative voices (ranging from socialists to left wing gun owners) gain prominence in the party. We're seeing the national popular vote gain serious steam. We're seeing the GOP's credibility get flash fried, and as a cherry on top of it all, he's broken the general assumption that the President deserves credit/blame for the economy.

He may in fact make America great again, but it's not gonna be in the way he expected.

[Patticus]

Meanwhile, Trump is busily disregarding protocol on FISA

The president of law and order, unless he's the subject of an investigation by the law, in which case he's just fine with abusing his power to undermine it for his own personal gain. Selectively declassifying extremely sensitive documents, endangering intelligence sources and methods... One wonders how many vitriolic tweets he might've dispatched into the ether had Obama behaved this way?

[Tani Coyote]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/18/politics/kavanaugh-hearing/index.html

Kavanaugh hearing has hit a snag: Ford is apparently not responding to requests to appear before the committee.

John Cornyn said it was "telling." You know, the usual implication that it's a lie.

Susan Collins finds the decision not to appear strange, saying that if Ford has a story, she needs to be telling it.

Honestly, Collins should probably be the one trying to contact Ford instead of Chuck Grassley. Her profile as a supporter of women's issues is pretty solid.

[Patticus]

I can only assume that Ford has received a barrage of death and rape threats since going public, and that those, combined with reliving the trauma of the assault, may have been enough to scare her into hiding.

[Tani Coyote]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/20/politics/christine-blasey-ford-brett-kavanaugh-testimony/index.html

Ford has indeed received plenty of death threats, and her lawyers have stated she wants to testify, but only after her safety is assured. They feel the Monday deadline is arbitrary.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/19/politics/kavanaugh-ford-grassley-judiciary-committee-supreme-court/index.html

All the same, Grassley has the deadline to say whether she'll appear or not set to this Friday.

It's going to be a tense few days as this situation develops.

Mitch McConnell's certainty that Kavanaugh will be confirmed, however, kind of illustrates this is all in bad faith. They're more interested in putting a conservative on the bench than anything else.

Meanwhile, Lindsey Graham is playing pot and kettle, saying this all about delaying the confirmation vote until after the midterms... even though we know his position is to hurry things up before the midterms.

How hard would it be to just toss Kavanaugh out and pick another conservative? It's better than picking a nominee who's REALLY going to piss people off and dramatically increase the risk of Court packing in the future. All eyes will be on Chief Justice John Roberts after this appointment... if he is not careful to side with liberals frequently, he can expect 2 new friends to be sitting next to him as early as 2021.

[8ther]

1 hour ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

How hard would it be to just toss Kavanaugh out and pick another conservative? It's better than picking a nominee who's REALLY going to piss people off and dramatically increase the risk of Court packing in the future. All eyes will be on Chief Justice John Roberts after this appointment... if he is not careful to side with liberals frequently, he can expect 2 new friends to be sitting next to him as early as 2021.

Meaning?

[Tani Coyote]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/20/politics/kavanaugh-confirmation-chances-analysis/index.html

Things are heating up. Ford's lawyers have said she will testify after all, with or without an FBI investigation.

There's no word on if she would testify on Monday, but it's possible Grassley will move the hearing back a few days so as to let her speak.

It's still very possible Kavanaugh will be squeezed through, though if he isn't, I highly expect Trump is already looking over another possible candidate.

What makes this fun: it's kind of ambiguous whether or not Kennedy can withdraw his resignation. And Kennedy handpicked Kavanaugh as his successor. So that kind of ties Trump's hands a little there, as that could lead into a legal battle.

Quote

Meaning?

That a Democratic President and Congress, assuming they come to power in 2020, could easily add one or two seats to the Supreme Court and fill them with liberal judges.

With how openly conservatives are bragging about controlling the Court, they better hope Democrats don't gain a backbone and decide to play dirty right back.

It honestly might be a better idea at this point to do as some European countries do and arrange it so the Supreme Court is half picked by the minority party, half by the majority party. May as well cast off the facade of being apolitical at this point.

The only thing precluding a Democratic seizure of the Court would be the filibuster, which has seen better days. I would not be surprised if the next change in power sees the filibuster get rolled back a little.

[Candescence]

This is also a pretty big reason why the GOP are stuck between a rock and a hard place on this one.

While there's plenty of conservative justices that they could pick, the GOP want Kavanaugh because he would be most likely to protect Trump and Kennedy essentially hand-picked him, and the whole effort is symbolic, in a way - if the Democrats successfully derail what should be an otherwise straightforward nomination process and delay until the midterms, the evangelicals believe it'll make it harder for the GOP to retain control of the Senate due to conservative voters giving up on the GOP altogether and staying home. Said evangelicals are already frustrated as it is that not only did the GOP fall right into a nasty bind, the longer this develops and the more opportunities for Ford and the Dems to solidify the case against Kavanaugh, the more perilous it becomes for more marginal GOP senators to vote for his nomination and more justified Dem senators in more red-leaning states are in voting against him.

[Tani Coyote]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/politics/donald-trump-brett-kavanaugh-accuser-tweets/index.html

Good things really can't last forever. After Trump took a moderate tone for a few days with the Ford allegations, he has gone full on pig as usual. He has said that obviously, if the allegations were true, they would have been reported when they happened, and is requesting Ford reveal the time, date, and place that such a filing was made with law enforcement.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/politics/susan-collins-kavanaugh-accuser-trump/index.html

Moderate GOP Senator Susan Collins said the comments were inappropriate, wrong, and appalling.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/politics/cory-booker-brett-kavanaugh-sexual-assault-allegations/index.html

Desperate to silence criticism, the GOP has latched onto Cory Booker's groping incident from when he was a teenager as an example of liberal hypocrisy.

...except Booker admits to the incident... apologizes for it... says it helped him grow a person when he gained a new perspective of consent... and is up for election every 6 years if people don't believe his remorse is genuine.

Kind of different from what's going on with Kavanaugh.

[Tani Coyote]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/politics/kavanaugh-ford-senate-judiciary-hearing/index.html

Okay, semi-breaking news.

Ford has until 10 PM EST tonight to reach an agreement for her testimony, or else the committee vote will be held on Monday.

The Senate has proposed a hearing on next Wednesday, which Ford's legal team has yet to respond to.

Ford's legal team has said there's no way Ford could testify before next Thursday, so... this will be a really tense couple of hours.

[Tani Coyote]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/politics/kavanaugh-ford-senate-judiciary-hearing/index.html

Another nailbiter. Chuck Grassley has extended the deadline for Ford to reach an agreement to testify.

Currently there's a lot of disagreement on whether an outside counsel would be used to question Ford, which the GOP is arguing would depoliticize the process, but which Democrats are arguing will make it so GOP Senators don't need to talk to Ford themselves. Another issue is Ford's request Kavanaugh not be in the room with her.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/politics/texas-senate-debate-ted-cruz-beto-orourke/index.html

Ted Cruz and Beto O'Rourke had their first debate. At one point, O'Rourke roasted Cruz for heading off to Iowa months after being sworn in to campaign for the Presidency, whereas Beto himself has campaigned in every county in Texas to be a cross-cutting candidate.

The end of the debate kind of shows what a shithead Cruz is, though. Each candidate was asked to say something nice about each other. Beto commended Ted Cruz for giving up time with his family to be a public servant and fight for what he believes in. Cruz... brought up Bernie Sanders, and said Beto is just Sanders in his unwavering commitment to higher taxes and socialism. Beto could only respond, "True to form."

At one point, Cruz said he's a Republican because the GOP was backing Civil Rights when Democrats weren't. He's desperate to court the ignorant vote, clearly, using that eye roll-inducing, misleading piece of historical trivia. That and using the s-word to scare people into voting for him. Cruz went so far as to say that Martin Luther King would disagree with kneeling out of protest, because King "respected the flag." The few people still alive who actually knew King were just "lmfao what" in response.

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/09/19/beto-orourke-leads-cruz-new-poll-texas-senate-race/

Cruz' desperation is understandable. The most recent poll puts Beto ahead of him by 2 points.

https://www.caller.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/09/21/beto-cruz-debates-who-won-ted-cruz-beto-orourke-first-debate-texas-us-senate-race/1363460002/

Analysts consider Cruz the winner when it comes to style, understandable given Cruz' experience, but say Beto won on personal likeability.

https://wwmt.com/news/state/national-popular-vote-in-michigan-speaker-leonard-says-im-i-am-100-percent-opposed

Michigan's move to the popular vote has hit a snag. The GOP House majority leader has gone the "muh Constitution, muh Framers' intent" route, citing a popular vote is against the Framers' intent and Constitution, even though the Constitution says each state is free to decide how its votes are allocated. This would-be genius would do good to consider the Electoral College was originally chosen by elite state legislators, and the push for winner-take-all is actually one of the few things Andrew Jackson was good for.

Also he pulled the common conservative myth that the Electoral College exists to protect the small states. No, again, it exists because a bunch of rich white people wanted to own black people without losing power in the Presidential elections. So the Electoral College and the three-fifths compromise came into being.

In good news, the bill seems to be moving along in the Senate, and Michigan's House is a likely chamber to be flipped to the Democrats in November. So even if this jackass stops the bill from going anywhere, there's a good chance he'll become irrelevant shortly.

[Patticus]

The Framers lived in a different time, when the term "Democrat" was an epithet that implied a person was only interested in uncivilized mob rule. They also didn't want political parties, a standing army, or unregulated access to firearms, but look what happened to all of that. Their intent can only be taken so far, for better or worse, and considering how much the country has changed since their day, it would be a fool's errand to use them to fight this of all fights. But looking at the modern GOP, fool's errands seem to be their specialty...

[Tani Coyote]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/politics/kavanaugh-ford-senate-judiciary-hearing/index.html

Ford has agreed to testify next week, but the exact date still hasn't been hammered. This process is going to take a while.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/22/politics/senate-judiciary-committee-adviser-quits-kavanaugh-nomination/index.html

The Judiciary Committee's adviser, who was working to push the Kavanaugh confirmation, has resigned on the basis of - get this - sexual harassment allegations.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/22/politics/ben-and-jerrys-ice-cream-democrats-endorsement/index.html

Meanwhile, I expect another hashtag boycott of Ben & Jerry's, because they're going to create several ice cream flavors to raise funds for Democrats in tough races.

[Bowbowis]

,Now that Republicans have elected an adulterous sexual assaulter president, nearly put a child molester on the senate, and are now falling over themselves to confirm a man credibly accused of attempted rape to the Supreme Court, I think it's high time the Jesus/family values party got a new slogan.

 

"The GOP: You can put your dick wherever you want, as long as it's not in another man or a condom."

[Tani Coyote]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/22/politics/kavanaugh-ford-accuser-nomination/index.html

Ford's testimony is at risk of being dismissed because a friend of hers who was at the party does not remember Kavanaugh.

You don't need to be a freaking psych expert to realize the brain prioritizes certain memories over others. To everyone else, Kavanaugh would have been just a guy. To Ford, he would have been something else entirely. Sure enough, several other people Ford tapped said they have no memory of the party.

Again, of course they don't. I don't remember practically anything from my teenage years (except say, an experience where I was intimidated by a cop, go figure), and I'm only 25.

I expect a "whelp, no evidence, let's move forward" outcome, because that's how these cases tend to go. Even though there's countless other conservatives they could probably tap who don't have the baggage.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/21/politics/patti-davis-ronald-reagan-sexual-assault-brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford/index.html

President Reagan's daughter has come out in defense of Ford, revealing her own experience with sexual assault. Much like Ford, she does not remember the whole day clearly, just the moments that were traumatizing. She can describe those moments in vivid detail, even as everything else is a blur.

Some people (usually men, which is odd, given the rates of assault against men and women are steadily equalizing) are quick to go "how convenient" with allegations like that, but, again, that is how memory works. The brain tends to give a heavy bias towards remembering emotionally powerful moments over everything else.

As for those who go "well why didn't they come out sooner," I get the feeling they probably haven't had an experience with this issue. It is not that easy. And again, given how gendered the takes tend to be, I would pose another question: how come men don't regularly admit to abuse by their partner? It's almost like there are immense cultural pressures that make an admission hard to do.

[Bowbowis]

The sad thing is, this is one scenario where a credible allegation actually should be enough to scuttle the process.

"Innocent until proven guilty" is the standard in criminal court because we're talking about taking somebody's rights away if they're guilty. But this isn't a criminal trial. The point is not to determine guilt or innocence. The point is to determine whether this is somebody we can feel comfortable having interpret our laws for the next few decades. If you can't be like, 95% sure he's not a rapist (attempted or otherwise) the answer should be a resounding "NO"!

[Tani Coyote]

And now, the pendulum swings to the other side of the spectrum.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/23/politics/mazie-hirono-keith-ellison-cnntv/index.html

There are calls to investigate DNC Deputy Chair and Minnesota Attorney General candidate Keith Ellison for abuse against an ex-girlfriend's mother. Ellison has gone the route of suggestion allegations are politically-motivated.

How hard is it to deny allegations and say an investigation is welcome because one is innocent, rather than going the "haha they're lying to score political points" route?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/23/politics/ip-forecast/index.html

Democrats will need to rethink strategies going forward, as in spite of everything Trump has been doing, they are seeing signs of losing the Latino vote, even as they consolidate support among black and women voters.

Things have really been shaken up, as there is evidence younger voters are turning Republican and older voters are turning Democrat as well. The promised "demographic war" that the Democrats have been hoping for may not deliver results after all.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/23/politics/lindsey-graham-brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford/index.html

Lindsey Graham, the shitheel who tried to repeal Obamacare with his state block program, has already announced his vote for Kavanaugh. He says he will not be swayed and is playing the "well what about the accused" card, saying he can't stomach ruining Kavanaugh's life because of the accusation.

I guess part of spending half your life as a career politician is you forget not getting a government position isn't a "ruined" life. Kavanaugh will always have his defenders, and he can easily just go back to serving as a lower judge.

[TailsTellsTales]

39 minutes ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

Things have really been shaken up, as there is evidence younger voters are turning Republican and older voters are turning Democrat as well. The promised "demographic war" that the Democrats have been hoping for may not deliver results after all.

Not surprising given that establishment democrats still refuse to embrace economic populism and still holding on to the very unpopular centrism.

The Senate on Tuesday passed a short-term spending bill that would keep the government running through Dec. 7, aiming to avert a government shutdown and put off a fight over funding for President Trump’s border wall until after the midterm elections.

The short-term bill came attached to a massive budget package containing full-year 2019 funding for the Pentagon as well as for the Labor, Education and Health and Human Services departments. GOP leaders designed the package to combine key Republican and Democratic priorities in an attempt to garner overwhelming bipartisan support. The package also aims to satisfy Trump’s desire for more military spending.

The 93-to-7 vote came less than two weeks ahead of a Sept. 30 deadline when government funding will expire unless Congress and Trump intervene.

Why do we keep increasing military spending repeatedly? And why did every single democrat vote for it? There was 6 Republicans and one Independent, Bernie Sanders, who did not vote on that.