I know most Americans think everyone around the world should understand your system of government, but I'm Canadian, I didn't study American politics in high school or university and so I'm genuinely curious about your system. Everything I know is from the daily show and from some internet shows.
Ah, I see. My apologies.
Our "system" has been pretty much completely overwhelmed with corporate money over the last few decades. Public officials are openly bribed in the form of campaign contributions, putting so much money into the system that if you're not from one of the two major parties you literally have zero chance of winning a national election. Frankly, it has gotten so bad that many politicians don't really even bother with the pretense of serving the public. But since we're stuck with the lesser of two evils, it hardly matters.
P.S. Are you single? I'm not even gay, but I'll pretend if it gets me into Canada faster. ;-)
Well for some anecdotal i'm a college educated white and I didn't vote for the guy.
Ditto. I don't believe that I've ever seen a more obvious fraud than Trump...and considering our politicians, that's saying something.
Well for some anecdotal i'm a college educated white and I didn't vote for the guy.Ditto. I don't believe that I've ever seen a more obvious fraud than Trump...and considering our politicians, that's saying something.
And somehow that still seems like an understatement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And somehow that still seems like an understatement.
My bad...I forgot to mention that he's also a corrupt authoritarian egomaniac. :P
I guess we will know how easy it is to primary out a democrat senator/rep in the next election. There is still very much a low grade simmering civil war between the old guard and progressive factions within the party, and I am not entirely certain you predict what is going to happen.
Are we talking money here? Or something else? 3 and 13% of what?
Re-election rates, actually. They fluctuate a bit from year to year, but any sitting member of Congress is almost certain to be re-elected at any given time. The fact that most of them spend hours every day doing fundraising doesn't hurt their chances any.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And I fully agree that single payer would be much better and I think that if you could pass it here and actually get it into place within a few years people would love it, but you have to get a huge tax increase and a full government takeover of the healthcare system passed against rabid opposition based purely on promises of how wonderful it's going to be. That's a tall order. That's why we got the watered down version we did getI have no idea why Americans are so afraid of socialized medicine. Even Adam @#$@# Smith knew that certain functions could NOT be done most efficiently through the free market.
Sometimes people are so ignorant it's painful.
Emphasis mine.
That one is easy to answer, particularly to a foreigner.
You Americans have been brainwashed* to fear anything associated with socialism - or socially intended-anything really.
It goes like that : social-anything = socialism = Socialism = Communism = EVIL ! REALLY EVIL ! EEEEVIL !
Of course Communism died a long time ago, but the Cold War brainwashing is still in effect. Less so in the younger generation, which is probably why the Millenials didn't give a fig that Bernie Sanders was a self-proclaimed socialist.
We all have those automatic "nationalist" cognitivo/emotional responses enmeshed in our brain. It's easy to pick in another culture, darn difficult to discern in one's own culture (unless you're a cultural deviant, like our esteemed comrade Anklebiter ;-).
*actually, you've brainwashed yourself, like in all human societies.
(You asked for the odds of overturning them. XD A 3% chance of that means a 97% chance they're going to stay in office.)
That's not something I was ever arguing against.
I'm saying that racism/sexism were a BIGGER factor than economic concerns.
You've argued that racism/sexism should take a back seat to economic issues.
For the democrats. For their national campaign. They don't win Trump supporters if they make anti sexism/racism as one of their main focuses but they could win independents who aren't racist or sexist. Do you see how that works?You've argued that racism/sexism should take a back seat to economic issues.That's not something I was ever arguing against.
I'm saying that racism/sexism were a BIGGER factor than economic concerns.
I think it was more of people who aren't (your favorite)-ist don't like being called such. Doing so will only further push them away. What a lot of people don't seem to realize is: the things that are important to you aren't important to at least half of the country. I a political climate where we have the rhetoric that "all men are sexist" or "all white people are racist", those statements are going to push the average working family away from those that espouse such ideas. That's one of the biggest (next to the scandals surrounding the DNC as a whole) reasons people in traditionally blue states changed their votes.
To be fair, if democrats did have anti sexism and anti racist policies on their agenda I don't think they'd ever be as tone deaf as that, no doubt republicans would try to suggest that it's their beliefs, but democrats themselves aren't that stupid. I don't think they should abandon their civil rights roots, but I do think the republicans have cemented their base and so the battle is going to be for independents. I don't think the fight against racism/sexism is going to get as many independent voters as policies that improve the lives of all voters. That's just my pragmatic observation.I think it was more of people who aren't (your favorite)-ist don't like being called such. Doing so will only further push them away. What a lot of people don't seem to realize is: the things that are important to you aren't important to at least half of the country. I a political climate where we have the rhetoric that "all men are sexist" or "all white people are racist", those statements are going to push the average working family away from those that espouse such ideas. That's one of the biggest (next to the scandals surrounding the DNC as a whole) reasons people in traditionally blue states changed their votes.For the democrats. For their national campaign. They don't win Trump supporters if they make anti sexism/racism as one of their main focuses but they could win independents who aren't racist or sexist. Do you see how that works?You've argued that racism/sexism should take a back seat to economic issues.That's not something I was ever arguing against.
I'm saying that racism/sexism were a BIGGER factor than economic concerns.
Agreed. As I stated, the (your favorite)-ism being a campaign strategy won't matter to the average working family. They're more interested in things like clean drinking water, safe streets (from crime and gorram pot holes), better schools, and actually affordable hospital visits (for when it's necessary).
For the democrats. For their national campaign. They don't win Trump supporters if they make anti sexism/racism as one of their main focuses but they could win independents who aren't racist or sexist. Do you see how that works?You've argued that racism/sexism should take a back seat to economic issues.That's not something I was ever arguing against.
I'm saying that racism/sexism were a BIGGER factor than economic concerns.
Did you refute my statement? Or agree with it?
Meanwhile, Republicans are passing laws to suppress minority voters
I still don't understand what these laws are? The ID laws?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some Republicans Acknowledge Leveraging Voter ID Laws for Political Gain
Essentially, Republicans discovered that yelling about voter fraud gets people to sign on for voter ID laws which, they had previously discovered, disproportionately affects indigent and/or minority voters, who tend to vote Democrat (when they vote at all).
Some Republicans Acknowledge Leveraging Voter ID Laws for Political Gain
Essentially, Republicans discovered that yelling about voter fraud gets people to sign on for voter ID laws which, they had previously discovered, disproportionately affects indigent and/or minority voters, who tend to vote Democrat (when they vote at all).
it seems the issue is more with the perception that minorities don't have/can't get id than the law itself.
3 times? were you going for is a charm and got your out instead?
I'm not sure what that means, but I heard that after age 65 you can attend Massachusetts state schools for free, so, assuming I'm still alive in a quarter-century, and assuming our civilization hasn't collapsed (neither of which I feel confident about), I'll finish up then.
Meanwhile, Republicans are passing laws to suppress minority voters I still don't understand what these laws are? The ID laws?
The voter ID laws, which allow ID's that white people tend to have and exclude types of ID that african american's tend not to.
Fewer voting machines per capita in african american communities, resulting in long lines and people leaving.
Extending early voting/ late voting in white districts but not african american districts.
Throwing people off the voting rolls and making it a long, arduous process to get back on. just happening to get a large number of african americans.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think this past election illustrated the clear difference between going after a fairly narrow, but very enthusiastic base by Trump, and attempting a broad, but completely unenthusiastic appeal by Clinton.
Clinton made basically the same mistake embodied by candidates like Kerry. John Kerry was a prominent member of the Winter Soldier movement after the Viet Nam war. He would have been a strong anti-war candidate, at a time when the the Afghan war was dragging on, and the Iraq War II was turning sour. However, he supported the was in Iraq (as did most establishment Dems), thus destroying an chance of being credible as either pro or anti war.
"How do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? - Testimony before subcommittees of the U.S. Senate, April, 1971
Kerry, May 3, 2003: "..., but I was in favor of disarming Saddam Hussein, and I’m glad we did. There’s no ambivalence. I believe I bring strength to this ticket: strength about how we maintain a military that is strong, but make ourselves stronger in the world."
Clinton and the establishment Democrats have the same half-assed approach to most issues. Racism? You have Hillary talking about 'super predators', Bill's history getting tough on (black and poor) criminals, and things like Rham Emanuel covering up the murder of a black man by his police force. On trade, the Democrats are almost identical (or worse) then the Republicans. On most economic issues, the Democrats are barely better then Republicans. And when Democrats do something good, like taxing the rich to pay for the ACA, they generally hide it in order to appeal to suburban republicans. Even on issues like LGBT rights, the democrats can't resist shooting themselves in the foot to appeal to Republicans. For example, Hillary running her mouth about how, the Reagans, particularly Nancy, helped start "a national conversation" about HIV and AIDS. WTF!?!
I think we are in a time where you need enthusiastic supporters to win elections. If the Democrats want more then piss-warm support, they need to stop being Republican-Lite, and start actually being credible progressives.
Well it's pretty easy to see that, I mean that's something most people would pick up at a glance, but it's also the reason I couldn't understand why you can't vote 3rd party or independent. If both sides are bought why wouldn't you vote for someone else?
Because the system is rigged to make a third-party candidate un-electable. It's something of a prisoner's dilemma in that if we trusted each other enough to cooperate, we could do it...but there are billions of dollars and entire industries dedicated to making sure we're split into two opposing camps. For many sitting politicians, the one thing that *will* actually cost them their spot is being seen to collude with the "enemy." The citizenry is exactly the same. I've given up on multiple real-life friendships because I got tired of being casually referred to as a "Libtard" or being told I have a mental disorder. :-(
Homer: Wow. [walks into kitchen] Look at me, er, uh, Mom: I am, er, uh, President Kennedy.
Mrs. Simpson: Oh, Abe: maybe our Homer could grow up to be President some day.
Grampa: You, President? This is the greatest country in the world. We've got a whole system set up to prevent people like you from ever becoming president. Quit your daydreaming, melonhead! [back in the present] Quit your daydreaming, melonhead.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did you refute my statement? Or agree with it?For the democrats. For their national campaign. They don't win Trump supporters if they make anti sexism/racism as one of their main focuses but they could win independents who aren't racist or sexist. Do you see how that works?You've argued that racism/sexism should take a back seat to economic issues.That's not something I was ever arguing against.
I'm saying that racism/sexism were a BIGGER factor than economic concerns.They don't win Trump supporters if they make anti sexism/racism as one of their main focuses but they could win independents who aren't racist or sexist if they make economics their main focus.
There, does that remove the ambiguity?
I'll just throw out that Dems have a whole history of moving right on issues that they see Republicans are successful with. See our overall policies on military intervention and foreign affairs, or the fact that Obamacare was actually a Republican developed model. Republican keep moving right, and social issues are pretty much the ONLY thing dems have stood there ground.
What you are suggesting, as I think I have stated before...Is basically the same type of thing that you have complained about with economic policy. It's abandoning one set of priorities in hoping that some magical number of independent voters show up, and also hoping that all the minority and related groups decide to show up and vote for you, even if you ignore their basic interests.
Not to mention...even if this was some "baggage" that was holding them back, it doesn't matter if they abandon it or not. The voters who feel that dems are too into social issues are still going to have that perception. Clinton DIDN'T make social issues a major priority for her campaign. It was much more heavily based on "continuing current Obama policies/fixing flaws in existing policies" and "I am not Trump". If that factor cost her the election it was because it was mostly something in those voters heads.
|
BNW, all of the voter ID laws passed have provisions to give anyone that cannot afford a state issued drivers License or state ID. All the Voter ID laws that have been struck down have been by democratic appointed judges. The Number of voting machines in black majority districts has nothing to do with racism and everything to do with the amount of money that the tax base in these districts have to buy voting machines. There is an easy way to overcome this problem the Federal government should mandate touch screen or OCR voting machines that are acceptable to both major parties and buy them and distribute them to each county.
BNW do you know that all other major democratic countries require ID to vote? Mexico requires ID to vote. IMO the US needs to have a National ID. The USG needs to be able to identify who is and who is not a US citizen not only for voting but be able to ID those in the country Illegally. There should be no one in this country that is undocumented the USG needs to be able to ID everyone in the US because we live in the age of Terrorism. The US all so needs to be able to ID those that are in the US that are not citizens to restrict tem from certain social benefits Welfare, medical care etc that are paid for by the tax payer.
Agreed. As I stated, the (your favorite)-ism being a campaign strategy won't matter to the average working family. They're more interested in things like clean drinking water, safe streets (from crime and gorram pot holes), better schools, and actually affordable hospital visits (for when it's necessary)
Unfortunately not all those issues are separate from matters of race and sex, and you can't really magical entangle them. Many anti-crime legislation tends to end up in practice as discriminatory to certain minority groups. Many proposed education reforms would actually worsen educational opportunities in urban areas with predominant minority populations. Healthcare laws often neglect and penalize women.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's why, in real life, you have president Kodos rather president Kang.
No.That is not true
No, stop that. This is getting people hurt.
The two parties are NOT the same. Can you honestly tell me we would have an iraq war under president gore? Do you think a repeal of oabama care would be going anywhere with president hillary in the oval office?
By all means, the democrats are more than open for criticism for being shills for big business, corporations, and foreign interests. But they are NOT as bad as the republicans. They are not undermining the fundamental freedoms that act as a check on government, and there is NO way forward without the democratic party.
Did you refute my statement? Or agree with it?For the democrats. For their national campaign. They don't win Trump supporters if they make anti sexism/racism as one of their main focuses but they could win independents who aren't racist or sexist. Do you see how that works?You've argued that racism/sexism should take a back seat to economic issues.That's not something I was ever arguing against.
I'm saying that racism/sexism were a BIGGER factor than economic concerns.They don't win Trump supporters if they make anti sexism/racism as one of their main focuses but they could win independents who aren't racist or sexist if they make economics their main focus.
There, does that remove the ambiguity?
And I find your lack of progressive values concerning racism and sexism disturbing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Democratic Party's two obstacles before the 2018 elections: time, and themselves.
... "Democrats are focusing on creating a unified front in the coming months around an economic agenda, because they are going to need votes from across the ideological spectrum to win the 24 seats needed to win back the House majority."
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BNW, all of the voter ID laws passed have provisions to give anyone that cannot afford a state issued drivers License or state ID.
False. Several included a fee for the license itself until the Supreme Court re-affirmed that this (obviously) violated the century old prohibition against poll taxes in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board. So the GOP switched to requiring multiple forms of identification to GET a voter ID and charging for those while also making sure that these voter IDs would require significant travel time and expense for many minority voters.
All the Voter ID laws that have been struck down have been by democratic appointed judges.
False. For example, judge Henry Floyd was appointed by GWB and voted to strike down the North Carolina voter ID law that 'targeted minorities with surgical precision'. Likewise, the GOP controlled Supreme Court has allowed several of these biased laws to be expunged.
The Number of voting machines in black majority districts has nothing to do with racism and everything to do with the amount of money that the tax base in these districts have to buy voting machines.
Inadequate local income is certainly a factor, though itself often a symptom of racism, but funding from the state level exists in many jurisdictions... and is NOT equally applied.
The US all so needs to be able to ID those that are in the US that are not citizens to restrict tem from certain social benefits Welfare, medical care etc that are paid for by the tax payer.
The logic of this position escapes me... given that those people are themselves taxpayers.
Historically, requirements to carry government ID have been enacted by totalitarian regimes. This has led to long resistance to such in the US on both sides of the political divide.
That said, it doesn't much matter any more. The 'real ID' standards which the GOP mandated all states must enact by 2018 create a de facto universal ID for anyone wishing to travel into, out of, or within this country... and facial recognition software is getting accurate and pervasive enough that the government will soon be able to assign a unique identification number to every resident and track their movements (except in rural areas) via cameras.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
facial recognition software is getting accurate and pervasive enough that the government will soon be able to assign a unique identification number to every resident and track their movements (except in rural areas) via cameras.
Actually, about half the US population is already included in the FBI facial recognition database because 16 states participate by sharing your driver's license photos. Rural or not, you can be tracked.
FBI facial recognition database
The bureau can also access an internal unit called Facial Analysis, Comparison and Evaluation, which can tap other federal photo repositories and databases in 16 states that can include driver's license photos. Through these databases, the FBI has access to more than 411 million photos of Americans, many of whom have never been convicted of a crime.
GAO Report
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
BNW, all of the voter ID laws passed have
... with the specific intention of preventing democrats from voting.
There is no wide scale in person voter fraud. The excuse for these laws is a problem that does not exist. if you want to commit voter fraud you do it by mail, not by showing up at the polls.
There is no reason that a hunting liscense, which has no picture on it, should be a valid form of voter ID but a college ID which DOES have a picture on it should not, except that college students tend to vote democratic and hunters tend to vote republican. This is a pattern enacted "with surgical precision" across several states.
Republicans ARE ON CAMERA admiting that the ID laws were passed to give them an advantage with voters
There is absolutely no excuse for an adult that can access the internet to still believe that voter id laws are anything but an effort for politicians to pick their voters. None.
It's not true. You need to address that reality by changing your position if not your party.
|
|
BNW there was wide spread voter fraud in Detroit in the last election counting was stopped by the court when it proven that there were more votes cast than registered voters. There should be only be one type of ID allowed for voting state issued drivers liscense, or state ID cards if an until there is a national ID card. Why is the dead vote in Cook county always talked about? B1 Bob lost his seat in congress years ago to Loretta Sanchez because of Illegals voting it was only because the rest of the Republicans were so spineless that Sanchez was seated in congress.
college ID and other ID w/o pictures like Hunting and Fishing liscense are not valid ID's except for the purposes they were issued for you can use a fishing liscense to buy booze, smokes or fly on a plane so why should you be allowed to use it to vote?
You want to know why I will never vote Democrat. They do not take national security seriously they gut the military and try to buy votes with that money with blacks and latinos. There are no Scoop Jackson's or JFK's in the Democratic Party any more Just Maxine Waters Nit Wit Nancy's and there ilk.
BNW there was wide spread voter fraud in Detroit in the last election counting was stopped by the court when it proven that there were more votes cast than registered voters. and there ilk.
Can you cite this? From a reputable source? Its a court case, that should have a record.
And let me be clear. Because you keep missing it. Voter id only stops IN PERSON voter fraud. It does absolutely nothing to alleviate mail in fraud.
There should be only be one type of ID allowed for voting state issued drivers liscense, or state ID cards if an until there is a national ID card.
.... IF the actual reason for the voter id laws was a concern about and i cannot stress this part enough voter fraud THEN that would be true.
But that is NOT the case. Michigan allowed hunting liscenses as ID to vote. Government worker ID's were not sufficient to vote. The actual security and use for verifying someone's id the card provided was completely irrelevant accross the dozens of id's used.
ALL. That mattered was whether or not the type of id was primarily held by democratic or republican voters. That ALONE shows you that the worry about in person voter fraud is a complete canard. And then they're on camera admitting that its a canard. How on earth do you not conclude that you've been duped about the laws intent at this point?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Republican Secretary of State Ruth Johnson was quoted:
"Johnson’s office does not believe there was “widespread fraud” in Michigan’s Nov. 8 general election, Woodhams continued, pointing out that the Pew Charitable Trusts has consistently named Michigan a high-performing state for election administration.
Republican Secretary of State Ruth Johnson also reiterated her belief that there was no widespread fraud in Michigan’s November election, touting her own efforts to boost election integrity in recent years.
<snip.
Bureau of Elections Director Chris Thomas said Tuesday officials have “seen a lot of performance issues” so far in Detroit audit but have “not run into anything we’d call fraudulent.” A full report is expected early next month.