2020 US Elections

[aguerrrroooooooooooo]

I'm starting to think Georgia is gone

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Well, that was some night. Yesterday if someone offered getting rid of Trump in exchange for the Senate I would've taken it in a heartbeat and barring a big surprise that's what we'll get. So I'm not happy, but also not despondent either.

It's the best possible outcome for me were I a completely selfish person. Interest rates are plunging because blue President/red Senate gridlock means the Fed will have to do more to stimulate the economy since stimulus will probably be more meager now, and as I cover interest rate-sensitive stocks, they are soaring today, and we're long them. Outside of that, I agree while it's a bit of a Pyrrhic victory it's probably a trade I would have made too.

 

[buckshot]

Is that why the mail-in ballots are so weighted towards the Democrats?

Slightly unusual because mail-in ballots over here are weighted more towards the Tories who appeal more to the older voter so it's surprising to read such a predominance of mail-in ballots for the Democrats.

That's it. Mail in ballots were used because of Covid19 and Democrats believe in it while republicans still think it's a hoax.

 

[Bigga]

I didn't accuse you of talking about electoral college/map rigging, though you'd be right to give them a kicking, I lumped them all together with the general shit show that is politics in America and to varying degrees here.

My beef with you is not one of politics, but of strategy and tactics.

Put simply, for want of a better word "progressives" believe that powerful reactionary forces railed against them means they're never given a fair crack of the whip, because if they were, the mass of the people would embrace their policies.

I believe that, I suspect you do to, with your reference to "neither of them particularly inspiring" (I'm taking that reference as relating to Biden, Trump plays with darker forces).

Where we disagree is that given the situation isn't going to change anytime soon, I believe we have to play the cards we're dealt.

I suspect you do not believe that.

You believe the game is so rigged as to be not worth playing, and you let everyone know that's what you feel, yet despite this, you get really agitated about not winning.

But you can't win because you don't play and you don't play because the game is rigged and that is why you always lose.

I'm not averse to seeing your point if that's what I believed.

But, no, I believe there's another way that involves the creation of a third or fourth party, depending if you class the Greens as a viable option.

There's real talk of a Black inspired party forming, one that wants reparations sorting. I have stated to some individuals on other sites that it would be best to incorporate other disaffected groups into a second tier for 'demands'. I don't believe there should be complete separation on certain policies, but to 'hold the vote' for the more established parties for guaranteed action on 'promises' rather than nothing to show for another 4 years.

It would be a powerful block of vote for either the Dem or GOP parties and, most likely assimilation. Advocating to get working people on the boards of companies would change working rights and practises and more besides.

That's my strong, but brief, belief.

 

[yankblue]

Arizona getting closer, Biden lead cut to under 100k and still 14% to go. Biden might need Georgia or Pennsylvania yet.

I thought AP already called Arizona for Biden hours ago? It's weird they've called it and others haven't.

 

[jerseyblue]

1) Supreme Court is 6-3 conservative and hasn't been Liberal since 1970. The last 5 justices have been elected by a party that received fewer votes.

2) Electoral college not remotely democratic and was set up to protect a bunch of white, rich slave owners.

3) How can anyone remotely argue that a popular vote is less democratic than the current system?

The US is a constitutional republic, not a pure democracy and there is good reason for that. The electoral college was set up for many reasons, but primarily to keep population centers from having unchecked rule over the rural population. Having seen kings rule from castles the founders were extremely wary of this.
The idea that the electoral college was only created to protect slaveholders is at best shitty propaganda.
Focus on the real problem in this country, a two party system that has completely monopolized governance. Neither party has served the people's interests properly in a long time and both deserve to be challenged in a meaningful way if we expect anything to change here.

 

[The perfect fumble]

I'm starting to think Georgia is gone

It's on my mind.

 

[domalino]

Arizona getting closer, Biden lead cut to under 100k and still 14% to go. Biden might need Georgia or Pennsylvania yet.

Look where the votes came from though, it was Pinal County which has always been Trump.

Apache, Pima and Maricopa counties are the ones heavily favouring Biden and they're the ones with a lot of reporting left to go.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

That's a done deal, then. Trump wins.

It's the red colour, isn't it?

 

[SWP's back]

I’m not saying one is better than the other, but my simplistic understanding is that if the popular vote is the decider, surely candidates would just pander to the large coastal cities and ignore middle America. When in power, they’d surely put more resources in to the large coastal cities as they are the deciders for re-election. Am I wrong in this?

I’d say so, think about being a Californian Republican. You can vote now for your entire life know full well that your presidential vote is absolutely useless.

fun fact, there are more GOP supporters in California than in any other state.

 

[domalino]

The US is a constitutional republic, not a pure democracy and there is good reason for that. The electoral college was set up for many reasons, but primarily to keep population centers from having unchecked rule over the rural population. Having seen kings rule from castles the founders were extremely wary of this.
The idea that the electoral college was only created to protect slaveholders is at best shitty propaganda.
Focus on the real problem in this country, a two party system that has completely monopolized governance. Neither party has served the people's interests properly in a long time and both deserve to be challenged in a meaningful way if we expect anything to change here.

The Electoral college was not set up with the idea that 100% of the EC votes would go to the person who wins by 1 vote.

The founding fathers would piss themselves at how it's turned out.

By the way they'd also find the idea of 1m people in DC and 3m in PR not having representation beyond unconstitutional.

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

I thought AP already called Arizona for Biden hours ago? It's weird they've called it and others haven't.

It just closed from 130k to 100k in Trump's favour. Still looks like a lot of postal votes to add in apparently.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

This is totally false. Poverty is in the big cities. A popular vote puts all votes on an equal standing where as the collage system gives some more weight than others. I'd be interested on any data but I'm 100% confident that the rural states are far wealthier per person than the coastal states with dense population and large inner cities.

That’s sticking it to him...

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I know DC doesn't elect senators - where do DC resident votes count for Presidential elections?

 

[inchy14]

I'm starting to think Georgia is gone

That’s always been on my mind

 

[SWP's back]

Well I can’t say I agree with that mate, having seen towns in Northern England with barely any investment, closed shops, fewer jobs, run down housing etc.

You’re making the opposite case. Why should Boris bother about central Newcastle and Liverpool when he knows he will never get an MP there?

Make it a popular vote and every vote counts.

 

[domalino]

It just closed from 130k to 100k in Trump's favour. Still looks like a lot of postal votes to add in apparently.

Arizona is 98% done, the NYT think there's only 20,000 more votes out there.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

I'll just do all of this in one.

None of this addresses the point. The point is that the US has a political system that has functioned for several hundred years. Some people are saying that they want to protect that system from somebody else who is going to subvert it. Then they say that they want to completely change that system.

Do you see how protecting a system from change and then saying you need to change it are opposite positions that cannot be held simultaneously?

And people can argue that the popular vote is less democratic in the case of the United States because the United States is not a democracy and not a country in the traditional sense but instead is a union of collective states who are all supposed to have equalised voting power. This way, having 100 million people in Texas can't decide what the rest of the Union does.



Hmm yes, "redress the balance". Fun slogan. The legally accepted candidates aren't to their liking so the way to solve this is to change the law so that they can put their own candidates on the SC. Which will definitely have no possible negative impact going forward. Setting a precedent that changing the SC numbers in order to "balance it" is definitely not something that anybody will ever use nefariously in the future. Seems like a great and totally unexploitable idea that definitely will not come back to bite the Democrats in the future in the same way that removing supermajorities for judicial candidates had zero harmful effects for them.

But again, this is besides the point. The point is that protection of a system against change and change of a system are opposites.

This is 100% true and one of the most basic things to understand possible. I'm sure that everybody with a single ounce of common sense can roundly agree with this simplistic idea and agree it's a contradiction in terms.

The Democratic SC picks of recent years have been moderate, highly qualified and experienced judges. Name a Republican pick in the last 20 years who comes anywhere close to that?

 

[SWP's back]

China's totalitarian regime, internal human rights or expansionist aggressive foreign policy, which are all far worse currently than the Yanks.

Just refresh my memory, how many countries have the Chinese invaded or attacked through CIA type organisation funded militias?

And the US?

 

[Bigga]

To be fair, Donald told his people not to mail in but to turn up. He mailed in, but that’s by the by. Don’t forget, if you the virus doesn’t bother you or you believe it is ‘fake news’ why wouldn’t you turn up? On the other hand, if it terrifies you, you’d vote by post, I’d have thought?

Well, it's not just that.

You have the 'silent' voter and the 'no party affiliated' voter to factor in that may also be wary of the virus.

Maybe small, but they exist.