Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
POG Politics Thread POG Politics Thread

02-21-2018 , 05:23 PM
Either you're agreeing with me or I'm failing to understand your post.
02-21-2018 , 05:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by soah
So right now in deep red districts you have a Tea Party candidate run against a moderate Republican in the primary and the winner of the primary faces no meaningful opposition in the general election. We reform everything and the same two candidates first knock out the token Democrat in the first round of the runoff and then face off head to head (edit: or in a more competitive district the Democrat makes it to the final vote but still loses to the more popular of the other two candidates). What's the difference, other than whether the Democrat is knocked out in the first round or the second? The same people get elected for the most part, and they still create the same alliance in Congress to get a majority.
in the reformed world, in the deep red districts you now get Democrats getting to have a say on which of the two republican candidates wins if their guy is eliminated R1 (and under a STV type system, they'd always get a say)

that's a pretty huge difference, and will naturally pull us towards centrism
02-21-2018 , 05:28 PM
wait damn dwetz got there first
02-21-2018 , 05:30 PM
I'm assuming that people in the deep red districts who really care already vote in the Republican primaries. That's what my mom does.

If you want reform in that area, look at changing laws regarding who can vote in the primaries. That's something that has a much better chance of actually happening.
02-21-2018 , 05:31 PM
As a centrist I approve of this centristism
02-21-2018 , 05:36 PM
opening all of the primaries to everybody seems cool
02-21-2018 , 05:37 PM
opening primary voting to all seems like a bit of a weird half-step towards a more sensible voting system, but hey, at least it's in the right direction
02-21-2018 , 05:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by soah
I'm assuming that people in the deep red districts who really care already vote in the Republican primaries. That's what my mom does.

If you want reform in that area, look at changing laws regarding who can vote in the primaries. That's something that has a much better chance of actually happening.
There's that too, but, again: in the present method, one must choose between expressing an opinion about one's side's own candidates, and that of the other side. The other way, one gets to do both.
02-21-2018 , 05:43 PM
I assume some sort of statewide proportional representation would alleviate gerrymandering. Maybe scotus could force it in States somehow?

Seems not as necessary nationally though.
02-21-2018 , 05:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWetzel
There's that too, but, again: in the present method, one must choose between expressing an opinion about one's side's own candidates, and that of the other side. The other way, one gets to do both.
Sort of. It wouldn't always work out that way. And if you're supporting someone who doesn't have a prayer of winning then I'd argue that you're not accomplishing a whole lot under either system.
02-21-2018 , 06:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by amplify
BRB, off to make 1000 gifs from this.
02-21-2018 , 06:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by soah
I'll just offer this as food for thought for those that think that changing the election system to favor 3+ parties will fix all of the problems with politics:

Michael Bloomberg, an independently wealthy businessman, temporarily joined the GOP to run for mayor of New York and then dropped them like a hot potato and was reelected twice as an independent and then seriously considered running for president.

Mauricio Macri, an independently wealthy businessman, created a new political party to run for mayor of Buenos Aires, was reelected, and then successfully ran for president.

What's the actual difference between these events?

You can change the parties all you want but it will still be the literal same people running for office.
Right, the actual fix to our system needs to be in the amount of wealth needed to run. You need millions of dollars to ru n a successful campaign. A guy with great ideas and no ability to raise that kind of money can never get those ideas out.
02-21-2018 , 07:15 PM
I think the real fix is it's probably not fixable
02-21-2018 , 07:22 PM
the empty husk of society recapitulates the hollow shell of self

like ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny
02-21-2018 , 07:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by amplify
the empty husk of society recapitulates the hollow shell of self

like ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny
02-22-2018 , 04:15 AM
I grew up always wanting to be a teacher..

Oh really.

Yeah, I always wanted to carry a gun.


Thanks Donnie Tinyhands.
02-22-2018 , 04:21 AM
Hey digger is up! Seems like if we want to have people do anything before owning a gun it'd be pass some kind of class.

Also I assume coverage of shootings can possibly dangerously increase number of shootings.
02-22-2018 , 06:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
Right, the actual fix to our system needs to be in the amount of wealth needed to run. You need millions of dollars to ru n a successful campaign. A guy with great ideas and no ability to raise that kind of money can never get those ideas out.
In a peculiar sense Buckley vs Valeo was right. Which might be a strange thing for a leftist like me to say. But, the courts finding merely reflected the reality of democratic politics in capitalism. You need money to have political speech. It is not a far leap from there to say that money is speech and corporates have rights of speech.
02-22-2018 , 11:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by soah
Sort of. It wouldn't always work out that way. And if you're supporting someone who doesn't have a prayer of winning then I'd argue that you're not accomplishing a whole lot under either system.
I'd argue that if you're supporting someone who doesn't have a prayer of winning, you probably shouldn't have much influence, under any system.
02-22-2018 , 01:17 PM
pulled an ass muscle deadlifting
still the highlight of my day
now reading twitter CPAC rehash

dog of the day: floofy husky/corgi puppy

Last edited by amplify; 02-22-2018 at 01:26 PM.
02-23-2018 , 06:20 AM
Dante would have assigned a special place in hell for that head of the NRA. Good guy with a gun piffle.....
02-23-2018 , 06:39 AM
That list of trump’s great guys in full:

- wife beater
- confirmed foreign agent at the heart of the White House
- gun runners in chief
- son, conspired with Russians.

Did I miss anyone?
02-23-2018 , 08:13 AM
Nazis.
02-23-2018 , 11:08 AM
serial prisoner abuser
02-23-2018 , 11:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kokiri
That list of trump’s best people in full:

- wife beater
- confirmed foreign agent at the heart of the White House
- gun runners in chief
- son, conspired with Russians.

Did I miss anyone?
fyp, but good effort

      
m