192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
Builder
 
  -2  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 01:19 am
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
nonsense


So, they just tossed a coin, and said "let's see how the big fella goes..."?

Everything happens for a reason, MJ. And I do mean everything.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 02:52 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
the electoral college, the founding fathers' poison pill for future generations,

Preventing progressives from cheating is hardly a poison pill.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 02:53 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
That is a meaningless statistic, no matter how often you post it.

That's a strange accusation for you to make considering your endless trumpeting of meaningless "popular vote" statistics.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 02:54 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
I'm for democracy, and the e.c. ain't it.

That is incorrect. The Electoral College is part of our democracy.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 02:57 am
@Builder,
Builder wrote:
Without the EC, you would only need to hold an election in two states, right?

That's the gist of it. But the focus would be on large cities instead of large states.

Progressives would boost the turnout in large cities with illegal voting, and the rest of the nation would simply be outvoted.
Builder
 
  -2  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 03:05 am
@oralloy,
We all know why the electoral college is essential to the process, but some here have been in denial for four years, and likely will be for four more.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 04:20 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
Progressives would boost the turnout in large cities with illegal voting, and the rest of the nation would simply be outvoted.

Pure speculation. "Progressives" aren't the largest faction in the Democratic Party and don't have control of the party in every large city. Methods for perpetrating voter fraud would need to be coordinated among these large cities, making detection very likely. The urban population of the USA is three times more than the rural population. The Constitution doesn't discriminate between urban and rural voters. If Republicans want to gain control of more large cities they simply have to adopte policies which help urban residents. What's wrong with that?
oralloy
 
  -2  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 04:32 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
Methods for perpetrating voter fraud would need to be coordinated among these large cities, making detection very likely.

Not necessarily. As long as turnout is boosted it doesn't matter what method is used in each locality.

It wouldn't have to involve fraud even, although knowing progressives it probably would. Large cities could just make sure there was a contentious local initiative on their ballot to boost turnout.

There was a silly plot in Michigan earlier this year to put a gay rights measure on our November ballot. The only point would have been to inspire leftists to come out and vote this November. Despite trying to cheat by using illegal "internet signatures" from Russia, they failed to get enough signatures to put it on the ballot so the plot failed. However, it's one example of the kind of games that the left plays to drive turnout in elections.


hightor wrote:
If Republicans want to gain control of more large cities they simply have to adopt policies which help urban residents. What's wrong with that?

What's wrong is that it disregards people who don't live in large urban areas.
oristarA
 
  1  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 04:58 am
Trump shows no respect for the pandemic guidelines of the United States. He wants to rise and shine as a superspreader.

His behavior of flouting the government's guidances is dangerous and despicable.

Quote:
"I feel so powerful, I'll walk into that audience. I'll walk in there, I'll kiss everyone in that audience," Trump said in Sanford, Florida, showing his illness did not teach him to respect his own government's pandemic guidelines. "I'll kiss the guys and the beautiful women and the -- everybody. I'll just give everybody a big, fat kiss."

Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/13/politics/donald-trump-election-2020-campaign/index.html
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 05:22 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
What's wrong is that it disregards people who don't live in large urban areas.

Um...do you really think it's impossible to develop public policies which don't fall into the either/or category? Are you saying that people who live in cities should be disenfranchised, that the needs of 75% of the population shouldn't be addressed and that only the other 25% matter? Wouldn't it make more sense not to view the needs of the two populations as mutually exclusive?
oralloy
 
  -1  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 05:43 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
Um...do you really think it's impossible to develop public policies which don't fall into the either/or category?

Not impossible.

But there will always be some issues where rural interests are at odds with urban interests.


hightor wrote:
Are you saying that people who live in cities should be disenfranchised, that the needs of 75% of the population shouldn't be addressed and that only the other 25% matter?

No one is disenfranchising cities. Under the Electoral College large cities have plenty of say over who becomes president. The Electoral College just ensures that everyone else has a say too.


hightor wrote:
Wouldn't it make more sense not to view the needs of the two populations as mutually exclusive?

If you don't view their needs as mutually exclusive, then there is no need to abolish the Electoral College.

The only reason why people want to abolish the Electoral College is so they can prevent rural voters from having a say.
hightor
 
  2  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 05:52 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
The only reason why people want to abolish the Electoral College is so they can prevent rural voters from having a say.

Interesting. Because at the time the Constitution was drawn up, the Electoral College was in part designed to restrict the influence of urban voters.
hightor
 
  2  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 05:55 am
Imagining the Trump Presidency That Wasn’t

A politically incorrect administration might have succeeded where this one failed.

Quote:
Where would we be now if we had a truly politically incorrect president? Donald Trump is supposed to be politically incorrect, but, for the most part, he isn’t. He’s mainly just a jerk.

Jerkishness is often mistaken for political incorrectness, in the way that blind luck is easily mistaken for great skill. They’re fundamentally different. Political incorrectness is an expression of intellectual independence. Jerkishness is a personality defect. The former requires a sense of inner rectitude. The latter reveals an absence of inner boundaries.

Politically incorrect people are prepared to deviate from their own party, ideology or personal interest for the sake of a moral principle. Jerks are always in it for themselves alone.

Andrei Sakharov and Liu Xiaobo were politically incorrect: honest men in dishonest systems. Trump is a dishonest man in a country with an increasingly tenuous grip on the concept of honesty itself.

With this in mind, let’s imagine an alternative history for a (politically incorrect) Trump presidency.

January 2017: Shortly after his inauguration as president, Trump fulfills a campaign promise by releasing his full tax returns. In a statement, the president says he’s releasing them for two reasons.

“First of all, if our dishonest media ever gets a hold of them, and they will, they’ll lie about what’s in them! And second, they show just what’s wrong with our tax code. As a real estate developer, I make no apologies for taking advantage of every loophole. As president, I will close these crazy holes for the sake of the American people. #IAloneCanFixIt. #MAGA.”

February 2017: Infuriating movement conservatives, Trump resubmits 64-year-old Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court, saying he wants to uphold the principle — denied to his predecessor — that a president has the right to nominate a candidate to fill a vacant judgeship at any point in his administration.

But he does so as part of a deal in which one of the court’s older conservative justices steps down from the bench in favor of Neil Gorsuch, 49. The subsequent retirement of Anthony Kennedy and the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg mean the court regains its conservative majority, with three younger justices, by the end of Trump’s first term.

October 2017: Following the massacre of some 60 people (and the injury of more than 800) by a lone gunman in Las Vegas, Trump delivers a prime-time address on the subject of gun control. He observes that, at the time the Second Amendment was written, a skilled marksman could fire, at most, three or four rounds a minute.

“The right to bear arms cannot become a license for American carnage,” he says, borrowing a line from his inaugural address. “We’re either going to get serious about regulating the ability of just about anyone to get access to high-powered, rapid-firing weapons, or we’re going to start requiring every gun owner to spend every other Sunday doing drills in their local ‘well-regulated militia’ — just like it says in the Constitution.”

May 2018: In the face of a migration crisis on the U.S.-Mexico border, Trump proposes a grand-immigration bargain with congressional Democrats: full funding for a border wall, in exchange for a path to citizenship for Dreamers. Later, he expands the proposal to a $2 trillion infrastructure bill with “Buy American” provisions, in exchange for expedited environmental reviews for federal projects and a repeal of the Jim Crow-era Davis-Bacon Act, which has long inflated the labor costs of public works.

June 2018: Invoking Gerald Ford’s congressional testimony regarding his presidential pardon of Richard Nixon, Trump agrees to sit before the House Intelligence Committee on the subject of his campaign’s links to Russia. He expresses regret for hiring Paul Manafort as campaign chairman and for his praise for WikiLeaks, which he concedes interfered in the 2016 election. But he challenges the factual basis of the Steele dossier and the legal basis for the F.B.I.’s investigation of his campaign.

July 2019: In a telephone call with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump makes no mention of the Biden family.

February 2020: Warning Americans that the novel coronavirus risks becoming the greatest global health emergency of the century, Trump tells Americans that we can beat this, and keep the economy strong, by adopting common-sense social-distancing measures: avoiding crowded public transportation, sports arenas, concerts and bars. Going further than even his own health experts recommended, he talks up his well-known germophobia and insists that everyone in the White House wear a face mask. But he also warns state governors that attempts to lock down entire communities in an effort to contain the spread is a futile cure that will impose ruinous economic costs.

June 2020: After the killing of George Floyd, Trump convenes a conference of law enforcement officials and others to develop a set of national police standards. He asks the Democratic Representative Val Demings of Florida to lead the conference.

For many conservatives (including me), some of these proposals would have been hard to accept. Liberals would have their own objections to some of this ideological jujitsu. Then again, what an interesting and fruitful administration it might have been. America still awaits a politically incorrect president — while it waits out the jerk.

nyt/stephens
engineer
 
  2  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 06:43 am
@hightor,
I don't know why this guy says these actions would be hard to accept, they are pretty much conservative doctrine and match what any more sane conservative would do with some stupid Trump positions (dishonest press, build a wall) in there as well. Here's another take.

Quote:
January 2017: Shortly after his inauguration as president, Trump fulfills a campaign promise by releasing his full tax returns. In a statement, the president says he’s releasing them for two reasons.

“As a real estate developer, I make no apologies for taking advantage of every loophole. As president, I will close these crazy holes for the sake of the American people. #IAloneCanFixIt. #MAGA.”
He then drives through tax reforms that close the loop poles that he takes advantage of as part of a massive tax reform package that updates the tax code to reflect the 21st century and increases government revenue to start paying down the debt from the Great Recession.

February 2017: Infuriating movement conservatives, Trump resubmits 64-year-old Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court, saying he wants to uphold the principle — denied to his predecessor — that a president has the right to nominate a candidate to fill a vacant judgeship at any point in his administration.

But he does so as part of a deal in which one of the court’s older conservative justices steps down from the bench in favor of Neil Gorsuch, 49. The subsequent retirement of Anthony Kennedy and the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg mean the court regains its conservative majority, with three younger justices, by the end of Trump’s first term.

October 2017: Following the massacre of some 60 people (and the injury of more than 800) by a lone gunman in Las Vegas, Trump delivers a prime-time address on the subject of gun control. He observes that, at the time the Second Amendment was written, a skilled marksman could fire, at most, three or four rounds a minute.

“The right to bear arms cannot become a license for American carnage,” he says, borrowing a line from his inaugural address. “We’re either going to get serious about regulating the ability of just about anyone to get access to high-powered, rapid-firing weapons, or we’re going to start requiring every gun owner to spend every other Sunday doing drills in their local ‘well-regulated militia’ — just like it says in the Constitution.” Then he drives an assault weapon ban through Congress.

May 2018: In the face of a migration crisis on the U.S.-Mexico border, Trump proposes a grand-immigration bargain with congressional Democrats: passage of the 2013 McCain immigration bill that passed the Senate with a bipartisan 68-32 vote but was killed in the House. Later, he expands the proposal to a $2 trillion infrastructure bill with “Buy American” provisions, in exchange for expedited environmental reviews for federal projects.

June 2018: Invoking Gerald Ford’s congressional testimony regarding his presidential pardon of Richard Nixon, Trump agrees to sit before the House Intelligence Committee on the subject of his campaign’s links to Russia. He expresses regret for hiring Paul Manafort as campaign chairman and for his praise for WikiLeaks, which he concedes interfered in the 2016 election. But he challenges the factual basis of the Steele dossier and the legal basis for the F.B.I.’s investigation of his campaign.

July 2019: In a telephone call with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump makes no mention of the Biden family.

February 2020: Warning Americans that the novel coronavirus risks becoming the greatest global health emergency of the century, Trump tells Americans that we can beat this, and keep the economy strong, by adopting common-sense social-distancing measures: avoiding crowded public transportation, sports arenas, concerts and bars. Going further than even his own health experts recommended, he talks up his well-known germophobia and insists that everyone in the White House wear a face mask. But he also warns state governors that attempts to lock down entire communities in an effort to contain the spread is a futile cure that will impose ruinous economic costs.

June 2020: After the killing of George Floyd, Trump convenes a conference of law enforcement officials and others to develop a set of national police standards. He asks the Democratic Representative Val Demings of Florida to lead the conference. He continues to drive Obama era civil rights investigations into police departments with questionable practices and obtain consent decrees to improve policing and reduce profiling of minorities. After police organizations in Minneapolis were videoed slashing reporters car tires, he speaks nationally on the importance of public reporting in speaking truth to power and vows to hold regular press conferences where truth will come before politics.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 06:46 am
@hightor,
The assumption that rural and urban interests are inherently opposed shouldn't be carved in stone.
Although cultural identities and societal values might differ between rural and urban regions, there are other differences in society as well which don't define national elections.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 07:44 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
Interesting. Because at the time the Constitution was drawn up, the Electoral College was in part designed to restrict the influence of urban voters.

What make you think that? I've never heard anything about a preference against urban voters regarding the original purpose.

I thought the original purpose was to ensure that only the wisest people would decide who the next president would be.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 08:20 am
Quote:
Michigan Supreme Court Orders Lockdown Lifted Immediately, Rejects Whitmer’s Request For Delay

Quote:
The Michigan State Supreme Court ruled on Monday that an Oct. 2 decision striking down Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s emergency orders is effective immediately.

The court decided in a 6-1 ruling to deny Whitmer’s request to allow her orders to stay in place until Oct. 30. The administration argued that it needed the extra time to come up with contingency plans and to work with the legislature. The majority decision ruled that the court did not have the authority to grant the request.

“Executive orders issued under that act are of no continuing legal effect,” the court said, according to the Detroit Free Press. “This order is effective upon entry.”

Michigan Speaker of the House Lee Chatfield, a Republican, celebrated the ruling in a message posted on Twitter.

“Another big win at the Supreme Court today!” Chatfield said. “The law is the law, and partisan politics can’t change that. The people will finally have their voices heard in this process. The House is in again tomorrow, and I hope the Governor is ready to cooperate. It’s time to work together!”

Democrats are the authoritarians. Fascists are authoritarians. See where this headed if the courts are packed? The female Stalin has been put in her place.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/michigan-supreme-court-orders-lockdown-lifted-immediately-rejects-whitmers-request-for-delay?%3Futm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwtwitter
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 08:28 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
I thought the original purpose was to ensure that only the wisest people would decide who the next president would be.
If you refer to the original - the comitia centuriata ("Centuriate Assembly) of the Roman Republic - that certainly was so.

In the newly founded USA, the original idea was that the most knowledgeable and informed individuals from each State select the president based solely on merit and without regard to State of origin or political party. (Office of the Historian, US House of Representatives; Kimberling, William C. : Essays in Elections - The Electoral College. Washington: National Clearinghouse on Election Administration, Federal Election Commission, 1992)
oralloy
 
  -2  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 08:35 am
@Walter Hinteler,
So in other words, yes.

"the wisest people"

"the most knowledgeable and informed individuals"

Same thing.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Tue 13 Oct, 2020 08:37 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
I've never heard anything about a preference against urban voters regarding the original purpose.

That's because the country was predominantly rural at the time. The preference wasn't explicit but the E.C. came to have that effect.
Quote:
I thought the original purpose was to ensure that only the wisest people would decide who the next president would be.

It was also designed to protect the physically smaller states against the large ones — NJ vs Virginia, for example. The rise of mega-cities, was of course, never envisioned. But restricting the vote to white, land-owning men — and allowing slaves to be counted as 3/5 of a person — effectively gave large agricultural states more representation. Over time, however, the density of population increased in small states with urban manufacturing areas and westward expansion led to geographically large states with small populations.

The compromises and deals which went into the formation of our government reflected the conditions of the time. Some of them were lofty and showed foresight and wisdom; some weren't. The E.C. was never perfect. It's anti-democratic features have only increased over the years.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.42 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 05:36:16