Discussion: Racism - Part 3

[Tacit Ronin]

I'm also not convinced that the removal of the electoral college wouldn't just make candidates pander and campaign in California and New York only. Just removing California's votes, you would of had Trump win the popular vote by a million.

Yes. The republicans would have to move left and put forward sane policies to win again. How horrible.

It will actually encourage voter turnout. Because solidly blue and red states where alternative opinion doesn't matter will no longer exist. Each vote counts.

 

[Erzengel]

Yes. The republicans would have to move left and put forward sane policies to win again. How horrible.

It will actually encourage voter turnout. Because solidly blue and red states where alternative opinion doesn't matter will no longer exist. Each vote counts.

In theory, yeah it can work and improve voting turnout. But since, we've never done it, I'd also wouldn't be surprised if voting turnout would be similar to what we have now just because of how people can be.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Then we can introduce mandatory voting like the Aussies. You are 18 and automatically registered.

 

[Lily Adler]

Queen Nefertiti Reconstructed Face Sparks Controversary

https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/peo...ust-sparks-outrage/vi-BBJ3732?ocid=spartanntp

 

[Aximili86]

You don't actually have to *vote* down there, Tacit. Just have to turn up and get your name checked off the list. From there you can draw a d*ck on the ballot paper and turn it in if you so desire, and plenty of people do.

 

[LTuser]

Why should 80,000 votes in the Rust Belt outweigh 3 million votes across the nation?

And saying "that's the system we use so we can't question it" is a cop out.

But by the same logic, why should politicians be allowed to just pander to those in CA, FL, NY, WA and the other top 10 big states, and ingore the REST of the country, cause those 10 states make up a majority of the population?

I too think the Electoral College has outlived itself. It made sense so that the colonies could come to an agreement in order to form the country, but in today's culture and our accessibility to things, it no longer makes sense.

I disagree. Eliminating the EC, makes it to where those small states get totally ignored in favor of just the 'big 10' states.. How would that be fairer than how we have it now?

Yes. The republicans would have to move left and put forward sane policies to win again. How horrible.

What about the left needing to move more centralist/right, rather than even MORE LEFTIST? Or is it that you feel only the right wing, needs to compromise/move?

Then we can introduce mandatory voting like the Aussies. You are 18 and automatically registered.

And how would that work?? Fine people if they refuse to vote?
Also, since we have a long thread as is, about voting ids, and the like, how do you ensure that only those lawfully authorized to vote, get 'caught up' in the dragnet of mandating everyone votes?

 

[Spider-Fan]

Wrong because you are assuming all voters will vote the same way in those states, which they will not.

 

[LTuser]

Well, so far, CA has voted straight dem for what, 20+ years, same with NY, WA and Or..

So its a safe bet that they will be voting that way for the foreseeable future..

 

[Teelie]

And yet I seem to recall a certain over-muscled Republican governor in California not too long ago... and several California Republicans in Congress are constantly in the news. Or is this more fake news?

 

[LTuser]

Yes, arnie was a republican governor, but what exactly did he do, showing his conservative roots??

Its like cook county in Illinois, practically all liberal dems, but they do iirc have a few token republicans in the mix..

 

[Tacit Ronin]

You don't actually have to *vote* down there, Tacit. Just have to turn up and get your name checked off the list. From there you can draw a d*ck on the ballot paper and turn it in if you so desire, and plenty of people do.

Doesn't change the fact that they have one of the highest voter turnouts in the world. So they're doing something right.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

What about the left needing to move more centralist/right

They have. Democrats are a center right party.

rather than even MORE LEFTIST?

Laughable. Democrats won't even commit to universal healthcare.

Hilary Clinton said universal healthcare is a pipe dream. That is not even a far right position. That would sink even the most far right Nazi party in Europe.

Or is it that you feel only the right wing, needs to compromise/move?

The far right never compromises. They bully their way into getting everything. The only people who compromise is the center right.

And how would that work?

Like Australia.

 

[Aximili86]

Doesn't change the fact that they have one of the highest voter turnouts in the world. So they're doing something right.

What?! They have the highest voter turnout because they have to show up.

That doesn't necessarily equate to political engagement. That's just "I have to spend a half hour on a Saturday morning at the local church or charity place or elementary school, get my name ticked off a list so I don't get fined". Plenty of people don't care after that. Same with us, you make it mandatory here people aren't going to magically feel better about democracy and take it more seriously - if anything the people that wouldn't have voted of their own accord are just going to resent being forced to.

If you're politically engaged, you're politically engaged by choice, you vote even though you don't have to. Mandating it isn't going to raise the percentage of people doing their due diligence.

 

[LTuser]

They have. Democrats are a center right party.

Strange, they seem totally on the left to me..

The far right never compromises. They bully their way into getting everything. The only people who compromise is the center right.

Funny, over the past 25 years, i've seen far more compromising from the GOP than i ever have the dems..

Like Australia.

Which is what?? Do they mandate everyone votes or face fines? Do they have it where everyone pays X when they get their voter card, and then get refunded a portion each time they go vote?

If you're politically engaged, you're politically engaged by choice, you vote even though you don't have to. Mandating it isn't going to raise the percentage of people doing their due diligence.

Good point. MANDATING something to me, is not making someone more engaged.. Just like mandating people give to charity is not going to make someone wish to be more charitable..

 

[Aximili86]

Technically, theoretically, the government will come and fine them if they don't show up and get marked off the registry list. Unsure if they even enforce it though, it's a good question. It'd be a pretty minor slap on the wrist if they do.

 

[summerteeth]

Funny, over the past 25 years, i've seen far more compromising from the GOP than i ever have the dems..

This is true just look at budget negotiations for proof of this. Republicans passed a budget that added to the deficit but they knew they had to work with Dems because of the lack of numbers in the Senate so they made compromises and passed a budget for 2 years. Obama couldn't do this and walked away from the Grand Bargain because he didn't want to make certain concessions even though Democrats didn't even control the House.

 

[Teelie]

It's even more funny when you realize it's because the Republicans are actually the ones responsible for most of the governmental problems in the past 30 years. Evidence of that is plentiful but ignored because Republicans are experts at dodging responsibility.

 

[Aximili86]

Well, that was a reasonable doesn't-seem-like-he-has-skin-in-the-game post.

"Most of the governmental problems?" Yeah, who's been running Detroit & Baltimore & Chicago for 40-odd years? It's not the *****ey Republicans, issues as they legitimately might have.

 

[Teelie]

So we're bait and switching from Federal to City government and pretending that both are exactly parallel? What about the way California is governed? By a mostly Democratic government that has a big liberal slant and is nothing like say the entire state of West Virginia which is deeply conservative, Republican and in the middle of a massive opoid epidemic that just won't stop? Every time there is a problem in the Federal government, Republicans are usually behind it.

 

[Aximili86]

By that rationale, California's up to its a**hole in debt and certain counties can't even pay their firefighters and other public employees.

"Lolz government problems!" Point is, there's stuff to point to as a major issue of bureaucracy no matter which side's in power at the time. Each party has different issues, but anyone can point out certain stuff either side is ****ing up on.

It's just a childish position to take. Specific things the GOP's screwing up on, go for your life, criticize away. The "all the problems with government are on those dastardly Republicans!" is beyond dishonest though.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Well, so far, CA has voted straight dem for what, 20+ years, same with NY, WA and Or..

So its a safe bet that they will be voting that way for the foreseeable future..

But in popular vote, it is not winner takes all. We seem to have this confusion that only those states matter because we're still thinking in terms of electoral votes. If it goes by popular vote, yes the majority of people who vote in CA will vote democrat, but the people who vote republican will instead of not mattering (because in current system, only the winner takes all...meaning loser gets none), now their votes will reflect in the vote tally for their candidate. It's not a matter of win CA and NY and you win. It's a matter of convincing people to vote for you.

 

[LTuser]

Technically, theoretically, the government will come and fine them if they don't show up and get marked off the registry list. Unsure if they even enforce it though, it's a good question. It'd be a pretty minor slap on the wrist if they do.

SO why have the law, if its not going to be enforced..?

 

[Aximili86]

Plenty of laws aren't actively enforced. What, are you kidding?

Lots of minor stuff is up to local or even individual police officer discretion. Technically, yeah, in Australia you're going to get a fine if you don't vote. How often that actually happens though, hard to say.

 

[Chance Jackson]

But in popular vote, it is not winner takes all. We seem to have this confusion that only those states matter because we're still thinking in terms of electoral votes. If it goes by popular vote, yes the majority of people who vote in CA will vote democrat, but the people who vote republican will instead of not mattering (because in current system, only the winner takes all...meaning loser gets none), now their votes will reflect in the vote tally for their candidate. It's not a matter of win CA and NY and you win. It's a matter of convincing people to vote for you.

this is something they refuse to acknowledge

 

[Sithborg]

Well, that was a reasonable doesn't-seem-like-he-has-skin-in-the-game post.

"Most of the governmental problems?" Yeah, who's been running Detroit & Baltimore & Chicago for 40-odd years? It's not the *****ey Republicans, issues as they legitimately might have.

[looks at MI]

I will tell you, it isn't the Democrats who tried to overthrow democracy and poisoned a city. Also not Dems who are going to go easy and cover up MSU's issues.

Sure, Kwame Kilpatrick was scum, with all his stealing. But, I am not exactly thrilled with the base desires of the GOP in my home state.