Fixed Elections

[DrZoidberg]

link

So this is getting pretty dangerous.

Surrogates for Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump accelerated their rhetoric on the racially charged issue of election fraud, accusing Democrats of systematic cheating in some of the largest U.S. cities.


“They leave dead people on the rolls, and then they pay people to vote those dead people four, five, six, seven, eight, nine times,” former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani said on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday. He added, “dead people generally vote for Democrats.”

How reckless can these people get? This is an open volley for contesting an election. But there is no evidence for a rigged election. Now while Trump can contest legally, there are little to no grounds for a case, and he most likely lacks the support necessary to block delegate teams being sent to DC.

What in the hell is their end game? Will there be guns?

It's so bizarre to think that this is the best candidate the Republicans could produce

 

[whichphilosophy]

link

So this is getting pretty dangerous.

How reckless can these people get? This is an open volley for contesting an election. But there is no evidence for a rigged election. Now while Trump can contest legally, there are little to no grounds for a case, and he most likely lacks the support necessary to block delegate teams being sent to DC.

What in the hell is their end game? Will there be guns?

It's so bizarre to think that this is the best candidate the Republicans could produce

It's so bizarre to think that these are the best candidates both parties could produce.

 

[bilby]

It's so bizarre to think that this is the best candidate the Republicans could produce

It's so bizarre to think that these are the best candidates both parties could produce.

Hillary Clinton appears to be a fairly typical US presidential candidate; Her resume is unremarkable amongst other candidates, both winners and runners-up, in past contests.

The only remarkable distinction appears to me to be her gender; and the unusual level of vitriol thrown at her seems likely to have that as its basis. The stated reasons people give for opposing her candidacy are all things that other candidates in the past have suffered from; and yet they are treated as insurmountable obstacles only now that they are characteristics of a female candidate.

She will likely make a good, if fairly unremarkable, POTUS. Rather like her predecessor, who was also unreasonably derided by certain elements of the public, although in his case his offence was his having the poor taste to be black, rather than female.

 

[TV and credit cards]

It's so bizarre to think that these are the best candidates both parties could produce.

Hillary Clinton appears to be a fairly typical US presidential candidate; Her resume is unremarkable amongst other candidates, both winners and runners-up, in past contests.

The only remarkable distinction appears to me to be her gender; and the unusual level of vitriol thrown at her seems likely to have that as its basis. The stated reasons people give for opposing her candidacy are all things that other candidates in the past have suffered from; and yet they are treated as insurmountable obstacles only now that they are characteristics of a female candidate.

She will likely make a good, if fairly unremarkable, POTUS. Rather like her predecessor, who was also unreasonably derided by certain elements of the public, although in his case his offence was his having the poor taste to be black, rather than female.

While Barrack Obama is very much seen as that black man in the white's house, I'm not getting the sense of Hillary Clinton being viewed as a weak female. Somewhere along the line she went through gender reassignment from female to politician. My sense is of her being largely viewed as a typical forked tongue politician and little else.
My hope (and I naively always have hope) is that with an irreparably fractured GOP, GOP lite will have little choice but to move to the center in search of identity and relevancy.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's so bizarre to think that this is the best candidate the Republicans could produce

It's so bizarre to think that these are the best candidates both parties could produce.

While a corrupt scum-bag I have no doubt she can do the job. I don't think she'll fuck it up.

- - - Updated - - -

I think Trump is a blessing to Clinton. I don't think it's possible to make her look better than standing next to a guy like Trump. She is horrible, but less horrible than him.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's so bizarre to think that these are the best candidates both parties could produce.

While a corrupt scum-bag I have no doubt she can do the job. I don't think she'll fuck it up.

- - - Updated - - -

I think Trump is a blessing to Clinton. I don't think it's possible to make her look better than standing next to a guy like Trump. She is horrible, but less horrible than him.

As I keep saying it's choosing the least worst. Anyway she can always borrow a trillion dollars a year like Obama to fund any programs. Trump could do the same to fund tax cuts.

 

[Elixir]

It's so bizarre to think that these are the best candidates both parties could produce.

While a corrupt scum-bag I have no doubt she can do the job. I don't think she'll fuck it up.

- - - Updated - - -

I think Trump is a blessing to Clinton. I don't think it's possible to make her look better than standing next to a guy like Trump. She is horrible, but less horrible than him.

Even before the primaries were over I was touting Trump as God's Gift to Democrats... and it has yet to be fully unwrapped. We'll see what happens to the House and Senate.
But ain't it amazing? 16 candidates on the stage, and the republitards picked the ONLY one who could possibly lose to Clinton. Well played, boys!

 

[blastula]

What unfairness do you mean?

They are attacking each other to the extent that they don't talk coherently on issues affecting the US.

Uh, this is not the "reply when you're drunk" thread.

As a non American they are both not addressing the issues where it wouldn't make much difference if the posters were drunk.

You could be anybody from anywhere, and still your reply was both nonsense and had nothing do with the quote you replied to.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

On AM radio Mike Gallagher was complaining about the likes of Ingraham, Medved, and Hewitt speaking out against Trump's 'leave you in suspense' line. Limbaugh seemed to be with Gallagher, that Trump did well last night, but seemed to be protesting a bit too much.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

When it comes to fixed elections (this is a thread about fixed elections), it is remarkable that over the last week numerous federal judges have ruled against GOP states that refused to extend registration in states where the hurricane hit. And have ruled against GOP caging stunts elsewhere. Nobody fixes elections like the GOP. It looks like there is about to be a mass movement against gerrymandering starting up. There is so much discontent both on the right and left as regards voting in America, I suspect a large omnibus reform bill will sooner or later be forthcoming.

 

[funinspace]

They are attacking each other to the extent that they don't talk coherently on issues affecting the US.

Uh, this is not the "reply when you're drunk" thread.

As a non American they are both not addressing the issues where it wouldn't make much difference if the posters were drunk.

You could be anybody from anywhere, and still your reply was both nonsense and had nothing do with the quote you replied to.

Well, what if I was nobody from nowhere, and my reply was sensible and had something to do with the quote; and drunk of course

 

[DrZoidberg]

While a corrupt scum-bag I have no doubt she can do the job. I don't think she'll fuck it up.

- - - Updated - - -

I think Trump is a blessing to Clinton. I don't think it's possible to make her look better than standing next to a guy like Trump. She is horrible, but less horrible than him.

As I keep saying it's choosing the least worst. Anyway she can always borrow a trillion dollars a year like Obama to fund any programs. Trump could do the same to fund tax cuts.

Aka Reaganomics

 

[whichphilosophy]

As I keep saying it's choosing the least worst. Anyway she can always borrow a trillion dollars a year like Obama to fund any programs. Trump could do the same to fund tax cuts.

Aka Reaganomics

Correct.

 

[zorq]

When it comes to fixed elections (this is a thread about fixed elections), it is remarkable that over the last week numerous federal judges have ruled against GOP states that refused to extend registration in states where the hurricane hit. And have ruled against GOP caging stunts elsewhere. Nobody fixes elections like the GOP. It looks like there is about to be a mass movement against gerrymandering starting up. There is so much discontent both on the right and left as regards voting in America, I suspect a large omnibus reform bill will sooner or later be forthcoming.

I don't know exactly how much discontent there is regarding voting in America, but I know the major parties are content with the setup as it is right now. A lot of Republicans are happy with their minority suppression and current gerrymandering advantages, and incumbents in both parties like to be able to set up safe districts to ride their careers out in.

Voting reform is a hidden trigger issue for me. If Trump set voting reform as the key plank in his platform, I would be voting for him right now regardless of his other attributes. Instant runoff elections or Coroset and (demographics blind) computer generated redistricting would be a personal boon.

But the way US federalism is set up, it just can't happen nationally without an ammendment to the constituition which is impossible as long a both parties stand in the way of it.

 

[bilby]

When it comes to fixed elections (this is a thread about fixed elections), it is remarkable that over the last week numerous federal judges have ruled against GOP states that refused to extend registration in states where the hurricane hit. And have ruled against GOP caging stunts elsewhere. Nobody fixes elections like the GOP. It looks like there is about to be a mass movement against gerrymandering starting up. There is so much discontent both on the right and left as regards voting in America, I suspect a large omnibus reform bill will sooner or later be forthcoming.

I don't know exactly how much discontent there is regarding voting in America, but I know the major parties are content with the setup as it is right now. A lot of Republicans are happy with their and minority suppression current gerymandering advantages and incumbents in both parties like to be able to set up safe districts to ride their careers out in.

Voting reform is a hidden trigger issue for me. If Trump set voting reform as the key plank in his platform, I would be voting for him right now regardless of his other attributes. Instant runoff elections or Coroset and (demographics blind) computer generated redistricting would be a personal boon.

But the way US federalism is set up, it just can't happen nationally without an ammendment to the constituition which is impossible as long a both parties stand in the way of it.

But, but, surely if Ralph Nader was allowed to join in the TV debates, it would happen without a constitutional amendment?

 

[fromderinside]

But, but, surely if Ralph Nader was allowed to join in the TV debates, it would happen without a constitutional amendment?

but, bilby. Its right here in the Constitution in article Ia-burp. A candidate must have at least 10% standing in five national polls selected by the league of Women Voters to be included in a debate. I wrote that there myself.