Trump vs. Biden

[ceecee]

Why vote 3rd party ?
Because someone has to place first brick.
Since viable 3rd party is probably one of the last things that will happen on it's own.

Ranked voting will provide the vehicle for this. Maine has it, the rest of the country can too.

 

[Virtual ghost]

What exactly do you mean with "Ranked voting?"

 

[ceecee]

What exactly do you mean with "Ranked voting?"

Ranked choice voting I should say.

Ranked-choice voting is on the ballot in Massachusetts, here’s how it works

 

[anticlimatic]

I personally just feel we're fucked either way.

Not us, but our descendants for sure. We will at least be able to live off of the fat of the traditional capitalist American land for a while longer. Trump is a buffoon, but he's also the last bulwark against an eventual totalitarian one-party system.

If Democrats take all three branches of government they can pack the Supreme Court with enough radical justices to abolish the electoral college and turn the country into the Hunger Games, where big cities soak up all of the wealth and influence and leave the small towns to rot.

They'll be able to abolish dissenting news platforms or stories as <insert whatever reason here> (As they did with the Hunter Biden story), redefine words if they have to in real time in order to make agendas work (as they did with Gender Preference for ACB).

So they will have their own North Korea-esque state news outlet to distribute propaganda, which the MSM currently does completely aside from a few marginalized organizations (that are likely on the chopping block), and they will have Big Tech billionaires ready to harvest people's data and spy on them, control what kind of stuff people have access to, again like North Korea.

And then the system will be complete- so anyone with a thirst for power can slide right in and enjoy their lovely pre-fab authoritarian home. I hate being right all the time. I genuinely do. If there's any evidence that I'm missing that can shoot enough holes in my theory to kill it I'd be eternally grateful.

 

[Jonny]

Please ignore then hundreds of thousands this administration has killed, raped, assaulted, traumatized, allowed to starve to death or or perish in a fire but yeah, let's worry about what the fucking dictionary says from an extreme right, loaded with propaganda and fake news outfit like CNS News?

The reason the right acts and talks like this is because they know Trump ripped the mask off of their ideology and warped view of reality for everyone to see and now - they mad. And it's all your fault because you are staring at a screen.

Except he's posting this on an internet forum. ������

I don't know what you're getting at here...I think it's reasonable to want to preserve some piece of our culture (like dictionary definitions, etc.). I also think it's reasonable to defend the free flow of "information", even if that information is false and meant to cause harm. I agree that the degree to which this is being pushed, as though voting for Biden will literally destroy our way of life, is just absurd fearmongering. And I think ignoring all the problems you mention is also myopic and wrong.

Trump is a buffoon, but he's also the last bulwark against an eventual totalitarian one-party system.

This and the rest is absolute bollocks. Fearmongering at its worst.

I'm not sure why you're talking this way though. As you said earlier, you don't see how Biden could possibly win. If you truly "hate being right all the time" then you have nothing to worry about. Trump will win and will continue to defend the country against crazed radicals like me. Stand back and stand by.

 

[Jaguar]

If Democrats take all three branches of government they can pack the Supreme Court with enough radical justices to abolish the electoral college

“Let's be honest, we don't elect a president of the United States. We elect a president of the battleground states under the current method,” Lennox said.

Conservatives for Yes on National Popular Vote say their method would allow every person in every state to have an equally weighted vote, including conservatives in deep blue states who may not turn out because they don’t think their vote matters.

The group has seen a boost from former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, who is supporting its efforts. Steele said that the Republican Party is increasingly at a disadvantage in the Electoral College as more states, like Texas, with 38 electors, could become more liberal.

“We empower citizens to feel and to come to know that their votes will count in every election,” Steele told The Hill.

Push for national popular vote movement gets boost from conservatives | TheHill

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Not us, but our descendants for sure. We will at least be able to live off of the fat of the traditional capitalist American land for a while longer. Trump is a buffoon, but he's also the last bulwark against an eventual totalitarian one-party system.

If Democrats take all three branches of government they can pack the Supreme Court with enough radical justices to abolish the electoral college and turn the country into the Hunger Games, where big cities soak up all of the wealth and influence and leave the small towns to rot.

They'll be able to abolish dissenting news platforms or stories as <insert whatever reason here> (As they did with the Hunter Biden story), redefine words if they have to in real time in order to make agendas work (as they did with Gender Preference for ACB).

So they will have their own North Korea-esque state news outlet to distribute propaganda, which the MSM currently does completely aside from a few marginalized organizations (that are likely on the chopping block), and they will have Big Tech billionaires ready to harvest people's data and spy on them, control what kind of stuff people have access to, again like North Korea.

And then the system will be complete- so anyone with a thirst for power can slide right in and enjoy their lovely pre-fab authoritarian home. I hate being right all the time. I genuinely do. If there's any evidence that I'm missing that can shoot enough holes in my theory to kill it I'd be eternally grateful.

You're missing something about the U.N (in league with the Roman Catholic Church) being a front for the Antichrist. Very disappointing that you left that out. I love it when people "interpret" current events with the Book of Revelations.

 

[Jonny]

For those who favor Trump, hope comes in the form of the Trafalgar hypothesis:

Under this reality, the country is 6% more Trumpian, on average, than standard polls are letting on. As I understand it, the crux of the hypothesis is that there are a number of closeted Trump supporters who tell pollsters one thing in response to the standard "Who will you vote for" question, but actually expose their true preference when asked about who their neighbors support. This pollster was more accurate in many crucial swing states in 2016:

Michigan
Average: Clinton +3.0
Trafalgar: Trump + 2.0
Actual: Trump + 0.3

Pennsylvania
Average: Clinton +1.9
Trafalgar: Trump +1.0
Actual: Trump +0.7

Florida
Average: Trump +0.2
Trafalgar: Trump +4.0
Actual: Trump 1.2

Ohio
Average: Trump +3.5
Trafalgar: Trump +5.0
Actual: Trump + 8.1

The question is, was this pollster right for the wrong reasons. The alternative theory was that there were many swingy voters who couldn't stand either Clinton or Trump, the news cycle broke against Clinton in the final stretch, and most of these swingers ended up voting for Trump.

Michigan
Average: Clinton 45.4
Actual: Clinton 47.0

Pennsylvania
Average: Clinton 46.2
Actual: Clinton 47.5

Florida
Average: Clinton 46.4
Actual: Clinton 47.4

Ohio
Average: Clinton 42.3
Actual: Clinton 43.2

As shown above, the polling averages each had Clinton below her final result. This means that she increased her vote share once people finally voted, but her margin evaporated, because more of those folks voted for Trump.

Ultimately, we'll know which is more true on November 3rd.

 

[Virtual ghost]

“Let's be honest, we don't elect a president of the United States. We elect a president of the battleground states under the current method,” Lennox said.

Conservatives for Yes on National Popular Vote say their method would allow every person in every state to have an equally weighted vote, including conservatives in deep blue states who may not turn out because they don’t think their vote matters.

The group has seen a boost from former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, who is supporting its efforts. Steele said that the Republican Party is increasingly at a disadvantage in the Electoral College as more states, like Texas, with 38 electors, could become more liberal.

“We empower citizens to feel and to come to know that their votes will count in every election,” Steele told The Hill.

Push for national popular vote movement gets boost from conservatives | TheHill

Absolutely, the president is the most federal function there is and therefore everyone should get genuine equal say in this. Because only once the whole country becomes one big swing state everyone will have a part to play. Therefore in order to attract so large groups you will actually need to suggest policy (country wide).

 

[Jonny]

If Democrats take all three branches of government they can pack the Supreme Court with enough radical justices to abolish the electoral college and turn the country into the Hunger Games, where big cities soak up all of the wealth and influence and leave the small towns to rot.

Care to elaborate on this hypothesis?

The 18 most "Urban" states/districts in the union are:

District of Columbia - 100%
California - 95
New Jersey - 94.7
Nevada - 94.2
Massachusetts - 92
Hawaii - 91.9
Florida - 91.2
Rhode Island - 90.7
Utah - 90.6
Arizona - 89.8
Illinois - 88.5
Connecticut - 88
New York - 87.9
Maryland - 87.2
Colorado - 86.2
Texas - 84.7
Washington - 84.1
Delaware - 83.3

These states have a combined 271 electoral votes. They represent approximately 51% of the votes cast in 2016. If someone went after the big cities in each of these states, and built a policy around attracting 55% of the vote in each state (for a 10% margin), they could capture the electoral college with 51% x 55% = 28% of the total votes cast in the country.

This is, of course, assuming your hypothetical dystopian hellscape where the policies of the prevailing party are tailored exclusively to the cities at the expense of the small towns. I would argue that your hypothetical scenario is far more likely under the current system than it is under the national popular vote.

Here is the current party breakdown:

While it's true that there is a clear Urban/Rural divide in voting patterns, a 60-35% split isn't exactly unanimous consent. In cities, 1 out of every 3 people you meet voted for Donald Trump. In rural areas, 1 out of every 3 people voted for Hillary Clinton. Is it your contention that these breakdowns would somehow be upended by abolishing the electoral college?

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, roughly 80% of the U.S. population lives in an urban area.

I think in practice it is true that Bush would have lost in 2000 under the popular vote. And Trump would have lost in 2016. No doubt the Republicans would have had to change their outreach to gain viability.

Interestingly, if I look at the 317 most populated cities List of United States cities by population - Wikipedia, the total population of those places is only about 30% of the total US population (the smallest on the list has a population of about 100k).

I'm not sure whether you think that places like Los Angeles and New York would dominate the US under a popular vote system, or you were thinking that this big coalition of cities with 100,000+ people would...either way it seems like a bad strategy. And, despite the fact that the electoral college is currently helping Republicans, there isn't anything inherently more favorable to Republicans and rural voters in that system. Sure, if you happen to section off rural areas and give each of them their own state with 3 electoral votes then that could be beneficial. But, you could also section off areas in a way that hurts rural communities.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Care to elaborate on this hypothesis?

The 18 most "Urban" states/districts in the union are:

He probably thinks it's part of some Satanic U.N plot or something.

 

[Jaguar]

I think you should vote for Trump.

Good idea.

 

[Jonny]

This is interesting. There seems to be a relationship between how close the margin of victory is for the winning candidate for president in a particular state and the voter turnout in that state. It's almost like...voters in swing states seem to turnout in greater numbers than voters in non-swing states. But...hmmm...based on free market principles that would imply greater value of the votes in those states. That doesn't seem right to me, based on what I've heard on certain corners of the internet. I've been told the electoral college protects rural folk...I've heard nothing about it giving more power to certain states.

 

[Jaguar]

Hang on to this link through the election, data junkies:

2020 General Election Early Vote Statistics

 

[Totenkindly]

Republicans should have stopped Trump in 2016 when we had the chance

The stuff about Priebus is interesting, its typically been clear he was in a position well beyond his competence level and moral caliber. It just more sketches in the opinions that led to The Lincoln Project.

 

[Jaguar]

Republicans should have stopped Trump in 2016 when we had the chance

The stuff about Priebus is interesting, its typically been clear he was in a position well beyond his competence level and moral caliber. It just more sketches in the opinions that led to The Lincoln Project.

All I have to do is head down to a street below mine and you'll see this big-ass sign that looks like a badminton net with a banner stretched from pole to pole that reads "Keep America Great." I'd like to knock on their door and ask "This is your idea of great? Really?" I could sneak up to the banner at night and pin a Biden button on it. I wonder if they'd notice.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

All I have to do is head down to a street below mine and you'll see this big-ass sign that looks like a badminton net with a banner stretched from pole to pole that reads "Keep America Great." I'd like to knock on their door and ask "This is your idea of great? Really?" I could sneak up to the banner at night and pin a Biden button on it. I wonder if they'd notice.

According to my uncle when I asked him about this, it's great because Obama's not president. So all Trump needs to do is not be Obama? That's a rather underwhelming argument.

 

[Jaguar]

According to my uncle when I asked him about this, it's great because Obama's not president. So all Trump needs to do is not be Obama? That's a rather underwhelming argument.

Does your uncle have a problem with black men or Dems?

 

[Totenkindly]

Fearing a 'Bloodbath,' Republican Senators Begin to Edge Away From Trump

I hope they all burn. Rats politically, scurrying for dry land.

 

[Stigmata]

Fearing a 'Bloodbath,' Republican Senators Begin to Edge Away From Trump

I hope they all burn. Rats politically, scurrying for dry land.

Good. I hope the election results is an absolute massacre for them politically. It's worth keeping in mind, as I'm sure we'll see if Trump does lose, the Republican party will try and rebrand itself and we'll see all the familiar faces repackaged in their political advertisements as "having stood up to Donald Trump". The people don't actually oppose his policies and can live with his complete and utter lack of decorum, the only reason they're pushing back is due to the optics of it all is just now appearing unpopular as a whole while the millions are out of work and the economy continues to crumble.

If people were less directly affected and thus more politically apathetic as they had been, and if Trump was just a little bit better and allowing the quiet parts to stay quiet, they'd continue to fall in line and be good little minions just as they had been.