2016 Election

[it]

Originally Posted by Big Sarge

I think this election will be a choice between bad or worse.

As apposed to which elections in what country and/or alternative universe?

[xoxoxoBruce]

The powers that be, and wish to remain being, are worried.

How can we stop Donald Trump? This is a question Republican Party donors and strategists have been asking themselves for weeks, a report says.

The GOP’s biggest donors are planning to invest scores of millions of dollars in a campaign to take Trump down, the New York Times reported. Republican strategists and donors have gathered groups to launch a smear campaign against Trump and amassed dossiers on his previous support for universal health care and higher taxes, the Times report published on Friday said. They have even discussed to establish a “super PAC” in order to convince conservative voters that the New York billionaire is not one of them. But the big-money Republican network is also extremely worried that any concerted attack against Trump might backfire, given his tendency to counterattack viciously.

Attack viciously? I'd say that's a given.

The wealthy donors have committed hundreds of millions of dollars to shape the Republican primary race and groom a contender who can win the White House back for them, but the maverick Manhattan developer has rocked their boat. They are also finding that money is a devalued currency in the blustery, post-policy campaign designed by Trump, which is not driven expensive advertising campaigns but by social media feuds and unending free publicity, the Times report said.

The Club for Growth, which helped sabotage the populist presidential run of Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor, in 2008, is also planning to attack Trump. Republican presidential hopeful and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. The group has spent millions of dollars on intraparty campaigns attacking Republican candidates who deviate from conservative economic orthodoxy.The group’s president, David McIntosh, however, said they were still not clear how to deal with Trump, who is tapping into the raw anger of Republican voters against leaders on Capitol Hill.

link The raw anger in most of the voters, of any stripe, is next step after desperation and exasperation, with the bullshit in congress. But they all forget the white house is the dog & pony show. The real problem is the manipulation of primaries to put puppets from gerrymandered districts in congress, state legislatures, and governor's mansions.

[BigV]

Just to be clear, the problem is for the voters, who are angry. The gerrymandered districts, which are the real problem, are the intentional product of the hard work of the politicians.

[it]

Originally Posted by BigV

Just to be clear, the problem is for the voters, who are angry. The gerrymandered districts, which are the real problem, are the intentional product of the hard work of the politicians.

Eh. Sure - gerrymandering, the electoral college, first-past-the-post /winner-takes-all voting... There are many hindrances on the way to a more democratic system.

But I doubt having a more democratic system in place would solve many of your problems.

Instead they create muddy middle grounds, on one hand it would be much harder for one party to monopolize The House and cockblock every move of the other party, because when things are more democratic there are often smaller parties you can sway instead... On the other hand that becomes the standard procedure since the "ruling party" can't really monopolize it either, so every single move requires a lot of I scratch your back you scratch mine, every executive act becomes an awkward multi-party negotiation, thus voting one way or another on matters that the small party blocks voter's did not cast their votes about and might very well have completely different opinions. A more democratic election system can very easily result in a government that does a worst job in executing the will of the people then otherwise.

p.s.
I am not yet a 100% sure if the above is devil advocating or me changing my mind, I usually argue the exact opposite.

[sexobon]

Originally Posted by traceur

p.s.
I am not yet a 100% sure if the above is devil advocating or me changing my mind, I usually argue the exact opposite.

We call it flip-flopping. It's a sport here. Maybe you could go pro.

[it]

Originally Posted by sexobon

We call it flip-flopping. It's a sport here. Maybe you could go pro.

...For politicians, having consistent opinions between the time you run to get elected for describing what you think you should do and the time you actually get elected to do what you think you should do... Makes you a good representative.

For everyone else, not changing your opinion when you find a good enough reason to change it makes you an unreasonable human being.

Except ofcourse, the "for everyone else" bit is stupid, it applies equally to politicians, and creates an interesting result where what makes them good representatives also makes them unreasonable human beings. But just for kicks and/or potential point conveying, and mostly to see how you'd react, I am going to leave the "for everyone else" bit in there despite changing my mind about it mid post.

[sexobon]

Well, I suppose that's alright, as long as it's for anyone else and not for everyone else.

[it]

Originally Posted by sexobon

Well, I suppose that's alright, as long as it's for anyone else and not for everyone else.

Got me there

[BigV]

“Today, the largest six financial institutions in this country have assets of some $10 trillion, equivalent to 60 percent of the GDP of America,” the senator from Vermont told a crowd of 11,000. “After we bailed them out, because they were ‘too big to fail,’ most of them are now a lot bigger than they were before.” - - Bernie Sanders.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...9f4_story.html

I'm glad to hear someone who's not an Occupy Wall Street activist acknowledge this dangerous situation.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Dangerous for whom? Certainly not the 1% who control the government.

[it]

So for those who appose Hillary...


If it came down to Clinton vs. Trump, who would you vote for?

[sexobon]

The one who has the best vice presidential running mate to take over.

[Pamela]

Whoever has the sharpest creases. I *swoon* for sharp creases!

[fargon]

Trump

[Big Sarge]

When it comes down to it, does it really matter who is president? I think it is the corporations that control the Speaker of the House are the ones that control the nation. The party and constituents seem to have no influence over the speaker.