American Politics XII: We Can Do Bad All By Ourselves

[Eahland]

So you are saying that "the high road" includes acknowledging the pandemic. You believe, absurdly, that there is some electoral advantage to be gained by ignoring the pandemic. And it is simply a coincidence that this aligns with your long-standing opposition to any and all acknowledgement of the pandemic. Hmm.

I keep telling you, the Democrats can do that, but they don't want to. It is not the case they the GOP gets to defy courts and the Democrats don't.

Not campaigning cost them multiple state legislatures and nearly cost them the house. It gained them nothing.

They should do it.

Doesn't matter how many people you kill, as long as the Democrats gain from it.

[Ifreann]

So you are saying that "the high road" includes acknowledging the pandemic. You believe, absurdly, that there is some electoral advantage to be gained by ignoring the pandemic. And it is simply a coincidence that this aligns with your long-standing opposition to any and all acknowledgement of the pandemic. Hmm.

I keep telling you, the Democrats can do that, but they don't want to. It is not the case they the GOP gets to defy courts and the Democrats don't.

Not campaigning cost them multiple state legislatures and nearly cost them the house. It gained them nothing.

See, I don't believe you. Your desperate desire to ignore the pandemic is highly likely to bias your reasoning.

They should do it.

They won't, because they don't want to. They don't want a system rigged for them to win, they want to uphold the system as they imagine it existed pre-Trump. They want to "return" to the imaginary politics of the West Wing, they want politics to be a friendly competition of rhetoric and public speaking, and they want to lose that competition some of the time so that they can tell themselves that the competition is fair.

[San Lumen]

Not campaigning cost them multiple state legislatures and nearly cost them the house. It gained them nothing.

They should do it.

Doesn't matter how many people you kill, as long as the Democrats gain from it.

And this is why Democrats lose. They are always taking the high road. If They lost the House and Senate you’d have said “oh well at least we didn’t possibly spread a disease. Never mind if Biden gets absolutely nothing done and not a single confirmation of a nominee.”’

[Juristonia]

They should. Stop taking the high road.

Aside from literally everything else that's wrong about everything else you've been saying, as has been explained to you by everyone else already, what good is a Dem win if the Dems just do what Repubs do?
What's the point of the party if they just do the same vile shit you'd like the GOP to not do, exactly? Why not just vote GOP if GOP behaviour is what you want out of your representatives?

[Ifreann]

Doesn't matter how many people you kill, as long as the Democrats gain from it.

And this is why Democrats lose. They are always taking the high road. If They lost the House and Senate you’d have said “oh well at least we didn’t possibly spread a disease. Never mind if Biden gets absolutely nothing done and not a single confirmation of a nominee.”’

Democrats control the House, Senate, and White House and you're complaining about how they always lose.

[Ors Might]

Doesn't matter how many people you kill, as long as the Democrats gain from it.

And this is why Democrats lose. They are always taking the high road. If They lost the House and Senate you’d have said “oh well at least we didn’t possibly spread a disease. Never mind if Biden gets absolutely nothing done and not a single confirmation of a nominee.”’

Not wanting your people to die is not taking the high road, Jesus Christ. You're actually criticizing Democrats for not wanting people to die.

[San Lumen]

And this is why Democrats lose. They are always taking the high road. If They lost the House and Senate you’d have said “oh well at least we didn’t possibly spread a disease. Never mind if Biden gets absolutely nothing done and not a single confirmation of a nominee.”’

Democrats control the House, Senate, and White House and you're complaining about how they always lose.

They nearly lost it. They should hand gained seats but didn’t.

[Ifreann]

Democrats control the House, Senate, and White House and you're complaining about how they always lose.

They nearly lost it. They should hand gained seats but didn’t.

Maybe they would have lost whichever of those three things you are referring to by the singular 'it' if more of their supporters and voters and candidates had died of covid.

[The Jamesian Republic]

Does anyone want the Democrats to do the same thing the GOP is doing? Considering what we have seen from the GOP.

[Ifreann]

Does anyone want the Democrats to do the same thing the GOP is doing? Considering what we have seen from the GOP.

Obviously some people do want that, yes.

[The Jamesian Republic]

Does anyone want the Democrats to do the same thing the GOP is doing? Considering what we have seen from the GOP.

Obviously some people do want that, yes.

But why though?

You can take the low road but not sink to GOP low.

[San Lumen]

Obviously some people do want that, yes.

But why though?

You can take the low road but not sink to GOP low.

When you have a party that doesn’t believe in democracy and nominates conspiracy theorists for statewide office you can’t have that attitude.

[Ifreann]

Obviously some people do want that, yes.

But why though?

You can take the low road but not sink to GOP low.

Try reading the thread.

[Adamede]

Obviously some people do want that, yes.

But why though?

You can take the low road but not sink to GOP low.

To get back at the GOP.

[The Black Forrest]

But why though?

You can take the low road but not sink to GOP low.

To get back at the GOP.

Indeed. I can see that. I am envisioning a “Don’t say Religion” bill.

[The Black Forrest]

Obviously some people do want that, yes.

But why though?

You can take the low road but not sink to GOP low.

Funny thing about Americans. You say “They can’t go that low” and there will be many who will say “Oh yea? Hold my drink!”

[The Jamesian Republic]

But why though?

You can take the low road but not sink to GOP low.

When you have a party that doesn’t believe in democracy and nominates conspiracy theorists for statewide office you can’t have that attitude.

Then nominate socialists. By socialist I mean not social democrats. Or something to counteract it.

[San Lumen]

When you have a party that doesn’t believe in democracy and nominates conspiracy theorists for statewide office you can’t have that attitude.

Then nominate socialists. By socialist I mean not social democrats. Or something to counteract it.

A socialist isn’t going to win in North Dakota or West Virginia. A socialist was nominated in the latter in 2020 for Senate. They got 27 percent of the vote.

[Thermodolia]

So why did the framers of the constitution reach a compromise position to establish a bicameral legislature if there was no issue to reach a compromise over?

The bicameral legislature wasn't a compromise position, it was a deliberate means to entrench the power of landed interests, as James Madison revealed when he said the quiet part out loud.

our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The Senate, therefore, ought to be this body

Except that’s wrong the bicameral system was a compromise. Other members wanted an elected unicameral chamber while people like Madison didn’t want people to be able to elect anything.

They compromised and made the senate the indirectly elected while the House was to be elected by the people

[Thermodolia]

What a dumb fucking idea. Just get rid of the Senate at that point, you're just creating a second House that will have all the same problems with no benefits and further slows down the legislative process.

I've come to unironically agree with the idea that the Senate needs to go. And not just because of the current cycle of things. A lot of legislation has gone through the House but then immediately dies in the Senate. Expand the House, ban gerrymandering, and let it be the defining thing, not this Senate bullshit that's becoming less and less representative of the country all the time.

The senate can work as a body but you’d need to reduce its powers and strip it of its ability to filibuster.

If you had a senate that was elected via STV with 5 senators per state and a house that had 500 members elected via Closed Party List PR and you then restricted the senate to only offering advice on bills while keeping their ability to approve nominations and the like it could work just as well as removing the senate.

[American Legionaries]

I've come to unironically agree with the idea that the Senate needs to go. And not just because of the current cycle of things. A lot of legislation has gone through the House but then immediately dies in the Senate. Expand the House, ban gerrymandering, and let it be the defining thing, not this Senate bullshit that's becoming less and less representative of the country all the time.

Or change the nature of the senate. House is represented by proportional voting across the country, senate represents each states, also proportional. Not sure how many senators.

100 senators. Each state gets two and they're by default one from each party. I don't think any state is tilted far enough that PR would result in two from the same party.

[Thermodolia]

Or change the nature of the senate. House is represented by proportional voting across the country, senate represents each states, also proportional. Not sure how many senators.

100 senators. Each state gets two and they're by default one from each party. I don't think any state is tilted far enough that PR would result in two from the same party.

STV with 5 senators per state would be better. You’d also get third parties and more independents too

[Bear Stearns]

as of yesterday i now have a girlfriend. she works in advertising.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5g196vURUDo

clearly

[Bienenhalde]

Yes.

They haven't done anything about it, but the gov said it's going to.

I think that's super expensive to do on a state level, unfortunately. Hence the west coast just needs to become its own country at this point and immediately create good things since everyone else wants to hold us back.

(I joke, sorta)

I thought other people said that the US was too large of a country to have universal health care run by the federal government. By that logic, wouldn't it be more practical for states to administer a universal healthcare program? Many European countries that have their own universal healthcare programs despite being no larger than US states in population or area.

[Stellar Colonies]

I think that's super expensive to do on a state level, unfortunately. Hence the west coast just needs to become its own country at this point and immediately create good things since everyone else wants to hold us back.

(I joke, sorta)

I thought other people said that the US was too large of a country to have universal health care run by the federal government. By that logic, wouldn't it be more practical for states to administer a universal healthcare program? Many European countries that have their own universal healthcare programs despite being no larger than US states in population or area.

There was a failed attempt to do something like that here in California.