2020 US General Election Thread V: Pandemic Postpones Polls

[Post War America]

I mean, to be fair most of our presidents have engaged in activites that aren't exactly copacetic with human rights, or upstanding moral behavior.

I don't think that justifies a president being "elected" despite a supermajority of voters voting against them.

It doesn't but as a measure to prevent vile people from taking office, the Electoral College has completely failed.

[San Lumen]

I don't think that justifies a president being "elected" despite a supermajority of voters voting against them.

It doesn't but as a measure to prevent vile people from taking office, the Electoral College has completely failed.

Its a relic that no longer serves its purpose. on this i fully agree

[Parti Ouvrier]

You are wrong. The current electoral strategy is to focus on winning just enough votes in a handful of key states while the rest are either in the bag or unobtainable. That electoral mentality isn't worth a shit, and even damaging to America's political stability. The possibility of the House being called upon to decide the President-Elect is more than enough to light a fire under the asses of party electoral strategists, and change party outreach as well as decisions on presidential nominees to those with wider appeal in all parts of the Union.

Winning a majority or plurality of the popular vote does require a different strategy than winning a majority in the electoral college. Sorry I misunderstood, but still "lighting a fire under the asses" of both parties isn't any more likely to produce a majority every time than the current situation where a majority of the vote is a meaningless trophy. Republicans and Democrats would be trying for the same thing and TOO often neither would get it.

Why not just amend the requirement for a majority, make it a plurality, or better yet distribute the third party vote using STV so one of the majors always gets a technical majority.

Contingent election is very bad I hope you agree.

The House of Representatives should be proportional and allow other parties to get through like the Bundestag and surely, the way the Senate is continuing to block legislation, their should be demands to abolish the Senate and presidency.

[San Lumen]

Winning a majority or plurality of the popular vote does require a different strategy than winning a majority in the electoral college. Sorry I misunderstood, but still "lighting a fire under the asses" of both parties isn't any more likely to produce a majority every time than the current situation where a majority of the vote is a meaningless trophy. Republicans and Democrats would be trying for the same thing and TOO often neither would get it.

Why not just amend the requirement for a majority, make it a plurality, or better yet distribute the third party vote using STV so one of the majors always gets a technical majority.

Contingent election is very bad I hope you agree.

The House of Representatives should be proportional and allow other parties to get through like the Bundestag and surely, the way the Senate is continuing to block legislation, their should be demands to abolish the Senate and presidency.

Nothing is stopping people from voting for other parties right now.

and replace it with what?

[Cisairse]

I don't think that justifies a president being "elected" despite a supermajority of voters voting against them.

The person with the most votes should be elected. simple as that.

Why?

[Post War America]

The House of Representatives should be proportional and allow other parties to get through like the Bundestag and surely, the way the Senate is continuing to block legislation, their should be demands to abolish the Senate and presidency.

Nothing is stopping people from voting for other parties right now.

and replace it with what?

A parliamentary rather than presidential republic. Would probably require a new constitution entirely, but I'm pretty certain some of the framers expressed support for the periodic replacement of the document.

[Wheatonleks]

I'm really tired of people and especially the mainstream media assuming that Bernie Sanders' campaign is done when there's still 27 states and territories that haven't held their primaries yet, with 1,660 delegates from those states and territories. It may not be as easy since he's down by about 300 delegates, but Sanders can still win the nomination.

By now anyways, it looks like Bernie Sanders has effectively lost this race. Now he can either stay in until its mathematically impossible for him to reach 1991 delegates, or he could drop out now or at a later date. If he wants to quit sooner, I think it should be at the beginning of April. If he wants to go down fighting, it should be when the delegate numbers show that he's never going to surpass Biden in support.

Now is perhaps the time to figure out why Bernie lost. It certainly wasn't the establishment taking it away from him like last time. This time it seems he really did lose support on his own. It all went downhill as soon as the centrist/moderate wing all switched to backing Biden once the field narrowed enough.

We might have to just conclude that the Democratic party isn't actually all that Liberal as it could be. Bernie Sanders' policies weren't as popular as the Progressive wing believed and his ceiling looks to be 30% maximum.

I wouldn't say I'm a fan of Bernie but I'm willing to admit that there was a lot of malarky, the DNC pressured Buttigieg to step down and cut off his funding, they cleared the other options and put them behind Biden, and I think that if that happened in Venezuela, or Cuba, or any country the US doesn't like; if Maduro's party pressured all other candidates to drop because there was one candidate in front of them all; and if Maduro only won by getting all of the other candidate's votes, I think the US would be calling for an invasion.

As an Anarcho-Capitalist, I'll probably be voting for the Libertarian candidate Jacob Hornberger, but I was definitely surprised to find that I had more in common with Bernie than Biden, and was also surprised that Trump beat Bernie by only 2%

https://www.isidewith.com/profile/4235613634/ballot

[San Lumen]

Nothing is stopping people from voting for other parties right now.

and replace it with what?

A parliamentary rather than presidential republic. Would probably require a new constitution entirely, but I'm pretty certain some of the framers expressed support for the periodic replacement of the document.

A constitutional convention can be held but it needs 2/3rds of the states to call for it and it must lay out specific proposals.

[Parti Ouvrier]

Nothing is stopping people from voting for other parties right now.

and replace it with what?

A parliamentary rather than presidential republic. Would probably require a new constitution entirely, but I'm pretty certain some of the framers expressed support for the periodic replacement of the document.

The US still needs a workers party to engage in a class struggle for political democracy, which requires class consciousness, and class militancy. Its almost impossible to change the US constitution, that is a deliberate restriction on democracy.

[San Lumen]

A parliamentary rather than presidential republic. Would probably require a new constitution entirely, but I'm pretty certain some of the framers expressed support for the periodic replacement of the document.

The US still needs a workers party to engage in a class struggle for political democracy, which requires class consciousness, and class militancy. Its almost impossible to change the US constitution, that is a deliberate restriction on democracy.

That was done on purpose so it could not be changed on a whim. Amending the constitution should be difficult

[Parti Ouvrier]

The US still needs a workers party to engage in a class struggle for political democracy, which requires class consciousness, and class militancy. Its almost impossible to change the US constitution, that is a deliberate restriction on democracy.

That was done on purpose so it could not be changed on a whim. Amending the constitution should be difficult

The purpose is to prevent political liberty taking hold and holding back the class struggle.

[Cisairse]

A parliamentary rather than presidential republic. Would probably require a new constitution entirely, but I'm pretty certain some of the framers expressed support for the periodic replacement of the document.

The US still needs a workers party to engage in a class struggle for political democracy, which requires class consciousness, and class militancy. Its almost impossible to change the US constitution, that is a deliberate restriction on democracy.

Actually the U.S. Constitution was specifically written to be significantly easier to amend than its predecessor.

[Shrillland]

Winning a majority or plurality of the popular vote does require a different strategy than winning a majority in the electoral college. Sorry I misunderstood, but still "lighting a fire under the asses" of both parties isn't any more likely to produce a majority every time than the current situation where a majority of the vote is a meaningless trophy. Republicans and Democrats would be trying for the same thing and TOO often neither would get it.

Why not just amend the requirement for a majority, make it a plurality, or better yet distribute the third party vote using STV so one of the majors always gets a technical majority.

Contingent election is very bad I hope you agree.

The House of Representatives should be proportional and allow other parties to get through like the Bundestag and surely, the way the Senate is continuing to block legislation, their should be demands to abolish the Senate and presidency.

No, the Senate should be switched to STV and expanded to at least three senators apiece. It still serves a purpose as the house of states.

[Parti Ouvrier]

The US still needs a workers party to engage in a class struggle for political democracy, which requires class consciousness, and class militancy. Its almost impossible to change the US constitution, that is a deliberate restriction on democracy.

Actually the U.S. Constitution was specifically written to be significantly easier to amend than its predecessor.

About as likely to happen as Sanders becoming president.

[Parti Ouvrier]

The House of Representatives should be proportional and allow other parties to get through like the Bundestag and surely, the way the Senate is continuing to block legislation, their should be demands to abolish the Senate and presidency.

It would still block democracy, to advocate such a position is as good as useless.


No, the Senate should be switched to STV and expanded to at least three senators apiece. It still serves a purpose as the house of states.

[San Lumen]

That was done on purpose so it could not be changed on a whim. Amending the constitution should be difficult

The purpose is to prevent political liberty taking hold and holding back the class struggle.

No it wasn't. The Founding Fathers didnt want the constitution to be able to be changed on a whim.

[Cisairse]

Actually the U.S. Constitution was specifically written to be significantly easier to amend than its predecessor.

About as likely to happen as Sanders becoming president.

It was amended as recently as 1992.

[Parti Ouvrier]

The purpose is to prevent political liberty taking hold and holding back the class struggle.

No it wasn't. The Founding Fathers didnt want the constitution to be able to be changed on a whim.

Don't you mean the all knowing Gods to save American souls from the masses?

[San Lumen]

No it wasn't. The Founding Fathers didnt want the constitution to be able to be changed on a whim.

Don't you mean the all knowing Gods to save American souls from the masses?

Did I call them all knowing? No. We've amended the constitution twenty seven times.

[Parti Ouvrier]

The House of Representatives should be proportional and allow other parties to get through like the Bundestag and surely, the way the Senate is continuing to block legislation, their should be demands to abolish the Senate and presidency.

No, the Senate should be switched to STV and expanded to at least three senators apiece. It still serves a purpose as the house of states.

The Senate would still be able to block democracy, simply switching to STV is as good as useless.

[Shrillland]

No, the Senate should be switched to STV and expanded to at least three senators apiece. It still serves a purpose as the house of states.

The Senate would still be able to block democracy, simply switching to STV is as good as useless.

No, it would and often still does, express the will of the states and the people inside them rather than just the people themselves. This is a federal state, and the components of it are just as important as the people themselves. Every federal state has some kind of senate for this sort of thing.

[Parti Ouvrier]

Don't you mean the all knowing Gods to save American souls from the masses?

Did I call them all knowing? No. We've amended the constitution twenty seven times.

Sure, we're not going to agree because ultimately I think the bourgeois constitution needs to be overthrown, (admittedly there are good bits, free press, right to bear arms).

[Parti Ouvrier]

The Senate would still be able to block democracy, simply switching to STV is as good as useless.

No, it would and often still does, express the will of the states and the people inside them rather than just the people themselves. This is a federal state, and the components of it are just as important as the people themselves. Every federal state has some kind of senate for this sort of thing.

A means to veto what the people want. States can have their own legislatures, as I believe they do have right now, a Senate in that case is superfluous.

[Shrillland]

No, it would and often still does, express the will of the states and the people inside them rather than just the people themselves. This is a federal state, and the components of it are just as important as the people themselves. Every federal state has some kind of senate for this sort of thing.

A means to veto what the people want. States can have their own legislatures, as I believe they do have right now, a Senate in that case is superfluous.

For their own laws, not federal laws. In any case, since the Senate is elected by the people of the states, it is voting for what the people want, the people of the states in question.

[Parti Ouvrier]

A means to veto what the people want. States can have their own legislatures, as I believe they do have right now, a Senate in that case is superfluous.

For their own laws, not federal laws. In any case, since the Senate is elected by the people of the states, it is voting for what the people want, the people of the states in question.

That's what the House of Representatives is for, I find giving individual states a veto over the House an unacceptable check on democracy.