Author Topic: The Politics Thread v3  (Read 14197 times)

Online Raineh Daze

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 9358
  • Less Angry Than Before
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #80 on: May 18, 2016, 09:16:41 PM »
But you aren't electing in the same way was my point.  Back in 1707 you still had a monarch calling the shots.  When did that stop and the monarch lose all real power?

1689. Before the Act of Union between England and Scotland--George II tried to regain it, but... no luck. Hell, if you want to trace the biggest loss of the Monarchy's power before the Glorious Revolution: 1660, on the ascension of Charles II to the throne, after the Commonwealth and the Civil War.
Still short tempered.

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #81 on: May 18, 2016, 09:23:25 PM »
I thought the monarch still had a lot of control then?  Like until...some point after the American revolution and before WWI. My England history between those points is....hazy....
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Online Raineh Daze

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 9358
  • Less Angry Than Before
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #82 on: May 18, 2016, 09:30:46 PM »
The monarch lost a lot of power as a result of the civil war (1660, when the interregnum ended); the Declaration of Right upon William III's accession established most of the monarchy's restricted powers, George II couldn't claw any back, and the USA wasted tea during the reign of George III.
Still short tempered.

Offline awaken_D_M_golem

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7324
  • (un-) Amazingly Unproductive
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #83 on: May 20, 2016, 04:19:52 PM »
538's Nate Silver --- the big cheese himself --- has issued a Mea Culpa about Trump.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-i-acted-like-a-pundit-and-screwed-up-on-donald-trump/

I'm trying to wrap my mind around the idea of Prez Trump,
since the chance of that happening is non-Zero.

Warren Buffett has said that wouldn't impact the economy in a measureable way.
I beg to differ on historical data, but my kitty avatar don't carry water.
Trump isn't very "historical" in his approach, but his maneuvering room is limited.

The Medicare Trust Fund is going to run out during the next Prez term
and Trump wouldn't be the Heavy Thinker figuring out how to deal.
Australia Britain and Canada wave their happier health care flags.
Oldsters howl, congressional Repubs quail a bit, but stick to their plans.
Centrist Senate Dems lick their chops.

China is having a Hard Landing sooner of later, to which Trump only has bluster.

The congresional Dems are primed to use the Repub filibuster-all-the-time tactic.
Trump gets no real say so about that.  And the "bully pulpit" is massively less
effective in Trumps hands, seeing as how bully is his standard persona already.

 :??? or  :hide
avatar#3 , gravitational lensing edition ... I'm way on the other side of the universe but look like pretty rings

Offline altpersona

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1850
  • #78
    • View Profile
    • You are here
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #84 on: May 20, 2016, 04:25:45 PM »
may not be the 100% perfect thread for it...

my little mayberryesqe town has decided that we need a gender based bathroom ordinance  :eh

#bandwagon

#why is violence frowned upon?
The goal of power is power. - 1984
We are not descended from fearful men. - Murrow
The Final Countdown is now stuck in your head.

Anim-manga still sux.

Offline awaken_D_M_golem

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7324
  • (un-) Amazingly Unproductive
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #85 on: May 21, 2016, 03:05:30 PM »
Before you go in there, Hands Up !
Lemme see your "mayberries" !!

(uh "sir" how'm I supposed to do both)

avatar#3 , gravitational lensing edition ... I'm way on the other side of the universe but look like pretty rings

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #86 on: May 26, 2016, 01:24:26 PM »
I'm curious as to what the fallout of this will be, but Clinton...absolutely broke the rules, and the FOIA.  She and her supporters maintain that she did nothing wrong, going as far as to say "this confirms what she's said about the issue" even though the new report directly contradicts things she's said about the subject.  Here's a look a number of issues that the report raised, of particular note are the fact that it was not authorized, despite her claims, and it was unique, despite her claims.
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Offline Libertad

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3489
    • View Profile
    • My Fantasy and Gaming Blog
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #87 on: May 26, 2016, 03:35:27 PM »

Offline awaken_D_M_golem

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7324
  • (un-) Amazingly Unproductive
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #88 on: May 27, 2016, 03:26:24 PM »
 :scared ... Trump clinched last night.  Some of the PA superdelegates got on board.


Hope the Bernie v Trump debate happens (see below).
avatar#3 , gravitational lensing edition ... I'm way on the other side of the universe but look like pretty rings

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #89 on: May 28, 2016, 09:38:58 PM »
After thinking about it long and hard, here's the chances I think of the various people in the race right now to become president of the USA next year, as rough percentages.

Trump: 50%
Clinton: 25%
Sanders:20%
Paul Ryan: 5%

Yes, I have Ryan as a non-zero win chance.  Because of a complicated thing called "everything explodes".  Essentially, Gary Johnson takes one state, really any state, but the bigger the more likely this happens.  And the more states the more likely.  But I think he only has any shot in one or two states at most.  Anyways, then he 'blows up' the electoral map in such a way that there's no winner, as in no one gets to 270, and the House decides the next president, they choose Ryan.  I think that percentage is lower than 5, but non zero so i put it as 5.

If Sanders is nominated by the DNC, I have it at 80% Sanders as president, 20% Trump.  Notice: no chance for Ryan.

If Clinton is the nominee, I have it at 65%  Trump, 30% Clinton, and 5% Ryan.  I may be underselling Trump's chances in this one though.  I...I think I'm resigned to a Trump presidency.
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Offline Samwise

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 495
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #90 on: May 28, 2016, 11:58:36 PM »
Yes, I have Ryan as a non-zero win chance.  Because of a complicated thing called "everything explodes".  Essentially, Gary Johnson takes one state, really any state, but the bigger the more likely this happens.  And the more states the more likely.  But I think he only has any shot in one or two states at most.  Anyways, then he 'blows up' the electoral map in such a way that there's no winner, as in no one gets to 270, and the House decides the next president, they choose Ryan.  I think that percentage is lower than 5, but non zero so i put it as 5.

They (the House) cannot do that.
Because of a not-so-complicated thing called "the actual text of the Constitution.

If your scenario happens,
Quote
The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority,

the House does not have an open election of whoever they like. Rather,
Quote
then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President.

which in this case would mean they have to pick from Trump OR Clinton OR Johnson.

You would need to get thoroughly bizarre and invoke this:
Quote
If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

for Ryan to somehow be selected by the House. That however would require:
1. A tie or 3 people getting electoral votes; AND,
2. The House being "unable" to select a President; AND,
3. The Senate being "unable" to select a Vice-President; AND,
4. Paul Ryan winning re-election (which is not guaranteed at this point); AND,
5. Neither the House nor the Senate deciding to bypass Ryan whenever they feel like it by "suddenly" agreeing on a President or Vice-President

At which point you may as well just skip to whoever is elected, along with their running mate, not being physically or mentally capable of serving on inauguration day, and Ryan being re-elected, after being retained as Speaker, in which case he would outright become President without any need for a vote. (Though he could turn it down if he felt like it.)

While theoretically that is a non-zero chance, it is more obscure trivia than a betting line.

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #91 on: May 29, 2016, 12:40:28 AM »
I meant to imply that they have Ryan running to allow this to happen, apologies if it didn't come across like that.
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Offline Samwise

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 495
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #92 on: May 29, 2016, 01:00:39 AM »
So somehow Trump wouldn't be running?
Then you wouldn't need any third party getting electoral votes at all.

Or do you mean Ryan running independently?
In which case Johnson getting electoral votes is irrelevant, as Ryan would need to get more to be considered anyway.

Both are still more in the realm of trivia than actual percentiles.

You have however forgotten to account for Biden showing up to "save" the election when "someone" is indicted the night before the convention opens.
There's a much better chance of that happening than Paul Ryan somehow pulling a Jack Ryan. He just isn't that big a Marty Stu for anyone.

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14334
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #93 on: May 29, 2016, 01:16:23 AM »
With Gary Johnson in all 50 states this time around, and him being brought up more often as the anti-trump, I wouldn't tun another third party at all if I were republican.  Polls (probably useless at this stage admittedly) show Johnson siphoning up 10% of the popular vote, and the likelihood being he'll get it from trump hating republicans and disgruntled sanders supporters.  He won't make it to the presidency, but he could conceivably take electoral votes, though it's a long shot for him.

It'll be weird this time out with both candidates being hated more than they're liked. Could come down to which sides voters stay home the least.

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #94 on: May 29, 2016, 02:41:30 AM »
I don't think Biden wants it.  If Hillary gets indicted before the convention, it'll be Sanders with the nomination.

And you don't need to get a specific number of electoral votes to be considered for the House election.  You just need a certain amount of the vote iirc.  There's a LOT of crazy things that might happen in this situation.  And my "Ryan" winning was mostly based on the rumors from a month or two ago that he was being vetted as a possibility to do this, so it's more tongue in cheek than not, however, replace 'Ryan' with whichever person gets that nod.  It may be Johnson even. Who knows.
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Offline Samwise

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 495
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #95 on: May 29, 2016, 11:58:08 AM »
Biden wants it. It was obvious in his last statement about how he would have been a great candidate, he just wasn't "ready" at the time.
More importantly, Bronco wants it, just because he hates the Clintons.
And however much Sanders may want it, that pales before what the DNC wants.

As for Johnson and the Republican vote, I know it is popular to confuse Liberturdians with Republicans, especially since people like to leap back and forth to get elected and "demonstrate their values" and such, but the two are vastly different. Even the big surge of NeverTrumpers are having to twist themselves into knots to justify some of the drivel coming from Johnson and now Weld. The fact that they even need to contemplate Johnson demonstrates that they know there is no one ready to spring into action to save them from the evil that is The Donald.

As for Johnson pulling 10% of the vote, not even in his pipe dreams. The "constitutionalists" will just stay home and mope or leave that line blank. Disappointed Bernistas will do the same or vote for Stein on the Green line, as despite the hardcore of Rothbardian Anarchists and Stoner Libertines within the liberturdian movement, and their attempts at outreach, they simply aren't attracting the "ordinary" "democratic-socialist" types who are the Bernistas likely to be outraged enough in their disgruntlement to cast protest ballots. They can't - they love their capitalism too much, and that is a deal breaker, no matter how much drug legalization and open borders they promise.

Offline Nanshork

  • Homebrew Reviewer
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11194
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #96 on: May 29, 2016, 12:05:53 PM »
Please don't start insulting the libertarian party (or any entire party for that matter), shit like that is why I never got involved in the politics threads until this one and things have been civil until now.

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #97 on: May 29, 2016, 12:23:25 PM »
There are libertarians, and then there are "libertarians".  Johnson is a libertarian.  Rand Paul is a "libertarian".  But yeah,please don't start disparaging parties, keep things civil.

Biden doesn't want it.  He left it open, kind of, but he really doesn't want it.  I think he's retiring from politics after he leaves the VP.  He'll be in advisory role mostly, but I don't think he's running another campaign ever.

Sanders didn't even really want it.  He doesn't care about becoming president, he wants his platform pushed forward because he thinks the DNC has lost its way, he's trying to bring real progressive policies back into the national discussion, a la FDR.  He's also trying to bring a diplomatic foreign policy back into things and trying to get us to shy away from war.

I'd like to see a bigger national discussion of the other parties, so I'd like to see both Johnson and Stein get an appreciable share of the vote, which I think can happen this election.  Johnson definitely, and Stein if Clinton's the nominee

Personally, I heartily disagree with Johnson (and most all Libertarian candidates) on a lot of issues, but of course, I'm a progressive so I like their social policies typically.  Incidentally, this is why Rand is a 'libertarian' and not a libertarian.  He's socially (moderate) conservative and hardcore economically conservative.
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Offline Samwise

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 495
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #98 on: May 29, 2016, 01:01:57 PM »
Rand Paul is a Rothbardian Anarchist, just like his father.
His "hardcore" economic conservatism extends only so far as needed to eliminate government completely. Once that is done he is like every other "libertarian" "anarchist", and believes in using government "force" to prevent people from engaging in economic activity that he doesn't like.
The only "difference" is that he is trying to outreach to the "traditional" "anarchists", rather than sticking with the conspiracy theorist and racist fringe that his father ran with.

Johnson is more of a "small government" international socialist with libertine tendencies than a "Libertarian".
He loves his open borders and drug legalization, but he has said several times he is on board with suppressing religious freedom, and freedom of association in general, in pursuit of "equality".

Neither represents the "classical liberalism" that the word "Libertarian" is supposed to stand for. Between them and the constant splinter groups that are more dominionist than anything else, there is nothing in the term for me to respect anymore.

Biden does want it, he is just not in a position to get it without receiving it as a gift. He knows it, and that's why he is willing to play the role to see if he can get it.

As for the Libertarians or the Greens getting any bigger share, it won't happen.
It has been predicted regularly since the Dixiecrats failed, and except for Ross Perot making a splash has never happened. And even with Perot his support was fading rapidly. Another month and he wouldn't even be a footnote in electoral history.
No matter how much media attention there is about the further fringes during primary season, they disappear into side issues once the conventions pass, simply because no one currently in power has any intention of letting it pass to one of those groups.
Even if the parties fracture, or undergo a significant realignment, which does seem possible, it won't be around the issues those groups want, but around more centrist issues that both parties have messed up on.

Offline bhu

  • Uncle Kittie
  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 14334
  • Fnord bitches
    • View Profile
Re: The Politics Thread v3
« Reply #99 on: May 29, 2016, 04:26:52 PM »
Normally I would agree with Johnson not having a chance due to being a fringe candidate, but technically Trump is a sort of fringe candidate who got lucky and demagogued his way into the nomination (not that teh RNC's fumbling didn't help).  He's the only reason Johnson polls well, because a lot of people reason "Trump is a neo-fascist who tells people what they want to hear, not a Republican or even a conservative.  And I can't vote for Hillary, so short of setting the election out Johnson is the least of three evils, especially since he'll likely be a one term guy."   I've tried explaining why that is somewhat flawed but they hate Hillary and Donald so much it's like talking to mannequins...