Rdskns2000

Presidential Election :11/3/2020- The Impotus Puppet vs The Rise of BootyWalker & some other Dems

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Harris is the front runner for now but Beto is probably getting in. Uncle Joe is probably getting in.  

 

Beto talks a good game, but he doesnt have nearly the experience Harris has nor will he enter the race with same policy framework she did.  Harris did her homework and has crossover appeal to progressives and moderates.  This is all my opinion, but if Beto is too green, Biden is too old.  I really hope Biden doesnt run unless he feels no one can beat Trump, I believe in Harris. Right now anyways, they all have plenty if time to screw up, too much time.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Beto talks a good game, but he doesnt have nearly the experience Harris has nor will he enter the race with same policy framework she did.  Harris did her homework and has crossover appeal to progressives and moderates.  This is all my opinion, but if Beto is too green, Biden is too old.  I really hope Biden doesnt run unless he feels no one can beat Trump, I believe in Harris. Right now anyways, they all have plenty if time to screw up, too much time.

 

Harris has been in Congress since 2017.  Beto has been in Congress since 2013.  Harris is in the Senate rather than House, but not a huge difference in amount of experience.  Right now, those are the 2 I'm fully on board with; I don't know what the deciding factor for me will be, but it won't be experience.  The deciding factor will probably be simply how they endure the long slog of a presidential campaign (which goes to your last sentence), and where they land on certain policy issues (although I'm less concerned about specific policy this election than usual, for obvious reasons). 

Edited by PleaseBlitz
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ixcuincle said:

 

Sadly I did not watch much WWE until around 2011 so I missed out on most of Macho Man but rewatching his promos and his rants on Hulk Hogan and defending Miss Elizabeth on Youtube was always hilarious. "Oh yeahhhh." 

 

If you liske the radio - see if you can look up his promo for Chad Dukes. Dude is one of the best orators in the history of mankind and its really not arguable Lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big question is whether Beto will be allowed his generalization themes (which sell well) vs primary opponents......gonna have to step up his game unless the media still leg humps him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I am ready for the primary season to be over already.   I just want a candidate to get behind for the purpose of ousting Trump.  The sooner the nominee is chosen the sooner we can just move onto the general election and trying to energize the base to turn out. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LePage's reasoning is totally wrong but I cannot stress enough how strongly I am against getting rid of the EC.  To the point that if the Dem candidate ran on that, I'd consider voting for Trump (shivers) or at least 3rd party.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't assigning all of a states delegates to the national vote winner be disenfranchising your state's voters?

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

LePage's reasoning is totally wrong but I cannot stress enough how strongly I am against getting rid of the EC.  To the point that if the Dem candidate ran on that, I'd consider voting for Trump (shivers) or at least 3rd party.

If we're all in on the EC why not assign more votes by districts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

If we're all in on the EC why not assign more votes by districts?

 

Maine does a proportional assignment now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, twa said:

 

Maine does a proportional assignment now

That's why I said more.

3 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

Huh??

In all but two states, electoral votes are 'winner-take-all'. The candidate winning the popular vote normally receives* all of that state's votes. Maine and Nebraska have adapted a different approach. Using the 'congressional district method', these states allocate two electoral votes to the state popular vote winner, and then one electoral vote to the popular vote winner in each Congressional district (2 in Maine, 3 in Nebraska). This creates multiple popular vote contests in these states, which could lead to a split electoral vote. 

 

https://www.270towin.com/content/split-electoral-votes-maine-and-nebraska/

 

Isn't this more representation than winner take all contests?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cooked Crack said:

Isn't this more representation than winner take all contests?

Possibly but I'd have to dig into exactly how it is done (how much does gerrymandering play into it mainly).  

 

We have a thread somewhere that there was a big discussion on eliminating the EC.  I don't remember what it was called though.  Anyways, my point has always been that getting rid of the EC would cause candidates to only cater to those living in urban areas at the expense of the rural areas.  

 

(if we really want to get deeper in the discussion, we should probably find the other thread.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'll leave this here. The EC and the arguments for it are flawed. Even addresses focusing on all the big cities.

 

Edit: A very quick update of the numbers

 

Edited by Cooked Crack
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After doing some scouting on the 2020 convention I was reminded of the terror of the superdelegate. They really need to get rid of those.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ixcuincle said:

After doing some scouting on the 2020 convention I was reminded of the terror of the superdelegate. They really need to get rid of those.  

Quote

Superdelegates will be able to cast substantive votes only in extraordinary cases like contested conventions, in which the nomination process is extended through multiple ballots until one candidate prevails.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/25/us/politics/superdelegates-democrats-dnc.html

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cooked Crack In my opinion, that video has just as many flawed arguements as it is trying to argue against.  This isn't the thread for that in-depth discussion on the EC though.  If you can find the other thread, read through it and we'll take the discussion there.  Much of the argument as already been had here though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We promote democracy and principles in other countries using direct election of the executive. Yet we don't practice this electoral method ourselves. 

 

We should elect our country's executive by direct election instead of the outmoded EC. It's time is over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure where I stand on EC vs. Popular vote.  It is nuanced, and I definitely understand the reason not to go with the popular votes, especially historically, however I am not sure if those reasons still hold up with how huge the population is now.  

 

Not sure if any analysis has been done on this before, but what if the system was changed to where we still went by the EC, but instead of the winner take all method, you awarded EC votes to each candidate based on the percentage the candidate wins the state by? In the end would that even change an election?  Would it do more harm/go against the "will of the people?"  I am not sure, I just know that ever since I learned about the EC in high school I have always wondered why the EC is awarded the way it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

I am not sure where I stand on EC vs. Popular vote.  It is nuanced, and I definitely understand the reason not to go with the popular votes, especially historically, however I am not sure if those reasons still hold up with how huge the population is now.  

 

Not sure if any analysis has been done on this before, but what if the system was changed to where we still went by the EC, but instead of the winner take all method, you awarded EC votes to each candidate based on the percentage the candidate wins the state by? In the end would that even change an election?  Would it do more harm/go against the "will of the people?"  I am not sure, I just know that ever since I learned about the EC in high school I have always wondered why the EC is awarded the way it is.

I know this isn't the thread for it but I just can't help myself.  I'll say this and then done with the EC talk in here.........probably.

 

My big problem with the EC is that it did not live up to its function in 2016.  The voters of the EC were not intended to just blindly go with whatever the people wanted.  Though I'm not sure how it would have played out if they had done what they should have done.

 

Quote

the College was put forth as a way to give citizens the opportunity to vote in presidential elections, with the added safeguard of a group of knowledgeable electors with final say on who would ultimately lead the country

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/electoral-college-has-been-divisive-day-one-180961171/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

Harris has been in Congress since 2017.  Beto has been in Congress since 2013.  Harris is in the Senate rather than House, but not a huge difference in amount of experience.  Right now, those are the 2 I'm fully on board with; I don't know what the deciding factor for me will be, but it won't be experience.  The deciding factor will probably be simply how they endure the long slog of a presidential campaign (which goes to your last sentence), and where they land on certain policy issues (although I'm less concerned about specific policy this election than usual, for obvious reasons). 

 

I'll add that I'm also looking at their experience prior to Congress, Harris has more of it.  I value attorney general for California over city council for El Paso any day of the week.  I like Beto, but we talking about president of the entire country, is he really ready for that?  I wish he ran for Senate again, saying Trump proved experience isnt neccesary misses point that he is the worst president we've ever had (not saying you specificly said that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was just going to post what @TheGreatBuzz did.  The actual purpose of the EC, the reason it was included in the Constitution, has never been used.  No once.  Meantime, it has caused 4 elections to be awarded to the loser of the popular vote.  

 

Furthermore, in 1787, when the Constitution was written, the nation was much more of a union of individual states than it is now.  People considered themselves Virginians or Marylanders, not Americans.  So holding a collection of separate elections made more sense.  Now, it makes much less sense to elect someone for national office based on anything other than the national popular vote.  Also, while there were some disparities in the populations of the states that existed in 1787, it was nothing like California (40 million) vs Wyoming (600,000) which seriously ****s up the math.  

 

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I'll add that I'm also looking at their experience prior to Congress, Harris has more of it.  I value attorney general for California over city council for El Paso any day of the week.  I like Beto, but we talking about president of the entire country, is he really ready for that?  I wish he ran for Senate again, saying Trump proved experience isnt neccesary misses point that he is the worst president we've ever had (not saying you specificly said that).

 

I agree with your overall point regarding their relevant experience, but it's a fairly close call for me.  One of my points above is that it will be important for me to see who deals with the slog of the election better, and I think that because being President is a long slog of a job, and 2 years of campaigning will hopefully bring out the best AND worst from both of them.  

 

I'd love to have Beto as a Senator, but the fact of the matter is he's much more well-suited to win a national election than a Texas statewide election.  I think the fact that he lost in deep red Texas by 3 is pretty strong evidence that he'd win in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by quite a bit.  

 

In any event, he hasn't even declared yet, nor has Biden.  I'm not making my decision in February 2019.  I want to see everyone actually make their case before I decide.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easily, Beto connects with voters across the country more than Kamala Harris. He's even a better speaker imo. But I think Harris dwarfs him in political experience and actual government acumen. 

 

As for the EC, my views on it are well known. No need to rehash how it's a broken outdated system that marginalizes the population of larger states in favor of sparsely poplulated states. 😁

Edited by The Evil Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.