Senate The US Politics discussion

You're post-racial, aren't you...

 

No.

 

The shenanigans are theater. The financial corruption is real and in both parties.

 

There are people the have pushed or meaningful campaign finance reform in both parties. And while you're right that neither group, institutionally, is interested in eliminating it entirely, only one wants to push far beyond the previous status quo to a regime that is basically unrestrained. Republicans are uniquely to blame there.

Well, and Hillary Clinton has made some pretty egregious mockery of campaign finance laws this cycle, too, in ways even some of her Republican counterparts aren't copying.

 

This is a great article, but I want to reinforce Josh's comments on the Presidential issue.

Pennsylvania, where I live, is a perfect microcosm for his argument about the difference between local and national elections.

Statewide, Republicans are dominate in the rural counties, which far outstrip Philadelphia/Pittsburgh and their surrounding more Democratic counties in number, but lag well behind in population. In Presidential election years, Pennsylvania has trended more and more blue. In off-years, Republicans tend to do well. That's only part of the picture, however, as local Republicans in the Philly suburbs tend to look more like Democrats on social issues. We have Tea Party candidates (one of them ran for office in Montgomery County, where I live), but they tend to get trounced (she did). Interestingly enough, Democrats dominated statewide elections to fill the state supreme court, which is now 5-2 Democrat for the first time in years (and will likely remain so for years to come). This occurred, in part, due to corruption on the previously Republican-dominated court, which led to an advantage for the Democrats, reinforcing the point from the article that when one party screws up, the other often benefits.

It also goes to the larger question of proportional representation, which benefits lower-population areas in off-year elections (and hence Republicans) vs. what direct democracy might look like. If the electoral college and republic-foundation of our elections were ever to be changed in favor of direct democracy, the GOP would wither and die. Personally, I find the structures that keep them popular on the local and state level--as well the dichotomy between Presidential and off-year elections--fascinating.

2016? Could go either way. It will be turnout driven, and multiple factors will be in play. No way to predict at this point.

Peace,

V-03

 

Washington State is very similar - geographically, the rural areas outnumber the urban/suburban and trend conservative GOP. Urban/suburban is the bulk of the population and trends Democratic (quite liberta Dems in Seattle proper, )

The "Seattle voters" outvote the rest of the state on most state-level and federal level candidates, to the on-going dismay of the rest of the state, who feel swallowed. Periodically, there's grumblings about how a small group is given disproportionate representation, when the truth is, the urban/suburban is more of the population and less of the geography distribution.

 

"The People's Democratic Republic of New York City (except Staten Island)"

Hence, statewide vs. national.

 

If both institutions are corrupt, is there even a point in voting anymore?

 

Outside of local elections (which affect your life far more than the President), no.

 

You old curmudgeon.

 

I vote for the Legalize Marijuana Now party anyway.

 

I hate stickers.

 

You can partake in the glory of Barack Obama.

I don't really know about after he retires.

 

Which one is real, which one is a parody?

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/259504-bachmann-jesus-is-coming-soon]Bachmann[/url]: Jesus is coming soon, time to convert the Jews

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/carson-loss-of-keystone-leaves-u-s-with-no-place-to-store-grain]Carson[/url]: loss of Keystone leaves US with no place to store grain

 

you're a parody, and jabba woggles is real.

 

Colorado to vote on Single-Payer, on Election Day 2016

http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...are-to-appear-on-colorado-ballot-in-2016.html

This would make Colorado the first state with single-payer healthcare, if it passes next November.
(Vermont would have been the first, but they decided to scrap their plans.)

 

Bill O'Reilly says the red Starbucks cup is fine, there's no problem and it's being overblown.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bill-oreilly-starbucks-cup_564356e9e4b0603773471887

Who would've guessed Bill O'Reilly being sensible on this year's "War Against Christmas" topic?

 

Will the "ISIS has been contained" become Obama's "Mission Accomplished" blunder in light of Paris?

 

More of this. Much needed.

 

Good question. I agree with Michael Scheuer that we should be neutral. As he put it, we should let the Sunni and Shia Muslims fight each other. It's none of our business. Don't get me wrong. I don't agree with Scheuer's past support of Ron Paul, but I deeply appreciated his opposition to the Iraq War when I was in high school.

 

I think this is a good case for why you should vote, but vote for a candidate or party who genuinely aligns with your beliefs and interests, regardless of how obscure they are.

 

Won't stop the GOP from trying, though.

Peace,

V-03

 

How powerful is the GOP compared to 2008?