Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

US Presidential Election 2020

Options
1170171173175176306

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 19,133 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    https://twitter.com/THEHermanCain/status/1274489632886075398?s=19

    Former Republican Presidential Candidate and vocal Trump supporter Hermain Cain has passed away from COVID


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,963 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    So I figured out why Jaime Harrison was on CNN yesterday, from all that....

    Lindsey Graham's campaign used a darkening filter on his opponents face in a facebook photo:

    566d1805-007b-4d4a-b0e4-13f1bc1f8b30-medium16x9_0729lindseygrahamad.jpg?1596055452731

    (By the way, fewer people give any ****s to who Kathy Griffith supports as the people who are concerned the Grand Wizard of the KKK endorses Trump, so...)

    https://twitter.com/Rschooley/status/1286767907880333313?s=20

    “Shame on Jaime Harrison for manufacturing a fake controversy to inject race into this campaign at a time of great turbulence in our country. It’s sad that our opponent has made up fake accusations about a graphic – one intended to highlight Jaime Harrison’s support from Kathy Griffin, a liberal actress who once posed with a fake severed head of Donald Trump," stated T.W. Arrighi, communications director for Team Graham, Inc. "The artistic effect used, the same one the Harrison campaign used multiple times this month in their own graphics and that our campaign used on Senator Graham just two days earlier, is a non-story. The only person who wants to shift focus from policies important to South Carolinians – like creating jobs and bringing our medical supply chain back from China – is Jaime Harrison who wants to change the subject and hide his radically liberal positions from the voters.”

    Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) added to Graham's sentiments.

    “With all of the real problems our country is grappling with about race, now is not the time to score cheap political points," he said.


    https://abcnews4.com/news/lowcountry-and-state-politics/graham-campaign-responds-to-accusations-of-darkening-opponents-skin-tone-in-ad

    Typical red-meat for the base stuff that's going to backfire on Graham and give his opponent more oxygen - QED, already has.

    The original photo of Harrison is from a brief interview-piece published by the NYT last year: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/29/us/politics/jaime-harrison-lindsey-graham.html

    As for "creating jobs" - Lindsey Graham has spent a lot of time golfing with POTUS and shares his mess. The PPE from China stuff is electioneering that will never go anywhere in the Senate, nor does it need to. Doesn't seem like a federal issue, he just wants to gin up voters on Wuhan pandemonium.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,171 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Obama in his eulogy for John Lewis was fairly direct in what he sees needs to be done. Bring back full The Voting Rights Act, two new states added to the Union, Washington DC and Peurto Rico and get rid of the filibuster, another Jim Crowe legacy.
    Wonder would the torch of equal rights for all pass now to Kiesha Lance Bottoms and elevate her chances of VP?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,109 ✭✭✭TomOnBoard


    Lance Bottoms may well assume that mantle, but not as VP. She'd really have to serve a Congressional term or two and become a Civil Rights champion there if she's to become the new John Lewis. She doesn't have anything like enough experience to become VP --> POTUS.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,264 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    two new states added to the Union, Washington DC and Puerto Rico

    Puerto Rico's not entirely on board with that. Not sure they'd be entirely happy with Obama telling them what they should be doing. Remember, they don't have D and R parties there, they have State and No-State. The balance is about equal between them. (Currently Statehood has a good majority in the legislature, a reversal of the previous election. They swing wildly. The last (legitimate) referendum in 2012 was almost precisely split between statehood and remain as is.)

    The DC idea is just as blatant senate-grabbing as the Republican opposition to it. Well, almost, the Republican position has the benefit of precedent. The lack of representation has been an issue for more than a few decades, the original solution was simply retrocession back to the State from whence it came in the first place (Maryland). This is exactly what happened to the DC residents on the Virginia side of the Potomac, when that land was retroceded to Virginia in the 19th Century. They now have full representation in Congress.

    Interestingly, Maryland is not entirely averse to the idea. It would dramatically increase its population and thus its representation in the House of Congress as well as its Electoral College weight. However, they have a concern about inheriting the various obligations such as pensions of DC city employees. And, of course, the conservative parts of MD (they do exist, and they're not small compared to the State) are definitely averse to the idea.

    L1011 wrote: »
    Splitting California in to 3 would also give 4 more Democrat senators and has been floated a few times however I've never seen polling on whether the actual residents want it

    We (at the time, that included me) did not. It comes up often enough, and, indeed, if you go up around Redding/Ft Bragg and further North, you will see a lot of flags flying for "The State of Jefferson", which is a very long-standing push for Northern California and Southern Oregon to make a new State. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_(proposed_Pacific_state)
    Five counties (with an area about 2/3 the size of Rep of Ireland, but a population today about the same as Cork, so you can imagine what it was back then) went as far as to actually declare independence and create a new (obviously unrecognised) State. However, that was mid November 1941, and within a few weeks everyone had more important things to worry about.
    ?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F2c%2Ff4%2F8896d16b4c558d91d8efc853d474%2F150116-michel-jefferson-wc.jpg
    flag.jpg

    That's probably the movement which has created the most traction, and indeed there's been something of a rebirth the last couple of years, but the rest of the State isn't really interested. The last time a serious proposal was put forward for referendum was 2016, split into 6, it failed to garner enough signatures to make the ballot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Californias
    Unofficial polling on the concept of splitting CA up in 2018 (There was another attempt to put it onto the proposition in 2018, except splitting into 3) showed about 75% against. No major California politician supports the split from either party.
    Accepting that it's not happening, the latest movement now is "Greater Idaho", with various counties in SoOregon and NorCal wanting to be part of Idaho instead, several have already voted for this. Apparently the rules for changing State borders are easier than for admitting new States. I don't know what Idaho's position on the matter is, but the Governor of West Virginia, has said he is open to counties in western Virginia swapping States, their movement is for similar reasons.

    It is not a guarantee, by the way, that all 6 Senators would be Democrat, depending on how it splits. Even the Cal 3 (2018) proposal would have had SoCal something of a swing State.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 81,963 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Well, I never knew about this, and it's fascinating.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,991 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Puerto Rico's not entirely on board with that. Not sure they'd be entirely happy with Obama telling them what they should be doing. Remember, they don't have D and R parties there, they have State and No-State. The balance is about equal between them. (Currently Statehood has a good majority in the legislature, a reversal of the previous election. They swing wildly. The last (legitimate) referendum in 2012 was almost precisely split between statehood and remain as is.)

    The DC idea is just as blatant senate-grabbing as the Republican opposition to it. Well, almost, the Republican position has the benefit of precedent. The lack of representation has been an issue for more than a few decades, the original solution was simply retrocession back to the State from whence it came in the first place (Maryland). This is exactly what happened to the DC residents on the Virginia side of the Potomac, when that land was retroceded to Virginia in the 19th Century. They now have full representation in Congress.

    Interestingly, Maryland is not entirely averse to the idea. It would dramatically increase its population and thus its representation in the House of Congress as well as its Electoral College weight. However, they have a concern about inheriting the various obligations such as pensions of DC city employees. And, of course, the conservative parts of MD (they do exist, and they're not small compared to the State) are definitely averse to the idea.




    We (at the time, that included me) did not. It comes up often enough, and, indeed, if you go up around Redding/Ft Bragg and further North, you will see a lot of flags flying for "The State of Jefferson", which is a very long-standing push for Northern California and Southern Oregon to make a new State. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_(proposed_Pacific_state)
    Five counties (with an area about 2/3 the size of Rep of Ireland, but a population today about the same as Cork, so you can imagine what it was back then) went as far as to actually declare independence and create a new (obviously unrecognised) State. However, that was mid November 1941, and within a few weeks everyone had more important things to worry about.
    ?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F2c%2Ff4%2F8896d16b4c558d91d8efc853d474%2F150116-michel-jefferson-wc.jpg
    flag.jpg

    That's probably the movement which has created the most traction, and indeed there's been something of a rebirth the last couple of years, but the rest of the State isn't really interested. The last time a serious proposal was put forward for referendum was 2016, split into 6, it failed to garner enough signatures to make the ballot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Californias
    Unofficial polling on the concept of splitting CA up in 2018 (There was another attempt to put it onto the proposition in 2018, except splitting into 3) showed about 75% against. No major California politician supports the split from either party.
    Accepting that it's not happening, the latest movement now is "Greater Idaho", with various counties in SoOregon and NorCal wanting to be part of Idaho instead, several have already voted for this. Apparently the rules for changing State borders are easier than for admitting new States. I don't know what Idaho's position on the matter is, but the Governor of West Virginia, has said he is open to counties in western Virginia swapping States, their movement is for similar reasons.

    It is not a guarantee, by the way, that all 6 Senators would be Democrat, depending on how it splits. Even the Cal 3 (2018) proposal would have had SoCal something of a swing State.

    I agree with you about California, it's not exactly the Democratic stronghold people like to pain it as. There are plenty of californian GOP governors and congressmen.

    But why does anyone want to join Idaho??

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users Posts: 19,133 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    https://twitter.com/neal_katyal/status/1288941724480544768?s=19

    Ronald Reagan's group recently disassociated themselves from him. This cannot be construed as a good thing from Trump's perspective


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,264 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Brian? wrote: »
    I agree with you about California, it's not exactly the Democratic stronghold people like to pain it as. There are plenty of californian GOP governors and congressmen.

    But why does anyone want to join Idaho??

    If the question’s not humor... It’s a fairly conservative State. The reason that the Jefferson counties, which are conservative enough, want to forge their own State Is that they believe they have no hope of being listened to by the legislatures in Sacramento and Salem. The use of the double crosses in the proposed flag is to represent those legislatures double-crossing them. Being as relatively sparsely populated as they are, they have no hope of really influencing the relatively progressive state legislatures, especially since the 2.5million folks in the area are split between two different States and thus cannot unify their vote.

    Given that Idaho has not gotten quite as on board with the progressive agenda, what Boise has been putting out is far closer to what the Jefferson counties consider acceptable to their principles and concepts. Thus, if the transfer were to happen, the population of Idaho would more than double, increasing its own weight in the EC and House, and Jefferson counties would feel that they are in a place that they are happier living in.


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,963 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Brian? wrote: »
    I agree with you about California, it's not exactly the Democratic stronghold people like to pain it as. There are plenty of californian GOP governors and congressmen.

    But why does anyone want to join Idaho??

    The potatoes.

    @Manic I think if we did start rejigging the states like that it would just lead to more all over. Gerrymandering on steroids as it were.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,160 ✭✭✭paul71


    The lies, little and large from little and large continue unabated. It seems the VP "fought" in Germany while in the US army.


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,963 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    paul71 wrote: »
    The lies, little and large from little and large continue unabated. It seems the VP "fought" in Germany while in the US army.

    Huh?

    I know Secretary Pompeo mentioned his military deployment experience in Cold War Germany during his hearing yesterday but he's not the VP.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,160 ✭✭✭paul71


    Overheal wrote: »
    Huh?

    I know Secretary Pompeo mentioned his military deployment experience in Cold War Germany during his hearing yesterday but he's not the VP.

    My mistake, secretary of state. He did not say I was "deployed" or "stationed in". He said "I fought in Germany".


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,264 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Overheal wrote: »
    The potatoes.

    @Manic I think if we did start rejigging the states like that it would just lead to more all over. Gerrymandering on steroids as it were.

    Quite possibly, except it's more with the approval of the gerrymandered.

    It will certainly entrench the tribalism as blue states get more blue and red states more red. On the other hand, from the perspective of the folks living there, there is plenty of precedent of folks getting generally fed up of being unrepresented or ignored by the folks making the decisions and just breaking away of their own accord in order to have a government representative of the people living there. The US being one of those precedents. West Virginia being another. The real question is "Just how far down that hole of local self-determination should we go?" But if raw size is anything to go by, if we're looking at States of 600-800 thousand folks already, a 2.5mil population certainly has precedence for viable self-determination.

    I would argue that the kicker is that this is precisely the sort of thing which is supposed to be the US's strength. As long as the various States can come to general agreement on issues of foreign policy and ease of commerce between them, the US is supposed to be able to be sufficiently decentralised that large degrees of inter-state differences aren't a problem. However, with the greater emphasis on DC as trying to run the country internally as well as externally, the US's system doesn't work as well.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,991 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    If the question’s not humor... It’s a fairly conservative State. The reason that the Jefferson counties, which are conservative enough, want to forge their own State Is that they believe they have no hope of being listened to by the legislatures in Sacramento and Salem. The use of the double crosses in the proposed flag is to represent those legislatures double-crossing them. Being as relatively sparsely populated as they are, they have no hope of really influencing the relatively progressive state legislatures, especially since the 2.5million folks in the area are split between two different States and thus cannot unify their vote.

    Given that Idaho has not gotten quite as on board with the progressive agenda, what Boise has been putting out is far closer to what the Jefferson counties consider acceptable to their principles and concepts. Thus, if the transfer were to happen, the population of Idaho would more than double, increasing its own weight in the EC and House, and Jefferson counties would feel that they are in a place that they are happier living in.

    In essence gerrymandering themselves out of one state into another.

    I see some areas of Virginia are trying to do the same by joining West Virginia. It really smack of throwing your toys out of the pram to me.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,264 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    It really smack of throwing your toys out of the pram to me.

    Well, what have they to lose? They obviously feel entirely disenfranchised and unheard. It's not their pram, it's the pram of the folks in San Francisco, Portland, LA or Richmond. They're strapped in and going wherever those folks say, no matter how much they may object, and the city folks have no particular reason to compromise with them.

    There's a common phrase around here, "If you don't like the local policies, move". Well, that's what they plan on doing, I find it difficult to blame them, especially given it's precisely the sort of thing we tend to celebrate around the world, throwing off the yoke of the rulers who don't much care about you and taking control of your own destiny.


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,963 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    paul71 wrote: »
    My mistake, secretary of state. He did not say I was "deployed" or "stationed in". He said "I fought in Germany".

    "This is personal for me. I fought on the border of East Germany when I was a young soldier. I was stationed there."

    To be fair he has bonafides and I don't see anything he said (in this regard) as a misrepresentation. Fighting a cold war doesn't always involve sending or receiving live fire, bullets flying past your head, sniper fire on the tarmac etc - he was a tank commander there.

    https://www.stripes.com/german-official-thanks-us-pompeo-for-role-in-defending-freedom-during-cold-war-1.606357


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,991 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Well, what have they to lose? They obviously feel entirely disenfranchised and unheard. It's not their pram, it's the pram of the folks in San Francisco, Portland, LA or Richmond. They're strapped in and going wherever those folks say, no matter how much they may object, and the city folks have no particular reason to compromise with them.

    There's a common phrase around here, "If you don't like the local policies, move". Well, that's what they plan on doing, I find it difficult to blame them, especially given it's precisely the sort of thing we tend to celebrate around the world, throwing off the yoke of the rulers who don't much care about you and taking control of your own destiny.

    That’s a bit over dramatic. They live in a democracy. Their rights are protected by both state and federal constitutions.

    Their vote is worth the same as anyone else in the state. They are in control of their own destiny, they just happen to be in the minority for now. California has had plenty of GOP governors.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users Posts: 19,616 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    @Manic whats your sense of the Trump Biden race on the ground in Texas? Quinnipiac poll a few days ago showed Biden leading 45-44 which makes it extraordinarily tight for a state considered to be blood red. Im sure theres other polls showing Trump in the lead but Biden is the candidate with momentum right now. Can you see an upset on the cards or do you think Trump will win it?


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,264 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Honestly, the only news I’m paying much attention to around here is local. Coronavirus, protests, and local news like crime, traffic, etc. I do see Trump flags, though, and I’m still in a slightly more blue than red part of the State. Slightly, we’re still purple.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,244 ✭✭✭Cody montana


    I see he’s banning TikTok now.
    That will go down well with the youth vote.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,084 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    I see he’s banning TikTok now.
    That will go down well with the youth vote.
    The youth don't tend to vote.


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,963 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    The youth don't tend to vote.

    I know it’s said every election but this might be different.

    Then again, how many 18 yr olds etc actually have any reception at all for politics, really. I don’t think I’d be as political as I am without living abroad and being castigated in school for Bush’s wars etc - my siblings are all far more politically ambivalent and didn’t leave the country like I did or have the same experiences.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,244 ✭✭✭Cody montana


    The youth don't tend to vote.

    Perhaps people in their 30’s as well.
    I’m sure some percentage of them vote.
    Maybe this will inspire more to vote against him.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,109 ✭✭✭TomOnBoard


    I see he’s banning TikTok now.
    That will go down well with the youth vote.

    Its gonna be difficult to do.

    That said, if Chinese ownership of TikTok does give rise to national security issues for USA, as argued, then US has every right to ban it. China has a dreadful record of mixing State sponsored political and civil rights attacks on its own people within its social media platforms - on that basis, they can't be trusted to refrain from doing similarly to US based users. For me, it's a no-brainer and I'd not lose any sleep if the app was banned in US and indeed elsewhere.


  • Registered Users Posts: 28,190 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    This has nothing to do with Sarah Cooper of course!


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,244 ✭✭✭Cody montana


    TomOnBoard wrote: »
    Its gonna be difficult to do.

    That said, if Chinese ownership of TikTok does give rise to national security issues for USA, as argued, then US has every right to ban it. China has a dreadful record of mixing State sponsored political and civil rights attacks on its own people within its social media platforms - on that basis, they can't be trusted to refrain from doing similarly to US based users. For me, it's a no-brainer and I'd not lose any sleep if the app was banned in US and indeed elsewhere.

    Well I use and watch TikTok frequently.
    It’s a great platform imo.
    Loads of clever and funny American users on it.
    Anything limiting creativity is a bad idea.

    It comes across as a personal vendetta from Trump.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Well I use and watch TikTok frequently.
    It’s a great platform imo.
    Loads of clever and funny American users on it.
    Anything limiting creativity is a bad idea.

    It comes across as a personal vendetta from Trump.

    AFAIK videos critical of China or the Hong Kong situation have been removed from the site so without knowing the service too well, it sounds like a manipulated platform. More than enough alternative platforms to engage creativity without putting money and power in China's pocket. Another stopped clock moment because I think I'd support trump's position here *vomit*


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,185 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    looksee wrote: »
    This has nothing to do with Sarah Cooper of course!

    Or tik tok users blockading tickets at his rallies


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,133 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    pixelburp wrote: »
    AFAIK videos critical of China or the Hong Kong situation have been removed from the site so without knowing the service too well, it sounds like a manipulated platform

    Funny. He's not concerned about Facebook.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement