US Presidential Election 2020

BonnieSituation · 12-10-2020 10:03PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

Generally works. Just because laws are passed doesn't make them legal, the point of the third branch is to ensure that there is a basic standard that the legislature cannot breach.

As SCOTUS has opined in the past, just because something is considered to be good policy, that doesn't make it a lawful policy. Which, if you look at how Democrats are pushing the "risk to ACA" aspect during the Barrett hearings right now, the argument they are making is "This legislation is at risk" without saying anything about why there are legal challenges to it in the first place.

Spare me.

If things were less partisan and committees did their job and the ridiculous idea of riders on bills didn't exist... we could go on.

You don't have to keep riding in here on your red, white and blue horse to defend aspects of the US political system.

You'd swear there weren't other democracies on that managed to function without such litigiousness when it comes to law-making.

It happens here periodically, but it just happens so seldomly that it is seen as a buffer from the legislature and executive yet in the US it's seen as a feature and not a bug.

TomOnBoard · 12-10-2020 10:08PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

Generally works. Just because laws are passed doesn't make them legal, the point of the third branch is to ensure that there is a basic standard that the legislature cannot breach.

As SCOTUS has opined in the past, just because something is considered to be good policy, that doesn't make it a lawful policy. Which, if you look at how Democrats are pushing the "risk to ACA" aspect during the Barrett hearings right now, the argument they are making is "This legislation is at risk" without saying anything about why there are legal challenges to it in the first place.

By definition, if a law is passed by the legislature, and is "signed into law", then actions that are encompassed by that law are either legal or illegal.

The question most often considered by the SCOTUS is not whether an action conforms (or otherwise) to such a law, but whether the law itself is "lawful". This distinction as between what is legal versus what is lawful is the territory in which the SCOTUS roams about.

Foxtrol · 12-10-2020 10:39PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

Generally works. Just because laws are passed doesn't make them legal, the point of the third branch is to ensure that there is a basic standard that the legislature cannot breach.

As SCOTUS has opined in the past, just because something is considered to be good policy, that doesn't make it a lawful policy. Which, if you look at how Democrats are pushing the "risk to ACA" aspect during the Barrett hearings right now, the argument they are making is "This legislation is at risk" without saying anything about why there are legal challenges to it in the first place.

Dems know they have no power to stop this nomination so they are using it to make the republicans pay at the polls - pointing to their untrustworthiness and the threats to ACA, Roe v Wade etc.

The problem with it 'generally working' is the presumption that judges are fair and consistent, which is going out the window recently. Originalist one minute and then wild interpretations the next. Whatever 'their side' wants.

Manic Moran · 12-10-2020 11:05PM

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Spare me.

If things were less partisan and committees did their job and the ridiculous idea of riders on bills didn't exist... we could go on.

You don't have to keep riding in here on your red, white and blue horse to defend aspects of the US political system.

You'd swear there weren't other democracies on that managed to function without such litigiousness when it comes to law-making.

It happens here periodically, but it just happens so seldomly that it is seen as a buffer from the legislature and executive yet in the US it's seen as a feature and not a bug.

There aren't many other democracies out there with the same unusual legal makeup of the US either. The US's system has some advantages and some disadvantages. I agree with you on the partisanship thing, which comes and goes over time.

TomOnBoard wrote: »

By definition, if a law is passed by the legislature, and is "signed into law", then actions that are encompassed by that law are either legal or illegal.

The question most often considered by the SCOTUS is not whether an action conforms (or otherwise) to such a law, but whether the law itself is "lawful". This distinction as between what is legal versus what is lawful is the territory in which the SCOTUS roams about.

Fair enough. Either way, ultimately there are two possible challenges in the Federal court system to any law passed by the US Congress. The first is whether or not Congress had any right to be making law on that subject in the first place (usually a consideration of the interstate commerce clause), and secondly, whether or not the law passed is in violation of any part of the US Constitution. Such challenges have been applied by both sides of the political divide on various topics, both sides tend to be happy when they win. And, generally speaking, both sides tend to have won because they had cogent legal arguments. There are at least arguments for both challenge categories against ACA.

TomOnBoard · 12-10-2020 11:26PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

There aren't many other democracies out there with the same unusual legal makeup of the US either. The US's system has some advantages and some disadvantages. I agree with you on the partisanship thing, which comes and goes over time.

Fair enough. Either way, ultimately there are two possible challenges in the Federal court system to any law passed by the US Congress. The first is whether or not Congress had any right to be making law on that subject in the first place (usually a consideration of the interstate commerce clause), and secondly, whether or not the law passed is in violation of any part of the US Constitution. Such challenges have been applied by both sides of the political divide on various topics, both sides tend to be happy when they win. And, generally speaking, both sides tend to have won because they had cogent legal arguments. There are at least arguments for both challenge categories against ACA.

There are those who actually believe that it was the extreme partisanship in Congress that led to an ACA that has such deficiencies as to make it vulnerable in the first place. A properly authored re-working of the Social Security Act and its Title XIX could have done much of the good intended by the ACA without introducing the interstate commerce objections. That whole heated war on Obamacare represents a sad and unhelpful decade on the Hill which, in more forward-thinking democracies (much less influenced by sectional-interest funding and lobbying), could have solved this without ever creating an Obamacare. The very term Obamacare has raised such vitriol among Republicans, stoked repeatedly by the likes of Mc Connell, that it never stood a chance of peaceful implementation regardless of its merits.

TomOnBoard · 12-10-2020 11:38PM

I havent seen figures, but that does seem to be quite a big turnout of (largely maskless) Trump supporters for the rally in Sanford, Florida. All being regaled by Village People's Macho Man....

I'm wondering whether The Donald will manage his usual 1.5 hour set of 'old favourites' or if a 20-30 minute jobbie is on the cards.

As he'd say himself: "We'll see!"

Water John · 12-10-2020 11:51PM

Dr Ranney on CNN says the Abbot test used on Trump to show he had two negatives hasn't authorisation an EUA for this and she would never use it for this purpose.

TomOnBoard · 13-10-2020 12:07AM

Whatever that Dexamehasone is that he's on, I wouldn't mind some for tomorrow... I've to tackle a big clear-out of scrub beside the house, and if Trump's amped-up performance tonight is anything to go by, I'd get it done in no time! Dunno how long the drugs will keep him going, but he's really flying tonight!

Francie Barrett · 13-10-2020 12:07AM

Gbear wrote: »

I was listening to the 538 podcast there about their prediction model, and they made the point that they've tried to factor in the increased uncertainty of this election into the figures. The 15% that Trump is currently on is already going out of it's way to give him a higher likelihood of victory. A conventional campaign would look more like 95% Biden to win.

They concede, of course, that they can't incorporate outright election fraud or other shenanigans into the model, so that limits its usefulness when we know that the Republicans and Trump will attempt to steal the election any way they can, but in terms of actual opinions, including in most of the battleground states, there's not a lot of ambiguity about who the people want to be President, even if you think there's some kind of bias in the polling.

It's pretty clear that Trump is in trouble. Across the board, the polls have him about 5% down on the polls from 2016. Given Trump barely won Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania in 2016, even a 1% swing of the vote against him is enough to flip those states to Biden and make him president.

Of course, a lot can change in the three weeks that are left, but this election really is Biden's to lose. The economy is in a mess, Trump himself appears increasingly deranged, "Sleepy Joe" just isn't as damaging as "Crooked Hilary", there is no FBI e-mail scandal for the Democrats, and it appears that Biden himself is more favourable to the electorate that Clinton was.

My feeling now is that not only will Trump lose, but he may lose by a landslide. I can get to 335-205 Biden quite easily. On a bad day for Trump, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that Biden could get close to 400.

BonnieSituation · 13-10-2020 12:13AM

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Whatever that Dexamehasone is that he's on, I wouldn't mind some for tomorrow... I've to tackle a big clear-out of scrub beside the house, and if Trump's amped-up performance tonight is anything to go by, I'd get it done in no time! Dunno how long the drugs will keep him going, but he's really flying tonight!

I lasted a few seconds., It's unbearable.

BonnieSituation · 13-10-2020 12:15AM

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Such a amazing system.

Manic Moran wrote: »

There aren't many other democracies out there with the same unusual legal makeup of the US either. The US's system has some advantages and some disadvantages. I agree with you on the partisanship thing, which comes and goes over time.

See what I was getting at here.

It's a ghastly system from top-to-bottom.

How anyone can look at it and go "yup, this is how we should manage a country", is bananas.

Atlantic Dawn · 13-10-2020 12:15AM

He's all fired up, I'd love a go of that stuff of a morning when I am at deaths door with a hangover.

TomOnBoard · 13-10-2020 12:20AM

Some comeback I have to say. Needless to say, the lies are coming out like a fire-hose, but the performance so far has to be one of his best in months!

I'm sure there are some serious frowns and worries in Biden-land right now!

AbusesToilets · 13-10-2020 12:23AM

TomOnBoard wrote: »

There are those who actually believe that it was the extreme partisanship in Congress that led to an ACA that has such deficiencies as to make it vulnerable in the first place. A properly authored re-working of the Social Security Act and its Title XIX could have done much of the good intended by the ACA without introducing the interstate commerce objections. That whole heated war on Obamacare represents a sad and unhelpful decade on the Hill which, in more forward-thinking democracies (much less influenced by sectional-interest funding and lobbying), could have solved this without ever creating an Obamacare. The very term Obamacare has raised such vitriol among Republicans, stoked repeatedly by the likes of Mc Connell, that it never stood a chance of peaceful implementation regardless of its merits.

Presumably the most straightforward means to Universal healthcare would be to open Medicare to everyone, and repeal the law that prevents it from setting/ negotiating drug costs. Not much to challenge there I would think.

Quin_Dub · 13-10-2020 12:24AM

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Some comeback I have to say. Needless to say, the lies are coming out like a fire-hose, but the performance so far has to be one of his best in months!

I'm sure there are some serious frowns and worries in Biden-land right now!

Why?

There's not a single voter who's mind is going to be changed by a Trump speech.

You either love him or hate him.

Everybody has made their minds up already.

13-10-2020 12:33AM

Trump:Cameras, can you show the crowd behind you?

Camera pans about 15 degrees.

Hmm.

TomOnBoard · 13-10-2020 12:38AM

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Why?

There's not a single voter who's mind is going to be changed by a Trump speech.

You either love him or hate him.

Everybody has made their minds up already.

Why?

He's coming out strong and lucid, despite days of being a Covid victim.

If you think that no minds can be changed at this point, which is 3 weeks out from the e!ection, then I'm afraid you're suffering from a touch of the same hubris that preceeded Clinton's failure in 2016. As long as there are undecideds or persuadable decideds, then either/both candidates' performances can move the needle..

TomOnBoard · 13-10-2020 12:57AM

Wrapping up now... He's into his Santy list now! An hour on-stage! Hmmmm!

I'll be interested in how this performance is reviewed in the MSM..

Tell me how · 13-10-2020 01:59AM

This may have been posted before but Pete Buttigeig once again going in hard on Fox News.

https://twitter.com/bguggs/status/1314225335752421376

BonnieSituation · 13-10-2020 02:22AM

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Wrapping up now... He's into his Santy list now! An hour on-stage! Hmmmm!

I'll be interested in how this performance is reviewed in the MSM..

Sounds like you're wavering Tom.

TomOnBoard · 13-10-2020 05:55AM

This guy (Dan Goodspeed) has done a number of great visual representations of state by state cases and deaths since the start of the pandemic in the USA.

A particular chart of cases on a state by state basis is spreading on Twitter overnight. The author plotted daily cases since 1st June, that being the time around which Red states were being pressured to re-open by the White House. This graphic will feature in any Biden pressers over the next day or so. It paints a picture of truly dreadful re-opening strategies that were managed in a terribly cack-handed manner, including blatant anti-mask and cavalier attitudes to Covid prevention efforts that public health professionals were begging states to adopt.

The effect presented is horrific..

https://dangoodspeed.com/covid/total-cases-since-june

Field east · 13-10-2020 08:02AM

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I can never understand how banjacked a system has be for people to have to que for hours to vote in US elections. Every one I’ve watched there’s always people still in line when the polls close.

I’d say if I’ve had to wait ten minutes to vote in any election, referendum in Ireland that was a lot and ten minutes may be generous. I’m sure I’m not alone in finishing work and getting home, and getting your polling card and walking to vote and it’s grand and handy.

Should the UN send in an OBSERVER TEAM? This is serious stuff. An earlier boardie reported that the republican state is placing a load of unofficial mailing ballot boxes around the place.

looksee · 13-10-2020 08:07AM

the American people yet again stick two fingers up to the establishment and their media lackeys who they are lying in bed with!

This says all we need to know about the value of your summary of US politics. Sadly I think this car crash of a presidency still has a flicker of life, I hope not, but if he does get back in I have promised myself that my current level of attention to the dangerous nonsense that is going on in America will have to be pulled back until they sort themselves out.

I don't care whether they have a conservative or a (by US standards) liberal government, provided the person in charge has some small degree of intelligence and integrity and has some concern for the country and the rest of the world. If they vote him in again then they deserve all they get, we can only hope we don't get caught up in the consequences.

reg114 · 13-10-2020 08:30AM

looksee wrote: »

This says all we need to know about the value of your summary of US politics. Sadly I think this car crash of a presidency still has a flicker of life, I hope not, but if he does get back in I have promised myself that my current level of attention to the dangerous nonsense that is going on in America will have to be pulled back until they sort themselves out.

I don't care whether they have a conservative or a (by US standards) liberal government, provided the person in charge has some small degree of intelligence and integrity and has some concern for the country and the rest of the world. If they vote him in again then they deserve all they get, we can only hope we don't get caught up in the consequences.

Personally I think his presidency has had an extraordinarily damaging effect on peoples' mental health. This makes sense I suppose when you are exposed to the constant stream of tripe spewing from his mouth daily. We have all had a ringside seat to delusional narcissistic megalomania and very few of us feel the better for it. I believe common sense will prevail this time and this political Frankenstein will leave the scene in a tornado of a tantrum. Good riddance.

Quin_Dub · 13-10-2020 10:02AM

Here's a surprising figure for you..

How many people have registered as candidates for the 2020 Presidential Election?

4? , 5? - Nope.

It's 1218!!!!

There were about ~800 in 2016

That's just mental - I have no idea how many of them will actually appear on ballot papers in each state , but even if only a fraction of them actually made it , that still makes for a very long list of choices..

L1011 · 13-10-2020 10:07AM

Quin_Dub wrote: »

but even if only a fraction of them actually made it , that still makes for a very long list of choices..

Ireland South clowncar ballots come to mind.

marno21 · 13-10-2020 01:58PM

https://twitter.com/JessicaTaylor/status/1315991309526720513

Cook Political Report upgrading their prediction from a gain of 2 in the Senate by the Democrats to a gain of 7. Would be an incredible turn around if true. They have AZ/CO as Lean D and GA/GA/IA/ME/MT/NC/SC as tossups.

everlast75 · 13-10-2020 02:00PM

Republicans accuse Dems of voter fraud.

Every accusation is an admission

https://twitter.com/TimOBrien/status/1315995124703387650?s=19

Tell me how · 13-10-2020 02:04PM

everlast75 wrote: »

Republicans accuse Dems of voter fraud.

Every accusation is an admission

'Accuse others of that which you are guilty'

Time and time and time and time again this is coming to mind watching everything going on.

spacecoyote · 13-10-2020 02:22PM

everlast75 wrote: »

Republicans accuse Dems of voter fraud.

Every accusation is an admission

https://twitter.com/TimOBrien/status/1315995124703387650?s=19

That's nuts. I'd assumed that was just some crackpot maga types that did that. Didnt realise this was done by the actual Rep party

US Presidential Election 2020

Comments