US Presidential Election 2020 Thread II - Judgement Day(s)

20silkcut · 09-11-2020 08:07AM

prawnsambo wrote: »

The EC isn't perfect, but it was designed to do the exact opposite of what you think is wrong with it. It's a form of proportional representation where the smaller states are supposed to be represented in a way that prevents them from being completely blown out by the big cities and states.

The system needs updating though and there are parts of the US like Puerto Rico that get no say whatsoever. Other than the popular vote of course.

Yes people here quick to diss the electoral college but I think it’s actually a fine system.
Without it politicians would just concentrate on the big cities and populous areas creating resentment and greater potential for instability arising from neglected areas. It may need a few tweaks but like it it or not, it does in my opinion , create tighter political engagement and unity of purpose across an entire huge continent.
In my opinion , a straight popular vote would lead to widespread disengagement from politics in huge geographical swathes of the states which would never have a hope of identifying with any candidate. Keeping the states United is the ultimate goal. They have the relatively recent memory of a savage civil war to remind them of that.

Christy42 · 09-11-2020 09:18AM

20silkcut wrote: »

Yes people here quick to diss the electoral college but I think it’s actually a fine system.
Without it politicians would just concentrate on the big cities and populous areas creating resentment and greater potential for instability arising from neglected areas. It may need a few tweaks but like it it or not, it does in my opinion , create tighter political engagement and unity of purpose across an entire huge continent.
In my opinion , a straight popular vote would lead to widespread disengagement from politics in huge geographical swathes of the states which would never have a hope of identifying with any candidate. Keeping the states United is the ultimate goal. They have the relatively recent memory of a savage civil war to remind them of that.

It still means a large swathe of states have little hope of identifying with a candidate. Did Trump connect with Kansas or did they just hate Biden more. The reverse for California. Neither had to campaign in either really because neither are near the 50% mark.

I think if states gave votes proportionally it might help. Or some sort of pr system to help 3rd parties. Certainly the last 2 elections have been defined by who people hate more than they like. It would be interesting to see how greens or a socialist candidate would do if it wasn't a wasted vote.

everlast75 · 09-11-2020 09:32AM

An update on the election results pending;

https://twitter.com/NumbersMuncher/status/1325639421396455424?s=19

spacecoyote · 09-11-2020 09:39AM

I still reckon a proportionally represented electoral college would be the best compromise in the US.

It would force both parties to look at pick ups of votes in all states as they could take a chunk of electoral college votes and removes the issue of winner takes all over a single vote margin

harr · 09-11-2020 09:57AM

What are peoples opinions of a possible spilt in the Republican Party ?
Seems to be a good number still backing trump and have his ideology and then you have the more conservative Republicans . Will the more extreme members fall back in line once trump is gone.

prawnsambo · 09-11-2020 10:10AM

harr wrote: »

What are peoples opinions of a possible spilt in the Republican Party ?
Seems to be a good number still backing trump and have his ideology and then you have the more conservative Republicans . Will the more extreme members fall back in line once trump is gone.

There was a similar fear at the time that the Tea Party started to gather strength. In some ways, Trumpism is a continuation of that. Basically, that danger seems to be always present and the GOP have struggled to contain those elements within. They will probably continue to do that now, note how quiet they are about the outcome of the election.

BobbyMalone · 09-11-2020 10:25AM

harr wrote: »

What are peoples opinions of a possible spilt in the Republican Party ?
Seems to be a good number still backing trump and have his ideology and then you have the more conservative Republicans . Will the more extreme members fall back in line once trump is gone.

There have been some call outs from Donald Jr over Republicans failing to row in behind the president, and some big names slowly came out in support. I imagine most of them are biding their time, waiting to see what way the wind blows.

Interestingly, it's not just the Republicans. The Guardian (and many others) are reporting an end of the truce between the progressive (or hardline communists, according to some) and the moderates: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/08/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-ends-truce-by-warning-incompetent-democratic-party

The Lincoln Project are also firmly setting the progressives in their sites as well:

https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1325305143395553281

Blowfish · 09-11-2020 10:35AM

spacecoyote wrote: »

I still reckon a proportionally represented electoral college would be the best compromise in the US.

It would force both parties to look at pick ups of votes in all states as they could take a chunk of electoral college votes and removes the issue of winner takes all over a single vote margin

It would, but you'd need to expand the number of EC votes so that third parties can get involved. 3 as the minimum per state is too little as it requires a minimum of 17.7% of the vote to get one. Multiplying the number of EC votes by 10 or 100 would allow third parties to start winning some as there'd be a much smaller barrier to entry.

breezy1985 · 09-11-2020 10:47AM

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

They are proportional to population but that's not what makes them undemocratic. What makes them undemocratic is that in 48/50 states the electoral college votes are given out on a winner takes all basis. In those states whether a candidate wins by a single vote or by 5 million votes there is no difference in the amount of electoral votes they get.

To use the language of economics every vote that a candidate gets in excess of a 1-vote win is wasted. This is because any extra votes beyond that in a particular state are not helping the candidate obtain any additional electoral college votes.

A good example of this wasted excess was in 2016 where Hillary Clinton won California by 4,269,478 votes. In Electoral College terms she didn't need 4,269,477 of those votes in California that day. She would have been far better off if she could have transferred some of those votes to make up the small margins that she was losing by in Wisconsin (23k), Michigan (11k) and Pennsylvania (44k) thereby flipping those states and winning all of their Electoral Votes and not the 0 that she instead got from the three of them combined. Had she got that 78k vote that would have swung the election to her instead.

This year was similarly tight - Had Trump won something like 70k extra votes in just 4 particular states then he would have won despite Biden probably winning the popular vote by 5 million votes.

Splitting the EC votes in every state based on that states popular vote is the simple obvious fixand doesn't require massive structural change

listermint · 09-11-2020 11:21AM

BobbyMalone wrote: »

There have been some call outs from Donald Jr over Republicans failing to row in behind the president, and some big names slowly came out in support. I imagine most of them are biding their time, waiting to see what way the wind blows.

Interestingly, it's not just the Republicans. The Guardian (and many others) are reporting an end of the truce between the progressive (or hardline communists, according to some) and the moderates: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/08/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-ends-truce-by-warning-incompetent-democratic-party

The Lincoln Project are also firmly setting the progressives in their sites as well:

https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1325305143395553281

But none of that has anything to do with AOC. Members of the democrats who had lost seats shouted down an open phonecall between Dems about the socialists within the party.

It wasn't AOC and I watched her interview on CNN when asked to respond to it she didn't want a lurch to the left. This is more fabrication from the same usual sources that spread the lies and fear in the first place. Amplification of these lies is the problem no having a progressive section within the Dems. The Dems should be proud of the broad church and not seek to emulate the republicans. Similar thing happened to labour in the UK and look how that's left them.

looksee · 09-11-2020 11:26AM

V8 Interceptor wrote: »

I would look at it another way. People, traditionally, have been too quick to believe any old crap they're shoveled by the media without critical thinking. Social media has opened another window where evidence can be seen directly for someone to make a judgment themselves.

Its horrifying to think the stranglehold a select few used to have on framing and giving out the information to the population. That's gone, never to return.

'People, traditionally, have been too quick to believe any old crap they're shoveled by the media' - but social media can use this kind of emotive language to sway public opinion? You are offering here an opinion unaided by any facts. It is in itself 'crap'.

Anyone can listen to Trump's actual words at a press conference or rally and hear what he is saying without interpretation by MSM. Half the people listening hear glorious oration, the other half hear rambling nonsense. Nothing to do with MSM.

People with phone cameras can catch bits of video from, say, a riot, and publish it to prove whatever they want. If MSM films a riot they generally have to show context and background or other MSM will be quick to show that they are being dishonest.

Why would you take a bit of film with no context, published by an unknown, unidentified person with an unidentified agenda over a formalised, identifiable organisation that may well have an agenda, but at least it is in the open.

The conspiracy theorist approach that all MSM is a single malignant body promoting ideas controlled by a single higher power is as nonsensical as the idea that any individual with a social media account, a chip on their shoulder and a complete inability to engage in critical analysis is worth listening to for information about how the world is working.

L1011 · 09-11-2020 11:28AM

V8 Interceptor wrote: »

I would look at it another way. People, traditionally, have been too quick to believe any old crap they're shoveled by the media without critical thinking. Social media has opened another window where evidence can be seen directly for someone to make a judgment themselves.

Its opened a window to get vastly more old crap to accept without critical thinking; based on the absolute gubbins that people now seem to believe.

ThunbergsAreGo · 09-11-2020 11:30AM

L1011 wrote: »

Its opened a window to get vastly more old crap to accept without critical thinking; based on the absolute gubbins that people now seem to believe.

Critical thinking is dead

BobbyMalone · 09-11-2020 11:32AM

listermint wrote: »

But none of that has anything to do with AOC. Members of the democrats who had lost seats shouted down an open phonecall between Dems about the socialists within the party.

It wasn't AOC and I watched her interview on CNN when asked to respond to it she didn't want a lurch to the left. This is more fabrication from the same usual sources that spread the lies and fear in the first place. Amplification of these lies is the problem no having a progressive section within the Dems. The Dems should be proud of the broad church and not seek to emulate the republicans. Similar thing happened to labour in the UK and look how that's left them.

Oh, I absolutely agree. I think a lot of what they try to sling at AOC has little to do with AOC.

BlitzKrieg · 09-11-2020 11:35AM

BobbyMalone wrote: »

The Lincoln Project are also firmly setting the progressives in their sites as well:

https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1325305143395553281

I'd be careful as the dems to assume kneecapping progressives or vice versa is the answer so soon before the nature of Georgia's vote is looked at.

Considering how close it was in Georgia and the numbers that came out it might be the progressives that pushed the dems over the top there (judging by who they're giving most of the credit to). We've yet to see how much actual influence the Lincoln Project has actually had on the election vs progressives.

Stacey Adams is credited for getting the democrats out to vote and from what I've read she primarily got out young black voters, so rolling back on progressive policies between now and the senate race could end up alienating them so soon after finally engaging them.

In contrast the republican base did no sleep in Georgia they did come out to vote, It is safe to assume beyond Trump making such a show of himself between now and the senate vote that they'll be back out to vote in the same numbers.

It may end up being the wrong image to send to blame progressives for losses in other states when they are who the dems will be relying on to get Georgia back out in the same numbers in January.

ancapailldorcha · 09-11-2020 11:37AM

V8 Interceptor wrote: »

You responded to that post and considered it civil but the Mod didn't. I guess its his decision that counts Stringer.

Stop discussing moderation please. Thanks.

StringerBell · 09-11-2020 11:45AM

V8 Interceptor wrote: »

I would've had the same opinion of Fox when I was a liberal/lefty type but now I look at CNN and see just as much of a false narrative only in the opposite direction. And Fox has changed. A number of its anchors are Democrats eg Chris Wallace and they were the network that called Arizona for Biden remember.

All the other main networks would be liberal/Democratic in their outlook. Nothing wrong with that but I seen Rachel Maddow and Larry O'Donnell saying very strange things leading up to the election. To be fair to them I think Trump had driven a lot of them crazy by this stage.

This is why I made the distinction to the opinion segment of Fox. It is about as big as you get. I guess when you are mentioning Maddow or O Donnell you are also referring to the opinion sections of the media which are not the news sections.

What is the point you are making though?

BobbyMalone · 09-11-2020 11:46AM

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I'd be careful as the dems to assume kneecapping progressives or vice versa is the answer so soon before the nature of Georgia's vote is looked at.

Considering how close it was in Georgia and the numbers that came out it might be the progressives that pushed the dems over the top there (judging by who they're giving most of the credit to). We've yet to see how much actual influence the Lincoln Project has actually had on the election vs progressives.

Stacey Adams is credited for getting the democrats out to vote and from what I've read she primarily got out young black voters, so rolling back on progressive policies between now and the senate race could end up alienating them so soon after finally engaging them.

In contrast the republican base did no sleep in Georgia they did come out to vote, It is safe to assume beyond Trump making such a show of himself between now and the senate vote that they'll be back out to vote in the same numbers.

It may end up being the wrong image to send to blame progressives for losses in other states when they are who the dems will be relying on to get Georgia back out in the same numbers in January.

Indeed, and on the reverse, there has been much talk about how Kasich was so pivotal for turning this election, yet others have stated that it's odd if this was the case, as Ohio remained staunchly Republican during the election.

First Up · 09-11-2020 11:54AM

I don't normally watch Fox News but I tuned in yesterday to see how they were dealing with it.

Sure enough, there was a woman saying Nancy Pelosi has shares in a company that has created an algorithm that either forced people to vote for Biden against their will or changed their vote from Trump to Biden. (Apparently this also worked with hand written postal votes so it's one heck of an algorithm. )

Fox were taking her very seriously. Enough said.

letowski · 09-11-2020 12:35PM

BobbyMalone wrote: »

Indeed, and on the reverse, there has been much talk about how Kasich was so pivotal for turning this election, yet others have stated that it's odd if this was the case, as Ohio remained staunchly Republican during the election.

I think the Dems ought to thread carefully with the LP. At the end of the day, these guys are neo-conservatives of the old Bush/Reagan party, that's where their interests lay. They now have a broad outreach established among center left liberals and make no mistake, if the 2024 GOP nominee is a neo-con, they will look to target those center left liberals to get a republican back into the presidency.

As a side note, they seemed to have made themselves very rich this past year, funnelling 2/3 ($40m) of their funding (mostly Democratic donors) into communication firms, owned by the LP founders themselves. I think the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' mutual agreement ends after this election.

everlast75 · 09-11-2020 12:42PM

First Up wrote: »

I don't normally watch Fox News but I tuned in yesterday to see how they were dealing with it.

Sure enough, there was a woman saying Nancy Pelosi has shares in a company that has created an algorithm that either forced people to vote for Biden against their will or changed their vote from Trump to Biden. (Apparently this also worked with hand written postal votes so it's one heck of an algorithm. )

Fox were taking her very seriously. Enough said.

Just wait until the usual culprits here come in to echo those unfounded allegations...

First Up · 09-11-2020 12:50PM

everlast75 wrote:

Just wait until the usual culprits here come in to echo those unfounded allegations...

I'd be more concerned about the numbskulls who attend the rallies Trump is threatening to hold.

ancapailldorcha · 09-11-2020 12:55PM

everlast75 wrote: »

Just wait until the usual culprits here come in to echo those unfounded allegations...

First Up wrote: »

I'd be more concerned about the numbskulls who attend the rallies Trump is threatening to hold.

Mod: No sniping and other users and/or insults please.

Brussels Sprout · 09-11-2020 01:00PM

letowski wrote: »

I think the Dems ought to thread carefully with the LP. At the end of the day, these guys are neo-conservatives of the old Bush/Reagan party, that's where their interests lay. They now have a broad outreach established among center left liberals and make no mistake, if the 2024 GOP nominee is a neo-con, they will look to target those center left liberals to get a republican back into the presidency.

As a side note, they seemed to have made themselves very rich this past year, funnelling 2/3 ($40m) of their funding (mostly Democratic donors) into communication firms, owned by the LP founders themselves. I think the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' mutual agreement ends after this election.

The Lincoln Project announced that they would continue to support the Democrats for the upcoming runoff elections in Georgia. I thought that was odd considering that their motus operandi was chiefly to oust Trump.

Now I suppose they did have a few ads that were bashing the Senate Republicans so if one were to be charitable you could say that they want the modern iteration of the Republican party to be razed to the ground in order that it can be rebuilt again in their preferred image.

Gbear · 09-11-2020 01:04PM

It's far too early to be trying to peddle one narrative or another about who voted and why.

Not only are there likely to be a broad set of reasons why people voted the way they did, it won't necessarily be consistent from state to state.

The obvious example is Miami Dade, which has nominally Democrat-favouring demographics, but lost the state for Biden.
As well as the Cuban American problem, it's also not clear how Latin Americans feel about things like Black Lives Matter.
They are, I think, more Christian (usually Catholic, I assume), and more generally conservative than the population as a whole.

With many, mostly male minorities voting for Trump, while Biden appears to have improved his vote share with white people, it could be that the traditional understanding of demographic splits has to shift. Until that analysis is done, it would be a mistake to hold to strongly onto opinions about the electorate.

There's lots of ways you could lay out a flexibile, rationally determined electoral college vote system.

If it was just something like 1 vote per 500k population + 2, you'd end up with:

California

55 -> 81
Texas

38 -> 60
Illinois

20 -> 27
Massachusetts -- 11 -> 15
Nevada

6 -> 8
Wyoming

3 -> 3

That'd mean that California would go from having only about 18 times the electoral votes with about 80 times the population, to 27 times the electoral votes as Wyoming.

You could skew it further towards the smaller states if you made it +3 (California would still have 20 times the electoral votes).

It would still heavily favour the smaller states, but at least if they established a system like that, it would maintain an appropriate weighting as populations continue to change.

harr · 09-11-2020 01:06PM

These fraud allegations are dangerous not only in US but for most countries.
You now have the usual conspiracy nuts on social media here and U.K. spouting nonsense but it has a lot of people put into the mind frame
“ why should I even bother voting if it can be rigged “
Fox News not helping matters by giving a voice to some of the outlandish claims.
It’s really time for senior republicans to stand up and refute the claims because if they don’t people will be shouting fix forever more .
Trump was shouting fix even before the election.
Not one claim has yet been backed up by any credible proof.

everlast75 · 09-11-2020 01:08PM

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

The Lincoln Project announced that they would continue to support the Democrats for the upcoming runoff elections in Georgia. I thought that was odd considering that their motus operandi was chiefly to oust Trump.

I think that their problems relate to the party which Trump has taken over.

Perhaps they know that there is no future in the GOP at present.

They want a viable Republican party, so trump and his enablers are legit targets until then.

L1011 · 09-11-2020 01:10PM

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

The Lincoln Project announced that they would continue to support the Democrats for the upcoming runoff elections in Georgia. I thought that was odd considering that their motus operandi was chiefly to oust Trump.

Now I suppose they did have a few ads that were bashing the Senate Republicans so if one were to be charitable you could say that they want the modern iteration of the Republican party to be razed to the ground in order that it can be rebuilt again in their preferred image.

I'm sure it had already been said they were going to go against Trump-aligned Republicans in both houses through the mid-terms and possibly 2024 if there's still enough around.

Quin_Dub · 09-11-2020 01:13PM

everlast75 wrote: »

I think that their problems relate to the party which Trump has taken over.

Perhaps they know that there is no future in the GOP at present.

They want a viable Republican party, so trump and his enablers are legit targets until then.

Especially given that both the GOP candidates are arch "Trumpists" , Loeffler in particular has gone down the QAnon rabbit hole hard in recent times.

Gbear · 09-11-2020 01:22PM

The notion that the Presidential election was rigged is so intellectually shallow that it only further exposes that the people who have been trying to argue it are simply authoritarians who want single party rule.

Alleging widespread voter fraud is a remarkable thing to do, and any sane person would immediately begin to game it out and try to pick holes in it. Why did it happen in states with Republican control of the AG, the Governorship, the state legislature? Why was there no fraud committed on the same ballots for the House and Senate? Why did deeply unpopular Senators like Graham and McConnell still win in a landslide?

As with most things over the last 4 years, authoritarians make very little effort to excuse their bull****, safe in the knowledge that they can shriek about freedom of speech when they're called on it.

US Presidential Election 2020 Thread II - Judgement Day(s)

Comments