EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 10008
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12341 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Every other office in the US is handled by popular vote. If we had not elected a bunch of complete clowns to congress over the last 8 years, this would not be as big of a problem. The problems in the US right now are bigger than one branch of government. There is a breed of anti government politicians and judge that is taking root in the US. And they see government as the biggest “threat” to Americans prosperity. Recently we found out that the NRA received millions from Russia oligarchs. Maybe 10s of millions. Obama warned that citizens united opened the door to foreign money flooding elections. And when he said that, Justice Alito mouthed “No it won’t”. Our problems reach so beyond Trump and the electoral college. A different outcome in the last election would not fix the dysfunction in our government. I am fervently of the opinion it might have just allowed the rot to fester for longer. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8165 Posts
On March 03 2018 22:02 Nebuchad wrote: There are no good arguments for an electoral college, there are just some people who don't really care cause it benefits them. "But it's the United States of America, not the United States of human people!" is genuinely the only argument I keep hearing, and it's a completely non-argument. Wtf is that even suppose to mean? Just because your country is divided into states doesn't mean the Presidents actions doesn't directly impact everyone living in it. Not having a straight up popularity vote is beyond retarded Also, get rid of First past the post! Does anyone really enjoy only having two options to choose from? Edit: Anyone who hasn't seen CGP Grey's videos on the subject; I strongly recommend you do. He does a very good job at explaining how different systems work, and the benefits and caveats of them. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 03 2018 22:12 Excludos wrote: "But it's the United States of America, not the United States of human people!" is genuinely the only argument I keep hearing, and it's a completely non-argument. Wtf is that even suppose to mean? Just because you've divided a country into states doesn't mean the Presidents actions doesn't directly impact everyone living in it. Not having a straight up popularity vote is beyond retarded Also, get rid of First past the post! Does anyone really enjoy only having two options to choose from? Edit: Anyone who hasn't seen CGP Grey's videos on the subject; I strongly recommend you do. He does a very good job at explaining how different systems work, and the benefits and caveats of them. We didn’t divide the country into states. They were states before they had a federal government. We are made up of many Norways of varying size. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8165 Posts
On March 03 2018 22:20 Plansix wrote: We didn’t divide the country into states. They were states before they had a federal government. We are made up of many Norways of varying size. Yeah I know..I'm hung over. I meant to say "Just because your country is divided into states" | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 03 2018 22:22 Excludos wrote: Yeah I know..I'm hung over. I meant to say "Just because your country is divided into states" I get it. But it shows a base misunderstanding of how our country grew. States joined the Union. We voted to accept them. We can still add more and might do so some day. Each state has its own government and judicial system. There are things the federal government has no control over, because the states handle it. We barely have federal voting laws. What you are say is stupid is like an American thinking it’s stupid the parliamentary governments can have failed governments. Or that they can call elections at any time. For Americans, that shit is wild and sounds like pure chaos. For you it’s Tuesday. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12341 Posts
On March 03 2018 22:10 Plansix wrote: Changing the electoral college would require a majority of states to give up power to elect the president to small number of states. And doing so would require a super majority in both houses to be on board. And a pure popular vote system will not fix the problem of one section of the US feeling disenfranchised. It’s seems like a good idea, but the political will necessary doesn’t exist and likely never will. And our political parties will always try to game whatever system is created. I don't disagree that it would be hard to change the system (precisely because, as you point out, you'd need the agreement of a bunch of people who benefit from it), I'm just saying that there are no good arguments for it. edit: I think we mostly agree. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 03 2018 22:30 Plansix wrote: What you are say is stupid is like an American thinking it’s stupid the parliamentary governments can have failed governments. Or that they can call elections at any time. For Americans, that shit is wild and sounds like pure chaos. For you it’s Tuesday. Technically America can have failed governments too, as the last several years have shown. The difference isn't in the failing, its what happens after. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 04 2018 05:23 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Interested to see what you mean by a "failed government". There are governments without a majority, so things like declaring war or implementing legislative changes becomes difficult, but failed governments make it sound like the government cannot run its own bureaucracy or fund its own services, which has never really occured in Europe outside of war. USA on the other hand... Dissolution of parliament due to no confidence or loss of supply, more or less. Or more simply whenever a minority government can't pass budget Bills, and another party alliance can't form a seated majority, forcing a new election. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 04 2018 06:38 Dangermousecatdog wrote: The post was directed at Plansix. When a parliament of majority cannot be formed the business of governance for the most part continues. You'll never see for instance the government shutdowns which occur in the USA, which to be quite frank is quite astonishing. In any case it is fairly rare (unless you are from Belgium), calling for fresh elections is rare and is hardly disruptive. I have a hard time that believing that Americans ala plansix think that sort of thing is "wild". That was kind of his point. Americans can't understand how governments can be dissolved overnight and elections held immediately. Just like we can't understand how a government can not govern. | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
I think he really wants that trade war. Not just like he'll take it if it comes, he actively wants it because he thinks it's a good thing for the US (or at least him) o.O After all he has to know that that tweet only makes it more likely that the EU will indeed tariff in retaliation, right? There's no way you get away with "being nice towards Trump" after a tweet like that... it's his complete inability to understand that those things matter outside of the US a well and not just something people in the US hear and see. I get that it gets him votes because US people like to hear that kind of stuff but don't complain if it only makes it less likely that the person you're dealing with is willing to accept a favoreable deal for you... you know, like with the insults towards Merkel etc or anyone else for that matter. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14047 Posts
| ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
On March 04 2018 07:29 Sermokala wrote: Well he needs to continue his plan of paying off the national debt by lowering the nations trade imbalance with other countries. Its the only thing that makes sense. how does that even work? It's not like the US government is importing goods with federal money from EU/Asia/Canada etc. Or I guess, there's probably a small subset of government projects that actually do that to some degree but for the most part trade imbalance is private companies buying from other companies, right?... so how does that money those companies spend or don't spend on foreign import go into dealing with national debt? | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21953 Posts
On March 04 2018 07:38 Toadesstern wrote: how does that even work? It's not like the US government is importing goods with federal money from EU/Asia/Canada etc. Or I guess, there's probably a small subset of government projects that actually do that to some degree but for the most part trade imbalance is private companies buying from other companies, right?... so how does that money those companies spend or don't spend on foreign import go into dealing with national debt? Ofcourse it doesn't work that way. Trumps a fucking idiot. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States14047 Posts
On March 04 2018 07:38 Toadesstern wrote: how does that even work? It's not like the US government is importing goods with federal money from EU/Asia/Canada etc. Or I guess, there's probably a small subset of government projects that actually do that to some degree but for the most part trade imbalance is private companies buying from other companies, right?... so how does that money those companies spend or don't spend on foreign import go into dealing with national debt? Trump once explained his plan to lower the national debt by closeing the trade deficit and he cited china as an example with their 288 billion a year that can be paid against the debt. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 04 2018 07:42 Sermokala wrote: Trump once explained his plan to lower the national debt by closeing the trade deficit and he cited china as an example with their 288 billion a year that can be paid against the debt. And what are the taxes on that which would actually go to the government? | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14047 Posts
On March 04 2018 08:06 WolfintheSheep wrote: And what are the taxes on that which would actually go to the government? No that was just the end of the idea. He explained he could pay the national debt off in a few years like that. | ||
| ||
