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.
On March 20 2016 11:59 LegalLord wrote: Both parties are lacking good, high-quality candidates and I could see that from the last DNC/RNC of 2012 where they failed to put forward someone who we could care about. It'll be interesting to see if there's a genuinely interesting rising star from their party this convention.
Rubio could be a wonderful 'establishment' republican with more experience to help him become more consistent and make less NH-esque gaffs. I just don't think he's as crazy right as the others, which might be troubling as the voters move to further extremes. Do you guys think it'll be more of a case where the establishment moves to follow the voters and become more extreme, or are we looking at an almost 'four-party' system in the future?
Given US history on this matter, the establishment is going to move to follow the voters. The Republican and Democratic parties each represent a coalition more than a party (or else Sanders and Trump would not be on the D and R ticket respectively) and every attempt to deviate from the two coalition-party structure in the US has led back to the original. I'm hoping that the R party will eventually move left and be about as right-wing as Hillary, but frankly I just don't know. Too many extreme right-wing elements in the US to really think that it will happen so easily.
Unless Sanders takes Jill Stein's offer and moves his support and his supporters to the Greens which would fracture the Democratic party in such a way as to make the GOP look amateurish.
On March 20 2016 12:22 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Unless Sanders takes Jill Stein's offer and moves his support and his supporters to the Greens which would fracture the Democratic party in such a way as to make the GOP look amateurish.
As much as I generally agree with Jill Stein's positions, I just don't think Jill is a strong enough candidate to make that at /all/ viable. It has a lower chance of happening than the GOP going full brokered convention, in my eyes.
On March 20 2016 11:59 LegalLord wrote: Both parties are lacking good, high-quality candidates and I could see that from the last DNC/RNC of 2012 where they failed to put forward someone who we could care about. It'll be interesting to see if there's a genuinely interesting rising star from their party this convention.
Rubio could be a wonderful 'establishment' republican with more experience to help him become more consistent and make less NH-esque gaffs. I just don't think he's as crazy right as the others, which might be troubling as the voters move to further extremes. Do you guys think it'll be more of a case where the establishment moves to follow the voters and become more extreme, or are we looking at an almost 'four-party' system in the future?
I think the Democratic party is changing more than fracturing. The under 40 demo that heavily favors people like Sanders aren't going to age into Hillary type democrats at a rate fast enough to keep them viable.
The kicker is that traditional power structures are starting to break down, so no one really knows what they are going to do.
I've said it before but I expect you'll just have a leftist party created out of the democrats, as opposed to just a "non-far-right" party. It's scary to think of cause it splits the vote and it could help republicans, but I suspect the Kasich type republicans might go for a moderate right wing party if said party stops also having leftists in it.
I kind of hope that doesn't happen too soon, cause if the youth is really shifting to the left as it seems to be, then a few years from now we'll have a much better situation for that to happen than today.
literally all of sanders' permanent support is suspicion of current political leadership of the dem party. all of this hope and stuff is on the basis of perceived desperation and lack of hope in the present.
his youth supporters are actually the more transient of the bunch. the low information, emotionally engaged bunch that are for sanders because he excites them. but this 'positive' position on sanders is far from enough to justify a split of the dem party. the ones who will split are the hardened haters of the 'establishment.'
fact of the matter is obstruction from the right rather than ineptitude or lack of courage from the dem leadership is really what's holding everything back. the relative gain from going to sanders platform vs hillary is NEGATIVE. it is simply more important to win than to go further left.
Man, how funny would it be if we had a 4 candidate general? Clinton with the Dems, Cruz with the Republicans, Sanders with the Green, and Trump as an Independent.
CNN is hosting a town hall with all the remaining candidates. Kinda disappointed it's not a debate but a debate should be what people end up wanting afterwords since surely they will set it up so the ones that go later will have a chance to respond to things said earlier in the night.
On March 20 2016 14:26 On_Slaught wrote: Man, how funny would it be if we had a 4 candidate general? Clinton with the Dems, Cruz with the Republicans, Sanders with the Green, and Trump as an Independent.
I think I'd actually be ok with that.
Wouldn't be great odds for Sanders/Trump. If none of the candidates get 270 electors, the House picks from the top 3. So the winner would probably be Cruz or maybe Clinton.
On March 20 2016 14:26 On_Slaught wrote: Man, how funny would it be if we had a 4 candidate general? Clinton with the Dems, Cruz with the Republicans, Sanders with the Green, and Trump as an Independent.
I think I'd actually be ok with that.
Wouldn't be great odds for Sanders/Trump. If none of the candidates get 270 electors, the House picks from the top 3. So the winner would probably be Cruz or maybe Clinton.
Well, electors are strongly encouraged (some by state law) to vote the way their state does, but are not required to, so no one could get the majority by popular vote and the EC could still make the pick themselves.
But they both have the problem of the people being party diehards.
Hopefully this election teaches some Americans about how many layers we have to prevent us from actually being the democracy we imagine/are taught we are.
On March 20 2016 14:26 On_Slaught wrote: Man, how funny would it be if we had a 4 candidate general? Clinton with the Dems, Cruz with the Republicans, Sanders with the Green, and Trump as an Independent.
I think I'd actually be ok with that.
Wouldn't be great odds for Sanders/Trump. If none of the candidates get 270 electors, the House picks from the top 3. So the winner would probably be Cruz or maybe Clinton.
Well, electors are strongly encouraged (some by state law) to vote the way their state does, but are not required to, so no one could get the majority by popular vote and the EC could still make the pick themselves.
But they both have the problem of the people being party diehards.
Hopefully this election teaches some Americans about how many layers we have to prevent us from actually being the democracy we imagine/are taught we are.
Don't even have to wait that long, the DNC and RNC both have their own set of shenanigans to influence the primary elections.
On March 20 2016 14:26 On_Slaught wrote: Man, how funny would it be if we had a 4 candidate general? Clinton with the Dems, Cruz with the Republicans, Sanders with the Green, and Trump as an Independent.
I think I'd actually be ok with that.
Wouldn't be great odds for Sanders/Trump. If none of the candidates get 270 electors, the House picks from the top 3. So the winner would probably be Cruz or maybe Clinton.
Well, electors are strongly encouraged (some by state law) to vote the way their state does, but are not required to, so no one could get the majority by popular vote and the EC could still make the pick themselves.
But they both have the problem of the people being party diehards.
Hopefully this election teaches some Americans about how many layers we have to prevent us from actually being the democracy we imagine/are taught we are.
Don't even have to wait that long, the DNC and RNC both have their own set of shenanigans to influence the primary elections.
Yeah no question the RNC convention will be the highest rated convention ever. Unless they totally roll over and submit to Trump before then. Like Trump said, he could walk out on 5th Ave and shoot someone and not lose his base, so anything other than capitulation to it will result in static.
On March 20 2016 11:59 LegalLord wrote: Both parties are lacking good, high-quality candidates and I could see that from the last DNC/RNC of 2012 where they failed to put forward someone who we could care about. It'll be interesting to see if there's a genuinely interesting rising star from their party this convention.
Rubio could be a wonderful 'establishment' republican with more experience to help him become more consistent and make less NH-esque gaffs. I just don't think he's as crazy right as the others, which might be troubling as the voters move to further extremes. Do you guys think it'll be more of a case where the establishment moves to follow the voters and become more extreme, or are we looking at an almost 'four-party' system in the future?
I think the Democratic party is changing more than fracturing. The under 40 demo that heavily favors people like Sanders aren't going to age into Hillary type democrats at a rate fast enough to keep them viable.
The kicker is that traditional power structures are starting to break down, so no one really knows what they are going to do.
Start World War 3. If robots can do half of all jobs in 20 years they need to cull the herd, especially now they know it's a rigged game.
On March 20 2016 11:59 LegalLord wrote: Both parties are lacking good, high-quality candidates and I could see that from the last DNC/RNC of 2012 where they failed to put forward someone who we could care about. It'll be interesting to see if there's a genuinely interesting rising star from their party this convention.
Rubio could be a wonderful 'establishment' republican with more experience to help him become more consistent and make less NH-esque gaffs. I just don't think he's as crazy right as the others, which might be troubling as the voters move to further extremes. Do you guys think it'll be more of a case where the establishment moves to follow the voters and become more extreme, or are we looking at an almost 'four-party' system in the future?
I think the Democratic party is changing more than fracturing. The under 40 demo that heavily favors people like Sanders aren't going to age into Hillary type democrats at a rate fast enough to keep them viable.
The kicker is that traditional power structures are starting to break down, so no one really knows what they are going to do.
Start World War 3. If robots can do half of all jobs in 20 years they need to cull the herd, especially now they know it's a rigged game.
...alternately, we recognize that people don't have to spend as much time working and we start working less per person and taking more leisure time.
For instance, a 4 day work-week instead of a 5 day work-week as a norm.
On March 20 2016 17:03 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Liberal protester in KKK outfit beaten up by black Trump supporter at Trump rally.Hope he got a few stitches at least.
It was a female wearing the KKK costume and she didn't get beaten up, the guy in front of her got him ass handed to him by the black guy. Some really clean punches thrown.
edit: Of course, according to the media its 'racial tension at Trump rally as protester gets beaten up', and the good old 'person in KKK costume at Trump rally'. No context on the horizon.
On March 20 2016 17:03 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Liberal protester in KKK outfit beaten up by black Trump supporter at Trump rally.Hope he got a few stitches at least.
It was a female wearing the KKK costume and she didn't get beaten up, the guy in front of her got him ass handed to him by the black guy. Some really clean punches thrown.
edit: Of course, according to the media its 'racial tension at Trump rally as protester gets beaten up', and the good old 'person in KKK costume at Trump rally'. No context on the horizon.
EPT
