Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Again, Septimus, I have to ask: How is arguing "they should listen to the will of the voters" and then immediately argue "but the states I didn't win should still back me" not hypocrisy?
For the South, they were flat out claiming it didn't mean as much or even that winning South Carolina was meaningless. Clinton won those on the strength of the black vote there. As for Paul Song...why is that relevant? Song, again, flat out called her a corporate Democratic whore, and Sanders' only response was to thank him for the intro at the time.
Bernie's demands to make all primaries open was completely unacceptable. The loyalty of independent voters is always suspect; they can either affiliate, or get lost.
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."@Fighteer: In regards to "how far would I go", it's not about ideological purity, it's about preventing regression, and when the ruling class feels secure in its position, regression is the natural tendency of society on issues where the interests of the ruling class and the general population diverge.
If you want your party to be an exclusive club, don't force a voting system on us that only allows for two viable parties.
edited 17th Jun '16 8:55:00 AM by CaptainCapsase
Nobody's mixing up any issues. The part about "black vote" appears to be cherry-picked and "the South" and the "black vote" are not exact synonyms nor do people always treat them as such (even when they should). And complaints about DWS have been around a long while for incompetence, mishandling of Congressional and state level parties, the debates and so forth. Ditto for superdelegates being undemocratic. Paul Song is one instance and without a reference frame that is not saying much.
Also, don't edit in an answer into an already existing post. Not everybody pages back in threads.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanLike it or don't like it; it's how our government was designed to operate.
edited 17th Jun '16 8:58:35 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"This. For reference: the French Revolution, followed shortly after by the French Revolution II: Electric Boogaloo.
Not everyone who demands revolution truly has what's best for the people at heart. Many revolutionaries are just bitter that the crown isn't sitting on their head. Even those that do mean well are at just as much risk of being short-sighted and ignorant as the person sitting on the throne to begin with.
It's one thing to say, "X is what is right!" and it's another to actually make it work. You don't have to deal with the logistics of running a nation when it's all theoretical ravings. But then you step into that chamber of power, take a seat on the throne, start to do what you set out to do, and Reality Ensues.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.![]()
It is, but when it became apparent that a two party system was a consequence of the system set up by the constitution, efforts to change it were continuously blocked by the parties out of fear of losing their monopoly on power.
Fear of the revolution spreading however, was one of the major impetuses behind the decline of absolutism in Europe.
edited 17th Jun '16 9:00:43 AM by CaptainCapsase
How did Clinton win the South exactly, Septimus? Please help me to understand how diminishing her gains there does not diminish the black vote? The optics alone should preclude that level of stupidity from the Sanders campaign.
DWS is incompetent and has mishandled alot. The Sanders campaign has been making her into a ridiculous example of a boogyman and it's long since worn thin. To the point she was blamed for a perhaps-too-harsh punishment for his campaign actively stealing the Clinton campaign's data. At what point do we agree that maybe it's a little much? Sanders also doesn't get to have it both ways on the Superdelegates. You don't get to argue they have to support the winner of the state, but the ones you didn't win should still support you without being a hypocrite.
I don't have any idea where you're going with Paul Song here. How is his statement nor relevant? Is a statement that vile and misogynist on behalf of the Sanders campaign alright if it only happens once?
![]()
I don't see how their motive matter.
If another party gets strong enough to become mainstream, which is a pipe dream. Then the 3 parties, Democrats, Republicans, and Glorious Half Life 3 would still struggle for monopoly. That's how politics work.
edited 17th Jun '16 9:02:47 AM by flameboy21th
Non Indicative Username![]()
![]()
You can say so, but I haven't seen improved results from other democratic systems. Different results, maybe, but not provably superior.
edited 17th Jun '16 9:03:09 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
If your goal is a system that minimizes the tendency towards oligarchy, than other voting systems are indeed demonstrably superior.
Allow at the poll registration switches from independent to democrat, require republicans to change affiliation in advance.
edited 17th Jun '16 9:03:07 AM by CaptainCapsase
Europe, which many pluralists like to hold out as emblematic of successful multi-party and/or parliamentary systems, is currently in a deep malaise brought on by technocratic ordoliberalism. Britain has sold its soul to austerity politics. You can't cherry pick good results (example: the Nordic states, which are also doing some pants-on-head stupid shit) as proof without being accused, properly, of intellectual dishonesty.
In all cases, the elites managed to suborn the putative democratic institutions. Democracy is inherently subject to this sort of failure no matter what form it takes, and obsessing over the form is missing the point.
edited 17th Jun '16 9:04:54 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!""Diminishing" and "deriding" are not synonyms. Also, Sanders has unsuccessfully for the most part appealed to black voters as well. I am not seeing a good argument here as to why DWS should not be sacked. Sanders was trying to have it both ways on superdelegates, which annoys me.
The issue I have with Paul Song is that you are citing only one event. Without a reference frame it could be part of a pattern or cherry-picking.
Also, I don't think the two party system has anything to do with the Constitution.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanI'm growing a bit tired of the French Revolution being presented as a Full-Circle Revolution that was purely about blood and punishment. It's very common in the Anglo-Saxon mind space, and rather inaccurate. Lots of very excellent things came of it, directly and indirectly. Certainly, the French are still very fond of it.
Doesn't everyone? Anyway, what specific examples do you have in mind?
edited 17th Jun '16 9:08:03 AM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.Why is it being 'one instance' relevant, Septimus? Here's the full context: a Sanders surrogate, introducing him at a big rally, called Sanders' chief rival a 'corporate whore' and received no criticism at the event for it. That's where it begins and ends. That's not 'cherry picking.'
Please provide me a reason for sacking DWS during an election season, too. Her term ends at the end of the year anyways. And Sanders' campaign has both diminished and derided the Southern primary votes, which again, were largely the black vote. Just ask his surrogates
edited 17th Jun '16 9:07:39 AM by Lightysnake
You know, it seems that every time someone says "Sanders did something stupid" Septimus comes back with "cherry picking". Even when that accusation means nothing.
Lightysnake isn't saying "the Sanders campaign is based entirely around calling Clinton a whore". If he was then saying "Paul Song said that once and it never happened again, you are cherry picking" would be an appropriate response.
Unfortunately, Lightysnake's argument is "Paul Song called Clinton a whore while introducing Sanders and Sanders' total reaction was 'thanks for the intro'". Sure, it only happened once, but Sanders didn't condemn it. That's not "cherry picking". That's a statement of fact.
![]()
Clinton didn't condemn a supporter of hers saying any women who didn't vote for her had a special place in hell waiting for them; neither was right to (not) do so, but it's not like Clinton's campaign has been a shinning example of clean politics. Which is the heart of the issue; both campaigns are guilty of using a Double Standard.
edited 17th Jun '16 9:12:54 AM by CaptainCapsase
The Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with first past the post at all. That's federal law which is to blame.
And as for that Song event, with that kind of sample size you can still call Hillary a corporate whore on her past support for TPP/TTIP. Now if you want to cite that Paul Singer ( that plus the claim of Hillary being "unqualified" sounds sexist, then you are on point. I am wondering myself.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

You cannot not have an elite class; one will always form in any society. Imagining otherwise is silly.
edited 17th Jun '16 8:52:46 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"