• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trump's Coup d'état.

Status
Not open for further replies.
angrysoba said:
This is just silliness.

"Get a rifle and start preparing for the next Civil War!" Said man on the internet.
Click to expand...

I see that went right over your head.
I said if things are as bad as some people here think...and I don't think they are..Arming yoursel if the only logical move because a second civil war or revlution is on it's way.
 
eerok said:
Oh, if you're just saying the GOP will continue to be dicks, I can't argue with that.
Click to expand...

I think the more rational classic concervative GOPErs will jump ship, and leave the party to the nutjobs.
And IMHJO, a lot of the GOP politicins supporting Trump know he is batcrap craxy, but they are afraid of his base and of being primaried in 2022.
Still another argument for term limits: if you know you are only going to be there for a few years, being relected might not be auch a big deal since you cannot make a career out of b eing in congress.
 
dudalb said:
I think the more rational classic concervative GOPErs will jump ship, and leave the party to the nutjobs.
Click to expand...

I'd love to see that happen, but I wouldn't count on it.

dudalb said:
And IMHJO, a lot of the GOP politicins supporting Trump know he is batcrap craxy, but they are afraid of his base and of being primaried in 2022.
Still another argument for term limits: if you know you are only going to be there for a few years, being relected might not be auch a big deal since you cannot make a career out of b eing in congress.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt that many in the GOP despise Trump, but it's a sign of how few principles they have that they suck up to him for favors. It's rather disgusting.
 
dudalb said:
Still another argument for term limits: if you know you are only going to be there for a few years, being relected might not be auch a big deal since you cannot make a career out of b eing in congress.
Click to expand...

I fail to see how the incentives of having to pander to your base as an incumbent must, in this context, be necessarily better than the incentives of having to pander to your base as someone new to the position. If anything, it is clear that elections favor incumbents (that is the actual argument for term limits) & thus an incumbent would, in theory, be less responsive to the electorate (because thy don't have to be).
 
cosmicaug said:
I fail to see how the incentives of having to pander to your base as an incumbent must, in this context, be necessarily better than the incentives of having to pander to your base as someone new to the position. If anything, it is clear that elections favor incumbents (that is the actual argument for term limits) & thus an incumbent would, in theory, be less responsive to the electorate (because thy don't have to be).
Click to expand...

My understanding of term limit proposals is not based on the idea that the incumbents will be less responsive to the electorate. The primary argument for term limits is that incumbents will be more likely to vote their conscience instead of the polls, and that would result in better government.

Being less responsive to the electorate is a feature, not a bug, of term limit proposals.

What we are seeing in the current Trump support issue is that darned near every elected official knows that Trump lost the election, but a fair number of those officials won't say it out loud, for fear of losing the next election, specifically the primary election.
 
You'd be hard pressed to convince me there's a more valid metric to prove that the election process for an elected government body has failed then an re-election rate above 90% but an approval rate below 20%.
 
JoeMorgue said:
You'd be hard pressed to convince me there's a more valid metric to prove that the election process for an elected government body has failed then an re-election rate above 90% but an approval rate below 20%.
Click to expand...

The local approval by the people that voted for each member of congress is much higher than that. That 20% or so represents how much everyone hates the senators and house members all the other states voted for.

At least along partisan lines, everybody loves their own congress members but hates everyone else's.

I'm not sure that's an issue with the election process exactly, it's more an issue with the political culture.
 
It's people voting for "name I recognize", not somebody they "love".

That could be called a problem with the election process, but it's really more of a problem with voters: voting without paying any attention.
 
dudalb said:
I said if things are as bad as some people here think...and I don't think they are..Arming yoursel if the only logical move because a second civil war or revlution is on it's way.
Click to expand...

Then you are creating strawmen.

I think there is literally nobody on this whole forum who has been more alarmist than you.

The rest of the posters are split into:

Position A - The majority: "Trump is predictably behaving very irresponsibly, and while he is almost certainly unlikely to succeed in his aim or overturning a democratic election, the very fact he is nonetheless attempting it is the problem"

Position B - The minority: "This is totally normal"

Position C - dudalb: "You need to get a gun."

Position C does NOT follow from Position A, so could you kindly stop trying to disparage people who are not saying anything that justifies your conclusions?
 
Cavemonster said:
The local approval by the people that voted for each member of congress is much higher than that. That 20% or so represents how much everyone hates the senators and house members all the other states voted for.

At least along partisan lines, everybody loves their own congress members but hates everyone else's.

I'm not sure that's an issue with the election process exactly, it's more an issue with the political culture.
Click to expand...

The whole idea that only people in Wyoming should care about Wyoming Congresspeople is part of the problem.

Congress makes decisions for the whole nation, not just the states they represent.

We don't get to just go "LOL I don't care about this Senator because I live in another state."

I've never set foot in Kentucky but Mitch McConnell has effected my life more in the last 4-5 years than Florida's Senators probably have or even could.
 
JoeMorgue said:
The whole idea that only people in Wyoming should care about Wyoming Congresspeople is part of the problem.

Congress makes decisions for the whole nation, not just the states they represent.

We don't get to just go "LOL I don't care about this Senator because I live in another state."

I've never set foot in Kentucky but Mitch McConnell has effected my life more in the last 4-5 years than Florida's Senators probably have or even could.
Click to expand...

This is why we must change how we apportion the districts. When the Constitution was written the House was supposed to be fairly apportioned. And the Senate was not. Changes were made that increases that rural inequity

Each district in California represents 745K people whereas Wyoming's single district represents 579K. This is duplicated throughout the country.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom