Imabench

The good news is that when someone has given that much time to a community like this one or the one that came before it, every once in a while they'll pop back onto the site randomly to reminisce and see what all has been going on. 

Thanks for the shoutout, hope you've been doing well <3 

Changing your mind on something is practically illegal in American politics at this point. You commit to a position and you are ride-or-die on that as if your whole political career depends on it, otherwise you get labeled as a flip-flopper, a turn-coat, traitor to the party ("RINO's") or basically dismissed as not a REAL insert-political-party-name-here

Even when political parties have majorities in every branch of legislative-crafting government, attention can only be focused on one major topic at a time, two at the most. 

When Obama was elected in 2008, he had to split time between the Economic Crisis and Healthcare which is why the Dems couldn't do much else about things like gun control, he minimum wage, police reform, etc. Then the 2010 midterm elections rolled around and Dems lost a lot of seats forcing them to play defense for the next 6 years. 

When Trump won in 2016, the GOP only had control of the Senate by a 3 vote margin which wasnt big enough to try to repeal Obamacare, the big goal of the GOP. Then in 2018 when the GOP got hammered in House elections, and forced them to play defense for the remainder of Trumps term.

Heavily partisan issues are always very difficult to pass legislation on because it only takes 1 little setback to kill any major move, and then after that the opportunity to get anything big passed into law has passed. 

Nah that happened because she A) appointed her sister to manage her campaign and she dropped the ball on that, and B) Couldnt make a namer for herself as a moderate (Buttigieg + Biden) or as a liberal (Sanders + Warren) 

It does no use trying to compare the nomination conventions of two very different parties at two very different times (nearly 70 years ago). You might as well try comparing it to the assassination of Caesar since Caesar thought his assassins were his friends.  

- 90% of the reason Biden won the Dem nomination despite starting off poorly is because he closely and loyally tied himself to the Obama Administration 

- Harris dropped out of the race before Iowa took place, even after handily winning the first major debate in the Dem nomination cycle which put her on par with Warren and Harris polling-wise. 

If aspirations to become president is something Harris still values, then if anything she will remain fiercely loyal to Biden as long as required since thats how Biden got it and since she wasnt able to secure it on her own the first time around...... Shit, Biden may still opt to serve just 1 term then step away in 2024, so Harris may not  even have to wait on the sidelines very long.

Yeah this went way fuckin differently then I thought it would. 

Georgia def a purple state now holy shit 

Look I dont know what to name this and im mentally fried from having to teach middle schoolers who after winter break forgot how to fucking act like theyre in a classroom, so I just wanted to put this into writing and refer back to it in the future should I ever need to. 

I predict that the Georgia runoff elections will not have any long term impact because theres almost no way in hell that Dems win one or both of them. 

Yes the state barely budged for Biden over Trump and almost elected Stacey Abrams over whoever the fuck actually won, but look at how other senate Dem challengers have done in other states and all you will find is a BLOODBATH. 

Iowa = In the state that forever reason is still considered a swing state even though it drifts further right with each presidential election, Democrat Theresa Greenfield loses to Joni Ernst by 6 points 

Maine = The state fucking EVERYONE thought would be flipped ended up staying red, with the oft-attacked Susan Collins beating challenger Sara Gideon by NINE POINTS 

North Carolina = 2 point Republican hold by incumbent Tom Tillis in a state that always votes red minus one time when Obama was on the ticket in 2008. 

Texas = John Cornyn, whose biggest asset is not being as hated as Ted Cruz, wins reelection by a double digit margin in a state that is concerningly pulling more towards the middle when it comes to presidential elections. 

My point is that while Biden has squeaked out a win against Trump at the top of the ticket, the next line down where senators have been judged have consistently gone in the GOP's favor. If Democrats cant pull out a win in fucking Maine or other states that have for sometime been considered swing states, I am very pessimistic they will be able to pull out one, let alone two, surprise upsets in the Georgia runoffs. 

If you want to see where shit REALLY is on the line, check out some of the states that elect senators in 2022. Its basically a who's-who of swing states where incumbant senators are either retiring or controversial in some way shape or form:

I think the safest answer is to instead offer a third option, that the status quo in the US is fucked..... This is a country where half the people are pushing for free healthcare run by the government for all, while the other half think tax cuts to the ultra rich is a sensible way to spur economic growth. 

If the USA dissolves into 5 different new countries by 2050 I wouldnt be too surprised and might actually look forward to it at this point. 

One of the big reasons why I stopped making debates back on DDO, and later stopped voting on them entirely, is primarily because enough time had gone by where it was just the same debates over and over and over again. It is nice to be able to see something new and fresh which this site immediately has as an advantage over DDO

If anything it looks like the final results would just be a hell of a lot closer than how it looks usually, which to me is important because the electoral college makes some elections look like landslides when they fucking shouldnt. 

Lets compare 2008 to 2020. 

In 2008 = Obama got 52.9% of the entire national vote 

In 2020 = Biden got 51.3% of the entire national vote

In 2008 = Obama won 365 electoral votes, beating McCain's 173 and looking like a landslide victory

In 2020 = Biden won 306 electoral votes, beating Trump's 232 in what turned out to be a much closer race than many people expected

In what reasonable world is a 1.5% margin the difference between 'landslide victory' and 'fucking hell this is a close one'? if Biden is considered barely better than Trump by American voters, than Obama should be considered barely better than John McCain by the same reasoning. Yet they arent, and thats kind of problematic 

If you make electoral votes infinitely divisible then that makes the totals more susceptible to voter suppression, more susceptible to vote fraud, and increase demands for full recounts since any vote that is compromised would have a direct effect on the final total.... A losing candidate could demand nation-wide recounts if he loses by a slim enough margin in an infinitely-divisible system while a system that rounds to the nearest whole number or half-whole number at least shields a majority of states from having their legitimacy questioned. 

If Biden wins 33% of Mississippi and Trump wins 67%, meaning Biden gets 1 vote and Trump gets 2, then any calls for a recount at the end of a close finish once all states are counted wont involve Mississippi since the margins clearly suggest that the population of the state voted 2-to-1 in favor of Trump. Under an infinitely-divisible system though, whether Biden wins 33% or 34% can suddenly become an issue if the final national vote is close enough, and demanding a recount on that kind of margin is simply ludicrous. 

Rounding to the nearest whole number/half whole number makes at least some states secure in terms of reporting outcomes so that any fuckery that does happen nationally can focus their attention to select states rather than be inflicted on every state that overwhelmingly voted one way or another. 

The value I see in this is not that the result would change from what it normally would be, the value from this comes to me from the fact that presidential candidates would have to pay attention to more states in order to be elected rather than just the usual batch of 6-7 swing states that are arguably the only ones that matter. 

Previous swing states like Virginia, Ohio, Colorado, New Mexico, New Hampshire and Iowa can now be considered 'safe' territory for the parties that won them, while the number of states that are more in the air have increased by just 2, Arizona and Georgia. By the time Texas becomes a swing state, some other previous swing states will likely have drifted further to the right or left enough to make them unimportant in terms of candidate campaigning strategy. With this system though, states that havent mattered in ages, if ever, can suddenly become opportunities for presidential candidates to make campaign stops in to make their pitch, which could alter the policies and agenda's they have for their platform, if not the entire outcome. 

Take Oklahoma for example. An entirely forgettable state that Biden lost 65.4% to 32.5% (2.1% left over).... Under this system, if Biden considered visiting the state to try to get at least 36% of the vote, he could walk away getting 3 electoral votes in the state instead of just 2 and take down Trump's total from 5 to 4. Trump would then have to consider visiting the state in order to defend their ground since the GOP needs 64.3% of the vote to hold on to 5 electoral votes, which they only barely got this time around...... This makes Oklahoma important, as well as other states, and gets attention from both major parties which I think is a positive change for American politics. 

The same goes the other way around too. For New York which carries 29 electoral votes and hasnt mattered in ages since its solid Dem territory now, Trump's 37.75% of the vote nets him 11 electoral votes and hands Biden the other 18.... If Trump manages to get at least 40% of the vote in the state, which is not impossible since thats less than 3% off from where he ended up this time, then he has enough to win 12 electoral votes and knock Biden down to 17. So now Biden has to consider paying attention to New York affairs to try to hold on to the electoral votes he can get from that state, which puts NY on the map in terms of importance and consideration. 

Thats what the fuckton of numbers in the original post are there for.... To keep things brief, no third party campaign anywhere did enough to win even a single electoral vote in any state, so proportional allocation would not have kept us from getting to 270 due to third party spoilers. 

The best 3rd party result I could find for 2020 was a 2.6% share of the vote by Libertarians in North Dakota which is the electoral equivalent of a quail queef, and even last election in 2016 the only point of success not belonging to the two major parties was when Independent candidate Evan McMullin won 20% of the vote in Utah. Under proportional allocation, the only real threat to the two parties would have to come in the form of some ultra independent billionaire trying to buy his way into the election such as Ross Perot, or Michael Bloomberg but actually with success this time. 

Long story short, I took the (most recent) popular vote margins taken in each state, and then applied the margins those candidates won to the electoral votes each state actually carries, splitting the votes that could be won in each state among candidates based on how well they actually did rather than the winner-take-all method we currently use........ Here's how the results for the 2020 election came out for any of you who give a shit: 

Alabama = 9 Votes = Trump 62.2% 
6 votes for Trump, 3 votes for Biden 

Alaska = 3 Votes = Trump 53.1%
2 votes for Trump, 1 vote for Biden 

Arizona = 11 Votes = Biden 49.4%
6 votes for Biden, 5 votes for Trump

Arkansas = 6 Votes = Trump 62.4%
4 votes for Trump, 2 votes for Biden 

California = 55 Votes = Biden 63.5% 
35 votes for Biden, 20 votes for Trump

Colorado = 9 Votes = Biden 55.4% 
5 votes for Biden, 4 votes for Trump

Connecticut = 7 Votes = Biden 59.3%
4 votes for Biden, 3 votes for Trump

Delaware = 3 Votes = Biden 58.8%
2 votes for Biden, 1 vote for Trump 

Florida = 29 Votes = Trump 51.2% 
15 votes for Trump, 14 votes for Biden 

Georgia = 16 Votes = Biden 49.5% 
8 votes to Biden, 8 votes to Trump


=====================================================
1-10 SUMMARY COUNT: 
Biden = 80 Electoral Votes 
Trump = 68 Electoral Votes 
=====================================================


Hawaii = 4 Votes = Biden 63.7% 
3 votes for Biden, 1 vote for Trump

Idaho = 4 Votes = Trump 63.9% 
3 votes for Trump, 1 vote for Biden 

Illinois = 20 Votes = Biden 57.6% 
12 votes for Biden, 8 votes for Trump 

Indiana = 11 Votes = Trump 57.1%
6 votes for Trump, 5 votes for Biden 

Iowa = 6 Votes = Trump 53.2%
3 votes for Trump, 3 votes for Biden 

Kansas = 6 Votes = Trump 56.5% 
3 votes for Trump, 3 votes for Biden 

Kentucky = 8 Votes = Trump 62.1% 
5 votes for Trump, 3 votes for Biden 

Louisiana = 8 Votes = Trump 58.5% 
5 votes for Trump, 3 votes for Biden 

Maine = 4 Votes = Biden 53.4% 
2 votes for Biden, 2 votes for Trump

Maryland = 10 Votes = Biden 65.8%
7 votes for Biden, 3 votes for Trump 


=====================================================
11-20 SUMMARY COUNT: 
Biden = 42 Electoral Votes 
Trump = 39 Electoral Votes 
=====================================================


Massachusetts = 11 Votes = Biden 65.9%
7 votes for Biden, 4 votes for Trump 

Michigan = 16 Votes = Biden 50.6% 
8 votes for Biden, 8 votes for Trump 

Minnesota = 10 Votes = Biden 52.6% 
5 votes for Biden, 5 votes for Trump 

Mississippi = 6 Votes = Trump 57.6% 
3.5 votes for Trump, 2.5 votes for Biden 

Missouri = 10 Votes = Trump 56.8% 
6 votes for Trump, 4 votes for Biden 

Montana = 3 Votes = Trump 56.9% 
2 votes for Trump, 1 vote for Biden 

Nebraska = 5 Votes = Trump 58.5% 
3 votes for Trump, 2 votes for Biden 

Nevada = 6 Votes = Biden 50.1%
3 votes for Biden, 3 votes for Trump

New Hampshire = 4 Votes = Biden 52.9% 
2 votes for Biden, 2 votes for Trump 

New Jersey = 14 Votes = Biden 57.3% 
8 votes for Biden, 6 votes for Trump 


=====================================================
21-30 SUMMARY COUNT: 
Biden = 42.5 Electoral Votes 
Trump = 42.5 Electoral Votes 
=====================================================


New Mexico = 5 Votes = Biden 54.3% 
3 votes for Biden, 2 votes for Trump

New York = 29 Votes = Biden 60.3%
18 votes for Biden, 11 votes for Trump

North Carolina = 15 Votes = Trump 50.1%
8 votes for Trump, 7 votes for Biden 

North Dakota = 3 votes = Trump 65.5%
2 votes for Trump, 1 vote for Biden

Ohio = 18 Votes = Trump 53.3%
10 votes for Trump, 8 votes for Biden

Oklahoma = 7 Votes = Trump 65.4%
5 votes for Trump, 2 votes for Biden

Oregon = 7 Votes = Biden 56.9%
4 votes for Biden, 3 votes for Trump

Pennsylvania = 20 Votes = Biden 50.0%
10 votes for Biden, 10 votes for Trump

Rhode Island= 4 Votes = Biden 59.7%
2 votes for Biden, 2 votes for Trump

South Carolina = 9 Votes = Trump 55.1%
5 votes for Trump, 4 votes for Biden


=====================================================
31-40 SUMMARY COUNT: 
Biden = 59 Electoral Votes 
Trump = 58 Electoral Votes 
=====================================================


South Dakota = 3 Votes = Trump 61.8%
2 votes for Trump, 1 vote for Biden 

Tennessee = 11 Votes = Trump 60.7%
7 votes for Trump, 4 votes for Biden

Texas = 38 Votes = Trump 52.1%
20 votes for Trump, 18 votes for Biden 

Utah = 6 Votes = Trump 58.2% 
4 votes for Trump, 2 votes for Biden 

Vermont = 3 Votes = Biden 66.4%
2 votes for Biden, 1 vote for Trump

Virginia = 13 Votes = Biden 54.4%
7 votes for Biden, 6 votes for Trump

Washington = 12 Votes = Biden 58.4% 
7 votes for Biden, 5 votes for Trump

West Virginia = 5 Votes = Trump 68.6%
3.5 votes for Trump, 1.5 votes for Biden 

Wisconsin = 10 Votes = Biden 49.6%
5 votes for Biden, 5 votes for Trump

Wyoming = 3 Votes = Trump 70.4%
2 votes for Trump, 1 vote for Biden

Washington DC = 3 Votes = Biden 93%
3 votes for Biden, 0 votes for Biden 


=====================================================
41-51 SUMMARY COUNT: 
Biden = 51.5 Electoral Votes 
Trump = 55.5 Electoral Votes 
=====================================================


Biden = 80 Electoral Votes 
Trump = 68 Electoral Votes 

Biden = 42 Electoral Votes 
Trump = 39 Electoral Votes 

Biden = 42.5 Electoral Votes 
Trump = 42.5 Electoral Votes 

Biden = 59 Electoral Votes 
Trump = 58 Electoral Votes 

Biden = 51.5 Electoral Votes 
Trump = 53.5 Electoral Votes 

FINAL TALLY

BIDEN  =  275
TRUMP  =  263

Total = 538

TL;DR version: Biden would have still won the electoral college vote by about the size of Washington State had electoral votes been split based on the actual popular vote among the states themselves, rather then winner-take-all. 


Special Notes

#1 = THE MISSISSIPPI RULE......... If both candidates get a proportion of the vote in a state that leaves 1 electoral vote left over, the remaining electoral vote will be split in half among the candidates who are almost the same margin (0.05) away from the halfway point to win the remaining vote. 

Proportional Allocation makes Mississippi an incredibly interesting state. Because it has 6 votes, a candidate would need to win a massive 58.4% or more of the vote in order to outright win 4 of the electoral votes the state carries while the other candidate is left with two..... This time around, Trump got 57.6%, which is just short of the margin to win 4 outright (it gets him to 3.456 which rounds down to 3), but what is curious is that Biden only got 41.1% in the state, which would put him at 2.466 electoral votes and round him down to 2, leaving 1 electoral vote up for grabs.  

Biden’s 0.466 is closer to the 50% margin to win the remaining electoral vote than Trumps 0.456, but giving Biden the remaining vote would be the equivalent of making the result 50/50 when the total results for the state was far from a split decision. At the same time, giving the 1 vote to Trump would be mathematically irresponsible since Biden was technically closer to winning the remaining electoral vote than Trump by a margin of 0.010.... For the sake of fairness, I split that last remaining vote in half and awarded one half to each candidate, since that what would have been done if the state had more electoral votes to work with. This problem is not an issue with larger states since the margins needed to leave an electoral vote up for grabs is incredibly small.... Indiana for example which is nearly twice as big almost had a similar issue with 11 votes, where Biden's 41.0% margin brings him to 4.51 electoral votes, barely enough to round up to 5 while Trumps 57.1% margin puts him pretty close to 6 electoral votes (6.28). 

#2 = This rule also applied to West Virginia. Of the 5 Electoral Votes in the state, Trump won 68.6% of the vote which brings him to 3.43 electoral votes. However, Biden only got 29.7%, which brings him to 1.485 electoral votes. Because both candidates are at least 40% of the way to the next vote and are within a 0.05 decimal margin, the remaining 1 vote was split between the two candidates just like the first instance where such a split happened in Mississippi. 

#3 = This rule almost kicked in for Utah as well. Utah has 6 votes, and Biden only got 37.7% of the vote which would put him at 2.26 electoral votes while Trump’s 58.2% puts him within spitting distance of 4 electoral votes (3.492)….. Had Biden done better and got some of the 4.0% 3rd party votes, he could have pulled close enough to 2.50 so cause the final electoral vote to be split between both candidates, but Biden missed the mark so it went to Trump.  

#4 Washington DC has 3 electoral votes….. I completely fucking forgot that they get electoral votes, and it drove me completely insane when the total tally for all this data kept stopping at 535 instead of 538. I finally figured it out when I wondered if there was some small ass state that has 3 electoral votes I somehow missed in the NE United States, and Washington DC showed up in the results when I started looking around. 

Given just how hard NYC got turbo fucked during the first wave of Covid-19, I can kind of understand them being super, if not overly-cautious, when it comes to moving schools to online learning if it there are worries of another spike..... The population density in NYC alone would make a 3% spread rate there close to a 15% spread rate anywhere else. 

If some place like Virginia or Oregon pulled something like this then it would be quite the overreaction sure, but NYC? They NEED to be super cautious after how bad it got there the first time around.  

I might have to bring back the Weekly Stupid for this shit 

The 2nd Amendments primary purpose is to ensure that Americans have the right to defend themselves. During the Revolutionary War it was mainly militias that brought the most amount of fight to the British, not the army authorized and funded by Congress. Since the government created under the Articles of Confederation was also incredibly weak, the Founding Fathers at the time they were writing the Constitution were left with the HEAVY impression that Americans cannot rely on their government to keep them safe from foreign threats, since twice already it really dropped the ball and citizens had to take care of things with their own hands...... The evidence of this is indicated by how the 2nd amendment explicitly talks at the start about 'well regulated militias' rather than defense against tyranny or any mention of the words 'self defense' 

For that reason, the right to bear arms was written in a context more towards the idea of 'dont depend on the government to protect you', rather than answering the question we have been dealing with for a lot longer 'how much do citizens have the right to arm themselves?'. That question has been punted to states, while firearms themselves have evolved considerably over time as well, leading to the current fuckfest we have to deal with now  

Considering how hard even middle class voters are getting pinched in terms of financial wellbeing, and how hard people close to the poverty line already have it, economics is and should continue to be the number one issue in presidential elections..... The economy deserves to be the #1 issue, but at the same time we cannot become TOO worried about it. With Covid going on, it feels like damn near everyone is questioning how hard we should fight it not based on how successful the efforts would be on Covid, but instead on how bad the economy would be effected, even though Covid's spread itself is far more damaging long term to economic performance compared to just about any temporary measure imposed to try to restrict Covid. 

Minimum Wage arguments have languished for so long that individual states themselves have had to pick up the slack and raise it on their own.... Florida voted for Trump pretty clearly yet a vote to raise the minimum wage in the state won by a 61-39 margin, so its not just blue leaning states that are getting on top of that.... Other regulations and taxes on income and businesses also vary state to state rather then wait on the federal government to get its shit together as well. 

The biggest thing at the national level voters should think about is the trade war with China and reorganization of trade agreements, because that's something that cannot be addressed on state levels. The tariffs on Chinese products is a good idea that has been executed haphazardly and poorly, while on the other hand the reorganization of NAFTA was done pretty successfully. Had Covid not come along Trump probably would have won re-election even with everything else that has gone on during his administration since he had one clear win with NAFTA and was sort of on the right track against China. 

I personally would gravitate towards any candidate who wants to nuke the tax code and replace it with a linear system that increases tax rate based on income, rather then the tiered system full of holes weve been stuck with for ages. Not a flat tax though because thats dumb as fuck as well as anyone who buys into it.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/

If you scroll down on the 538 site Susquehanna shows up and its ranked C which is COMPLETE horse shit in light of what the actual results were

Quinnipiac and Monmouth getting B+ and A+ is also horse shit since those polls statistically were the first and third worst polls out of all of them! 

TL;DR

1 - TV networks other than NBC for some reason cant poll for shit
2 - Susquehanna is fucking outstanding with their accuracy, they polled four different states towards the end and never missed by more than 2.5% 
3 - InsiderAdvantage, Rasmussen, and Trafalgar are also pretty reliable and accurate

CNBC had Biden at +4.0 (Missed by 3.2)

InsiderAdvantage had Trump at +2.0 (Missed by 2.8) 

-

Final Result: Trump by 8.2

Rasmussen (Missed by 2.2, 4.9, 4.2, 4.4)...................................... Average miss = 3.93%

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/who-could-become-speaker-of-the-house-if-pelosi-doesnt/  Clyburn isnt coming from out of nowhere, hes the 3rd highest ranking member of the Democratic Party in the House, with Pelosi being first and old ass unremarkable white guy Steny Hoyer from Maryland coming in at number 2. No other Dem House politician has a heavy amount of leadership experience apart from those 3 I just mentioned, and I dont think House Dems would be ballsy enough to elect someone who is pretty new to politics in general as their next leader for perhaps a decade

Nah Pelosi is third behind McConnell since the GOP maintain control of the Senate (for now at least).... McConnell will also be the one to decide if Biden gets anything done these next four years, whereas Pelosi will fall in line with what Biden thinks should be the course of action. 

I havent the faintest fuckin idea tbh.... Since Pelosi has decided to step down in 2022 ( https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/lissandravilla/nancy-pelosi-has-agreed-to-step-down-by-2022-to-secure-the ) whoever the house votes to replace her will be the one who could really influence policy in the house. Theres just two/three issues with that 

#1 - Because the win over Trump was narrow and not as big as some anticipated, Dem House members may vote for the next speaker to be someone who is fairly centrist to try to preserve the slim majority they have in the country, rather than nominating someone that will pull the party further to the left and piss off enough centrists back to the GOP and tip things back in their direction. 

#2 - Because Biden is still the one who ultimately beat Trump and is now President, the Speaker of the House will likely follow his lead on things since he does pull rank on them.... UNLESS: 

#2A - If Biden decides to only serve 1 term, then the new Speaker of the House in 2022 will will have to wait two more years to see what happens with the Dem nomination in 2024 and see if a moderate centrist candidate wins or if someone further towards the left takes the mantle. Whoever the nominee is in 2024 will be the one to dictate Dem party policy, and the Speaker of the House will follow suit. 

Whatever the fuck happens, I dont see the Speaker of the House trying to position themselves to dictate/reform/revamp/alter Democratic Party Policy stances going into the future. The political climate is too hot for them to move further to the left, while Biden and the next nominee for the party in either 2024 or 2028 will likely dictate which direction the party chooses to go to begin with..... Hell whoever does become Speaker will probably be someone with a national profile so low that they wouldnt have the gravitas to move the Dem party one way or another even if they wanted to. Can any average person name any Democrats in the House of representatives who is not or in a squad that consists of AOC? 

 

Funny enough, theres a way where it could happen almost naturally....

If Bernie dies or retires (he's 79 and already had a heart attack),  and if Warren retires (She's 71 and her term ends in 2024) and AOC decides to leave politics (which she is already considering https://www.businessinsider.com/aoc-says-she-may-quit-politics-dems-blame-progressives-losses-2020-11) then who does that leave to carry the torch for the super left-wing in the Dem party? 

Right now theres only 3 Democrats that Americans really know about that represent the far left. Two of them are damn near the end of their careers while the other has barely started. If the elder two leave the picture via death or retirement, and AOC doesnt feel like being the face of the next wave of far left voters, then the Dem Party can drift back closer to to the center with only small repercussions.... If the GOP also continues to pull to the right and embrace Trump's methods for just about everything while this happens, then I think Dems could strengthen their position in elections without pissing off progressives since they will be more outraged at where the GOP is going than where the DEMs are going. 

The senate 'control' was a farce.... After 2008 the Dems had a 59-41 majority which was 1 short of a super majority, but two of those senators were independent and 7 other senators were from super republican states such as Alaska, Montana. South Dakota, Iowa, Arkansas, Louisiana, and West Virginia..... Senators from those states were never going to give Obama a free pass to pass anything he wanted, especially since only one of them were actually elected in 2008 and all the others were already in office before Obama was even on the map. 

So Obama had to water down his plans a little bit to get support from his party in order to get it passed. 

The easiest ways would be for the next nominee to openly be a dick to Cuba and Venezuela to appeal to the older generation of hispanic Americans who first fled those countries decades ago,  or for the Vice President pick to be a Cuban American (Miami Mayor Francis Suarez is registered as a Republican, but won his most recent re-election with fucking 86% of the total vote) 

The more difficult path would be for future Dem nominees to somehow explain how whatever 'socialist' policies that are part of the Dem platform are different then the socialist policies that Cuban and Venezuelan dictators promised when they made moves to clinch power. Thats really difficult to do though and will only continue to become more difficult to do since the Dem party is likely going to drift more to the left in subsequent elections. 

" You are arguing that as long as he doesn't do something extremely popular, that he will do well. If does something extremely popular (like providing healthcare) then he would lose. "

Polling on healthcare is borderline incomprehensible to obtain because the questions are either worded without proper context or because polling sites clearly dont know how to sample the American population..... People like having their own healthcare plans that come from their employer, people dont like the idea of the US government being in charge of all heealthcare.... If Biden pushes for a Public Option, that would be about as far as he could go to the left on healthcare without really rallying the GOP against him and the Dems in subsequent elections. Anything beyond that becomes a campaign slogan that the GOP will be able to flog hard. 

"He promised universal healthcare. In the end, he picked a republican healthcare plan and struggled to even implement that. He then steadily declined in popularity"

2 things, 1) Obama never promised universal healthcare he only wanted to improve access and quality of it  since the last time major changes to healthcare was back in the 1960's, and 2) The healthcare reforms we got were different than the ones initially promised because part of passing legislation in this country involves COMPROMISING WITH THE OTHER SIDE which seems to be an increasingly foreign concept to some people..... 

Every modern president has had the house lose seats during midterms compared to what they walked into office with, so the GOP will manage to reclaim some seats. That part i a certainty. How many  seats the GOP gain back depends on two two things: 

1 - How Biden handles the Pandemic (if shit keeps getting worse or doesnt really change, than the GOP can regain more seats by proving that it wasnt necessarily Trump's fault it got so bad in the first place) 

2 - How hard Biden tries to push really leftist policies (if he goes full Warren or full Sanders, then you can be sure the GOP rally their base to oppose it)

If Biden can handle the pandemic at least somewhat better than Trump and he doesnt go apeshit with ideas like packing the Supreme Court or government healthcare for everyone, he will STILL lose seats cause historically every president has, but probably not enough to lose control of the House barring some sort other sort of fuckening 

my fucking internet keeps cutting out so let me keep this part brief 

4) Harris will not be the future of the Dem party.... She won the first debate and still couldnt even stay in the race long enough to make it to Iowa when voting started happening, I dont see her taking up the mantle of the Dem party once Biden steps aside.... My money is on AOC or Stacey Abrams 

5) Barring foreign policy fuckups or domestic crises, future elections will depend on who is hardest on China.....  Economics still remains king when it comes to what American voters care most about. All the social justice ideas, trust in police, stance against abortion, etc wont matter to anyone the way economic performance does. Since China is clearly our biggest economic foe, whichever candidate can most successfully position themselves as the person who will be better against China will carry the election

6) Marijuana and the Minimum Wage are no longer national issues..... if you glance at state amendments and ballot initiatives, marijuana and the minimum wage are getting handled all over the nation..... Florida went hard for Trump due to fears of 'socialism' that a Biden presidency would bring, yet voters within Florida still approved a plan to raise the minimum wage up to $15 an hour 61% to 39%..... If FLORIDA of all places can beat a 60-40 margin to damn near double the minimum wage, then other states will move to alter their own minimum wages long before the national government steps in to require it...... As for marijuana, both Montana and South Dakota opted to fully legalize marijuana, and those states are redder than Texas which has drifted a bit to the center but is still solidly a GOP state

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/fl/florida_trump_vs_biden-6841.html

In Wisconsin damn near EVERY POLL THAT WAS HELD IN THE STATE had Biden up by an average of 6.5% yet Biden only won by a margin of about 0.7%..... A 6 point gap that is only slightly better than the horrid 7 point gap that was uncovered in 2016. 

Unless all of this is somehow just unique to Trump and his base, and not actually reflective of the Republican base as a whole, then polls going into future elections are going to be just as similar of a crapshoot as theyve been for the last two elections.... That actually leads me a bit into my second point: 

After the GOP missed in 2012 with Romney, an 'autopsy' on the election led them to conclude they need to reach out to younger, black, and hispanic voters otherwise the GOP as a party will be left behind.... Trump now has TWICE shown that just appealing to their base as hard as fucking possible and relying on rural turnout to overcome bad polling is a strategy that can work since it worked once and damn near almost worked a second time. Romney and McCain when they were nominees were ale to position themselves as somewhat moderate and could appeal to independent voters, but Trump on the other hand made the GOP reflective of himself and still came closer to winning than either of the two previous nominees..... Whoever runs for the GOP in 2024, 2028, and even 2032 are going to be more inclined to try to rally the GOP base as hard as fucking possible the way Trump has rather than try to be a moderate centrist that tries to woo independents to come to their side. 

Even the Democrats might start doing the same because their strategy of picking a moderate leftist has barely worked as well. Both Hillary and Biden have relied on being moderate democrats whose extensive time in politics make them good candidates for the job, and both times the strategy has left little distance between them and Trump's scorched-earth way of campaigning. Could the next Dem candidate after Biden tell conservatives to suck a fat dick and just try to rally liberal voters as hard as possible? It sure seems possible that it would lead to a better outcome since playing it safe and being a bit centrist cost them one election and damn near lost them another. 

If Democrats cant win a senate race in fucking MAINE against a Senator who is not even that conservative yet still has largely sided with Trump a vast majority of the time, then theres not going to be enough chances for Dems to reclaim any other seats in the midterm 2022 elections barring any monumental fuckup by the sitting senator themselves.... Florida and Ohio are squarely in the GOP column now (Rubio is especially safe in Florida since he is already hispanic and can rally cuban voters to support him), leaving Pennsylvania as the only spot where Dems really have a chance to flip a seat.... Georgia is going blue in 2020 but unless Stacey Abrahms runs for senate again and manages to win this time, I dont see how Democrats flip that seat either

Luv U <3

AYYYY TOP 17

I flat out dont even bother posting in this forum anymore just because the chances of an actual conversation or exchange of intelligent ideas taking place in this forum are close to zero. The fact that people think Trump somehow did well in that first debate is a testament to how warped and deranged the majority of people who post in here are

Oh THIS thing, gotcha. 

I was completely thinking of other something else, i never would have remembered this one XD 

I think My top 2 are League of Legends and Civilization 5

I also logged a lot of hours on Civ 3 and Civ 4, so as a combined series its probably number 1 overall. For specific games though then League is number 1 

Goodnight 

Tell him I said hi! 

Morning 

Probably not for the following reasons: 

1) The main reason: BLM is far too decentralized and not working towards common goals to be able to accomplish anything of significance. The BLM chapter in Jacksonville could have a way different agenda and set of goals than the BLM chapter in Seattle,  or the BLM chapter in Phoenix, or the BLM chapter in New York City, and this is true for every other BLM chapter in any other American city you can think of. The Civil Rights Movement in the 1960's moved all kinds of legislation and reforms because it was highly centralized behind Dr Martin Luther King Jr who basically coordinated and set the strategy for the entire movement. There is nothing close to an organized leader of BLM as there is to Dr King, so any changes that BLM does lobby for would be regional at best rather then national, assuming policies could even get passed to begin with.  

2) The ongoing Coronavirus shitfest causes more deaths in the United States right now in a single day than police brutality does in years. If the momentum behind BLM somehow outlasts the pandemic then maybe it could really change things, but because it is number 2 on everyone's minds behind the Coronavirus, hardly any changes will be achieved. The way the media is set up and functions is that attention is paid to whatever is causing the most death and destruction at that time, so as long as the Coronavirus is around, people will be more concerned with the progress in keeping that contained and their own safety from the virus rather than the progress in keeping police brutality contained and their own safety from the cops, no matter how many marches and protests there may be. 

3) Public opinion on police. The Civil Rights movement against segregation in the 1960's was pretty clear cut in that segregation was an evil policy that was intentionally designed to keep black people from enjoying the same rights as white people. For that reason it was easy to sympathize with black people and over time led to the removal of those segregationist policies. The picture this time around is not as black-and-white. Police officers most of the time are good people trying their best to do a difficult job, so when a handful of bad cops really fuck it up, public focus shifts to the bad cops in particular rather than the system as a whole. Because police departments operate differently than each other (Baltimore and Phoenix being garbage PD's while Trenton NJ's being one of the best) it again shifts focus to the individual cops who caused shit to happen or the city Police department that cop is a member of, not really all Police Departments or the system as a whole. Because the police in general can be a sympathetic figure/group, it will be harder for BLM to bring about any change in policies unless they are very carefully thought out and nor perceived as a giant over-reaction. 

If I had to give this a shot: 

The most Far Left person would want a lot of government intervention in economic affairs, and want no government restrictions in personal affairs 

The most Far Right person would want no government restrictions in economic affairs, and want a lot of government intervention in personal affairs. 

Wasn't that obvious? 

Whether or not Trump was in the system is one thing, and an argument can be made that he was..... Compared to Hillary though, who was basically co-president with Bill from 1992-2000, a Senator of NY from 2000 to 2009, and Secretary of State from 2009-2013, Trump looks like a political outsider.

I still question if people in 2016 who voted for Donald Trump actually liked him and his policies, or if they voted for him because they viewed that election as a referendum on Washington Politics as a whole and they voted against the system. The entire matchup featured a complete outsider who never held public office against arguably the most 'in the system' candidate you could have come up with in Hillary Clinton, so naturally the election could be framed as pro-system vs anti-system where there is a lot of anti-system sentiment that a politician can capitalize on. 

Just looking at what people think of Trump now that he's been in office really indicates how little enthusiasm people have for him. His approval rating has rarely been above 50%, there was no real 'honeymoon' period for him at the beginning of his term where most people wanted him to have a fair shot, and every time there's been a major situation or crisis Trump has consistently found himself on the wrong side of public opinion in how he handled it........ Biden barely campaigned in states that he handily won early in the primary, and yet he still ran away with the nomination because people view him as the best bet to defeat Trump and return things to a sense of normalcy, that's how much people really dont care for Trump as president. 

The window lickers who loudly defend Trump to this day try to mask the glaring disdain that a majority of the country has for him, but the fact that he is pushing states like Texas, Georgia, and Arizona closer to the liberal side/closer to being swing states is a pretty clear indication of how hollow his base has become.