American Politics 3.0 - Back to Brunch

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

Thus is the US politics page, I don't want to go too far down the rabbit hole but.... WHAT?

The last Prime Minister was literally from Calgary.

Who won in Ontario. Yes this is off topic but don't we want a triple E Senate?

The US system is checks and balances which works which is basically why it can run on autopilot. GOP are going to take the house for sure in 2022, can't blame that on imbalance. Biden can't pass stuff because the bills just aren't good enough not because of the system.

Yes, the US is polarized right now but it wasn't always and might not be in the future.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Who won in Ontario. Yes this is off topic but don't we want a triple E Senate?

The US system is checks and balances which works which is basically why it can run on autopilot. GOP are going to take the house for sure in 2022, can't blame that on imbalance. Biden can't pass stuff because the bills just aren't good enough not because of the system.

Yes, the US is polarized right now but it wasn't always and might not be in the future.

I prefer elected dictator over checks and balances. Eventually the ruling party is booted but #### gets done.

Where an elected dictator system needs safeguards is in investigative powers by the opposition. Being able to shutdown investigation when you have a majority is a pretty big defect.

A 3E senate is a terrible idea.

[#-3]

I actually think what would be ideal for both Canada and the US, to the extent that the Senate is meant to be a check on the legislators, and the House's are meant to legislate, is Sortation.

I think we would benefit a lot if seats were +/-8 year terms, and every few years a fraction of the senate was retired, and replaced by random draw of anyone who puts their name forward. I actually think it would be even better if you could have some algorithm that would ensure the traunch of senators was an equitable mix age/income/geographic/sex/race/professional background... but I don't have faith that we would successfully program that algorithm right now.

Either way I have no doubt in my mind that senators who felt random chance contributed to their appointment, and understood it was a time limited appointment would be a much more honest and sober in checking the legislators, then those who feel they owe something to a party or a segment of the electorate. The key problem is nobody who was elected would ever agree that they should be replaced by random draw, they feel they are special and talented, and admitting they could be replaced in this way would be far to damaging to their ego, while in reality those elected in a wave aren't really all that different from random selections, they just also have the ego/resources to spend a year knocking on doors talking about how great they are too.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by GGG

I prefer elected dictator over checks and balances. Eventually the ruling party is booted but #### gets done.

Where an elected dictator system needs safeguards is in investigative powers by the opposition. Being able to shutdown investigation when you have a majority is a pretty big defect.

A 3E senate is a terrible idea.

That would have been fun with Trump. What would have stopped Trump from making himself Emperor like Xi?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

The dems will never regain a real majority in the senate, it strongly favors republicans by design. California has more people in it than the 16 smallest red states put together, but only get 2 senate votes compared to their 32. The US is governed by a tyranny of the minority, it's the biggest failing of their democracy

It’s true that the system is set up to favour states with smaller populations. But that’s baked into the constitution and it’s not going to change. The country will dissolve before the less populous states accede to a dramatic loss of power.

However, the U.S. is a federal state, and the voters of California have control over most of the policies that affect their day-to-day lives. The solution to the structural disparity of the U.S. federal system isn’t to rant ineffectually about it, but to devolve even more power to states and municipalities so constituents can be better served by government closer to their needs.

The increasing nationalization of political discourse in the U.S. over the last few decades has riled people up and generated audience engagement. But it’s led people to believe the federal government has more impact on their lives than it really does.

[afc wimbledon]

I personally would like to see some form of 3E senate but controlled at the Provincial level not by the Feds, allow each province an equal number of senators, make it a non Federal political position, when a seat opens up a Province could nominate several worthy candidates for the people to vote for, give them 20 year terms and real power over the feds

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

That would have been fun with Trump. What would have stopped Trump from making himself Emperor like Xi?

The same thing that stopped him this time.

The courts.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

That is the balance isn't it? That the house is by population and the senate is by state. It just happens that the Democrats are popular in California but it could easily be the other way around.

Do we really want a situation like Alberta where it gets absolutely no say?

Except both houses are equally important when passing legislation, so it always falls back to the senate anyways. Plus if you look at electoral votes, smaller states have way more power than larger ones

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._by_population

If you live in Wyoming, your vote for president has over 3x the power that someone living in California or New York does. If electoral votes were spread fairly around the states republicans would never win another presidental election again, which is why it will never happen

The US by total population would probably slide into a liberal democracy, but they're being held back by 40% of the population that have more voting power than the other 60%

[Macman]

Looks like Joe Manchin is going to vote NO on Joe Biden's new spending bill.

Joe Manchin struck a decisive blow to President Joe Biden’s sweeping social and climate spending bill, igniting a bitter clash with his own party's White House.

Biden left negotiations with Manchin this week thinking the two men could cut a deal next year on his sweeping agenda. Then the West Virginia Democrat bluntly said he is a “no” on the $1.7 trillion in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/1...ng-bill-525458


What are they going to do now?

[GGG]

I don’t understand why they don’t continually try to pass small bills and force republicans to filibuster each one. Give them stupid names that work well in campaign adds.

Instead the Dems seem content to do nothing.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don’t understand why they don’t continually try to pass small bills and force republicans to filibuster each one. Give them stupid names that work well in campaign adds.

Instead the Dems seem content to do nothing.

I assume the larger bills are a result of deal-making. If you split up the components, it becomes "well what if your agenda passes but mine doesn't"?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don’t understand why they don’t continually try to pass small bills and force republicans to filibuster each one. Give them stupid names that work well in campaign adds.

Instead the Dems seem content to do nothing.

Like the 1 trillion dollar infrastructure bill that passed last month? It passed 69-30 in the Senate. Again, the problem isn't the partisanship, it's bad bills.


That said, Pelosi almost held that bill up in the house because 1 trillion wasn't enough. Insanity.

[ResAlien]

The most powerful man in America has killed the build back better bill after essentially being given carte blanche to write it himself. Nice. Love my coal country overlord.

Also the 50 republicans who refuse to even consider a yes vote can EAD. Stupid politics.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Except both houses are equally important when passing legislation, so it always falls back to the senate anyways. Plus if you look at electoral votes, smaller states have way more power than larger ones

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._by_population

If you live in Wyoming, your vote for president has over 3x the power that someone living in California or New York does. If electoral votes were spread fairly around the states republicans would never win another presidental election again, which is why it will never happen

The US by total population would probably slide into a liberal democracy, but they're being held back by 40% of the population that have more voting power than the other 60%

I will agree with you that the proportion is off. California should have like 100 electoral votes . But I don't agree that the Senate should also be by population. At least one branch should be by state.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I will agree with you that the proportion is off. California should have like 100 electoral votes . But I don't agree that the Senate should also be by population. At least one branch should be by state.

Why? Giving the states so much individual power made sense when the US was founded and free movement was difficult, but now all it does is enable the small states to hold the large ones back

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

Why? Giving the states so much individual power made sense when the US was founded and free movement was difficult, but now all it does is enable the small states to hold the large ones back

That's not a bad thing. Why shouldn't small states have a voice? Wyoming might have some great energy plan but never get that voice at the federal level. I think you're a bit clouded by the current Republican/Democrat rural/urban divide but remove that and it's a pretty good checks and balance system. Again, I think California should have 100 electoral votes. In fact it's lost one for the next election.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

That's not a bad thing. Why shouldn't small states have a voice? Wyoming might have some great energy plan but never get that voice at the federal level.

They should have a voice. A small one. Proportional to their population.

"You've divided yourselves into smaller units, there you get more power" is a terrible way to run a country.

The American constitution is the second oldest in the world and it shows.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by SebC

They should have a voice. A small one. Proportional to their population.

"You've divided yourselves into smaller units, there you get more power" is a terrible way to run a country.

The American constitution is the second oldest in the world and it shows.

Divided yourself into smaller units? There hasn't been a new state or a divided state since Hawaii. As you said, this would benefit the Republicans but is there ever any talk of divided states to get more red Senate Seats?

Say all you want about America but it's still one of the oldest and in tact Republics there is, with just one civil war. Again, it can run on autopilot.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

The most powerful man in America has killed the build back better bill after essentially being given carte blanche to write it himself. Nice. Love my coal country overlord.

Also the 50 republicans who refuse to even consider a yes vote can EAD. Stupid politics.

Biden and Pelosi played themselves. That is if you believe they actually wanted to pass it at all.

[rubecube]

https://www.dailyposter.com/the-demo...rying-to-lose/

Cognitive dissonance is one of the defining traits of American politics, but with this weekend’s blow against the Build Back Better bill, we’ve now reached an inflection point: Americans are being simultaneously asked to believe that Democrats are mounting a valiant last-ditch defense of democracy against insurrectionists and election deniers, and yet we’re also watching Democrats proudly surrender the midterm elections to those same fascists, knowingly creating#Weimar-esque conditions#for an authoritarian takeover.