trump off the CO ballot

[stanky]

MM, you've already been debunked on this argument.

It is bad form to march it out again without new supporting evidence.

If by "debunked" you mean "someone disagreed", yeah.

yup, not a 'gotcha' thing at all.
Glad to have a venting opportunity, MM.

And, yes...modernity raised living standards hugely in poor countries. Of course, this has brought its own insurmountable problems.
Like, a tripling of population in my lifetime; China's need to thin their herd and limit reproduction is met with disgust; India is now the biggest (1.3 bil?) but not doing great with poverty and pollution. Just getting enough food as a child is a huge deal. Chinese grew a foot taller in a single generation. Food could happen in spite of ideology with clever land use and good plants...though, that too is threatened. Too much topsoil loss; salting of soils; vast energy inputs needed now, with predictable climate issues.

I've never heard anyone in the field suggest that modern ag is remotely sustainable. Less so by the day as climate changes. The ocean(s) are basically depleted now, though they're still fished hard. Not for long.
I suspect it's too late to manage a future elegantly. It may take a bad pandemic for humans to get through this phase. Rough thing to say; i got grandkids. Thank christ us boomers are dropping like flies. We kinda sucked. Needed too much too fast; didn't think it through.

may the new crop be brighter; gentler; dare i say "awake"?

otherwise,
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/I2hadUpB_Sc

[President Bush]

Just sold our 2012 Nissan NV3500 one ton tall cargo van.

189,400 miles, still runs like a champ. First time since I think 1975 that I haven't owned a vehicle.

That's gotta feel a bit strange. Adapting OK?

After I got myself prematurely retired it was actually quite nice to get in the truck only once or twice a month for that long (5 mile) journey to town. Now I worry about the thing not getting enough up time to keep it in good condition!

Had to go, didn't think it would fit on the plane. Big Filipino that has a nice little Middle Eastern restaurant we've been getting lunch at for years has always wanted it. So it got a good home.

We have a rental for a few days until Saturday when we head to the airport.

[sparks]

MM, you've already been debunked on this argument.

It is bad form to march it out again without new supporting evidence.

If by "debunked" you mean "someone disagreed", yeah.

Indeed. Play it however you want to my friend.

[Meadmaker]

The conversation is going in a lot of different directions, so I won't try and pick up every thread. There seems to be a sort of unifying theme, though.

Sure it may seem like things are ok, but behind the scenes, nefarious actors are going to lead to our doom. Well, if that's the case, I'll go theree comfortable. Things seem ok.

I do want to get back to the part of it that's closest to the thread topic, which is Trump, and the election issues.

Based on that description, I would rather live here.

In a binary choice between America and Bolivia? Fuck yeah.

I believe the US is more democratic than Bolivia.

This is not a high bar.

Indeed it is not, which is why the comparison is kind of nonsensical.


So let's go back to the root of the conversation about whether America is a democracy. You assert that it's really a plutocracy.

Well, I feel like I vote, and I do so based on my principles, and my assessment of which candidate I feel like best fits the vision of what I want from government. If everyone did that, it sounds like democracy to me. Your assertion that we actually have a plutocracy has to be based on the belief that most Americans don't do that. I think you have to be saying that most Americans are mind numbed zombies who have been duped into voting by some sort of evil manipulation via campaign ads or Russian interference or secrect influence.

To some extent there's a little bit of truth to that. Advertising and propaganda do work. That's why people do it.

But in the end, we all make decisions, and we cast votes, and the votes are counted, and we get the government we deserve, because we chose it, even if we did so based on false advertising.

[Meadmaker]

One more note about democracy. When the Founding Fathers got together and wrote the 1st ammendment, they included in it the right to free speech, and the right to a free press. Two different rights. We talk about free speech more often, but the free press is more relevant here. Having a free press means the right to publish. i.e. the right to spend money to distribute a message.

If a free press exists, then people will use it. They will spend money to attempt to influence elections. Some of those attempts will be successful. In other words, every free society will have some element of plutocracy.

[President Bush]

Based on that description, I would rather live here.

In a binary choice between America and Bolivia? Fuck yeah.

I believe the US is more democratic than Bolivia.

This is not a high bar.

Indeed it is not, which is why the comparison is kind of nonsensical.

Then why on earth did you start making that comparison in the first place?

[arthwollipot]

Well, I feel like I vote, and I do so based on my principles, and my assessment of which candidate I feel like best fits the vision of what I want from government. If everyone did that, it sounds like democracy to me.

Only if everyone actually can do that, and if everybody's vote counts equally. It doesn't. Certain candidates and political parties make sure of that. When parties can set electoral boundaries to suit themselves, that is not democratic. When parties can make it difficult for certain classes of citizen to vote, that is not democratic. When 50.0001% of the vote controls 100% of the representatives, that is not democratic.

Democracy means equity. Just voting on its own doesn't equal democracy. At a minimum, America needs to turn over the administration of elections and the management of electoral boundaries to a genuinely independent statutory authority. That will eliminate the gerrymander and make sure that all citizens get equal access to polling places. Then America needs to consider proportional representation and the elimination of the Electoral College, which is a profoundly inequitable institution. Then, America will be a true democracy, and you can start looking at campaign finance.

Of course, all of this isn't going to happen because the status quo benefits - who? The rich.

[President Bush]

One more note about democracy. When the Founding Fathers got together and wrote the 1st ammendment, they included in it the right to free speech, and the right to a free press. Two different rights. We talk about free speech more often, but the free press is more relevant here. Having a free press means the right to publish. i.e. the right to spend money to distribute a message.

If a free press exists, then people will use it. They will spend money to attempt to influence elections. Some of those attempts will be successful. In other words, every free society will have some element of plutocracy.

hmmm... does the Press Clause of the First Amendment give the institutional press any freedoms from government restraint not enjoyed by everybody else? Not really.

In terms of the spending of money to influence elections... that is something that is generally quite regulated in order to keep elections from being too subject to manipulation by the wealthy few. That is exactly why the ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission was so controversial.

[Meadmaker]

When 50.0001% of the vote controls 100% of the representatives, that is not democratic.

????

Are you referring to electors, because that's the only place I can think where that, sort of, happens. I say "sort of" because it's on a state by state basis, so it usually balances out. We've had a total of 5 elections out of 58 where the winner of the popular vote didn't become President. That's bad. I think it should end. But it doesn't mean democracy doesn't exist here.

As for gerrymandering, if there are districts, there is gerrymandering. Even if some sort of algorithm is used to draw districts so it isn't so blatant as it is here in the US, the choice of algorithms will favor one party or another. In Australia, the party that receives the most votes for the legislature doesn't always end up with the most seats. There's no way to make that happen.

At a minimum, America needs to turn over the administration of elections and the management of electoral boundaries to a genuinely independent statutory authority. That will eliminate the gerrymander

In Michigan, we did exactly that. Created an indempendent commission to draw the boundaries.

A federal court threw it out because it was gerrymandered, in an illegal manner. (As opposed to all the other times, when it had been gerrymandered in a perfectly legal manner.)

and make sure that all citizens get equal access to polling places.

If you think this is a huge problem, I think you've been overly influenced by selective media coverage. It's not that it never happens. Ohio had a big problem with blatant polling place manipulation back in the 00's. That was pretty scandalous. But for the most part, my experience of voting is almost identical to what you described, except we don't get sausages. There were a couple of times I waited in line for about 10 minutes. And I've lived in poor neighborhoods, majority black neighborhoods. Middle class neighborhoods. Never in rich neighborhoods....because I can't afford that.

It's really not so bad here. The media makes everything look worse than it is because, "Everything went smoothly" is a boring headline.

For the most part, it's ok. Yeah, there's a thumb on the scales just a bit, and at this point in history it favors the Republicans, but not by much. We're doing ok here. We've got room for improvement, but the demise of democracy in America is greatly exaggerated, at least for now. As I said, I worry about people bashing it around here because if people believe it's already not a democracy, people won't mind giving it up.

ETA: I always assumed that as soon as the electoral college and popular vote didn't match, the voters would throw out the elctoral college. Obviously, that didn't happen. I'm not sure what will happen in the long run. What will it take to dump the EC here in America? Unfortunately, I think something very bad would have to happen. The 2016 election wasn't all that close, in the popular vote. It wasn't like 2000 where the race was essentially a tie. Hilalry got 2% more votes. Not a landslide exactly, but not a squeaker, either. I think the "wrong" guy would have to be elected, and then he would have to do something that made everyone hate him, as opposed to just half the people hating him.

[Meadmaker]

hmmm... does the Press Clause of the First Amendment give the institutional press any freedoms from government restraint not enjoyed by everybody else? Not really.

Exactly. It gives them exactly the same amount of freedom.

There have been attempts to impose restraints on the press, usually in the name of "fairness", but they have usually failed, as they should.