And we're back!

Main Menu

What does a BIDEN Presidency look like?

Started by Caliga, November 07, 2020, 12:07:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic


Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 18, 2022, 12:50:57 PMTrump won Florida in 2020 with a big swing of Venezuelan voters convinced that Biden = SOCIALISM.

How does it play when DeSantis is fake deporting victims of Communist oppression?  Are the Magazuelans and their Cuban cousins really so brainwashed that they will keep cheering while the GOP shits in their face?
From what I've read it is complicated by class. GOP voting Venezuelans in Florida do not see themselves in people trying to cross the border (or the millions forced to flee to Colombia).

If that's true there might even be a bit of "come-uppance" about it.
Let's bomb Russia!


Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 18, 2022, 01:16:45 PMAlso did you know that DeSantis is Italian for "Castro"?  You can look it up.

Seriously? That's pretty fucked up. Fidel and Raul don't deserve that.


The Republicans don't really have the Cuban American vote locked up, they have the Cuban American vote above age 40 locked up, likely permanently. But like most cohorts, the 3rd and now 4th generations are different. For one, right now they have a lower voter participation rate, but that is likely to change as they get further into middle age. For two, they are more likely to be English language fluent and English language primary language speakers. A lot of Republican strength in South Florda in 2020 was built on very aggressive Spanish language far-right talk shows and radio stations, which are much more relevant to the over 40 crowd than people under that age, who largely do not listen to talk radio.

There's a lot of opportunities for Democrats to make inroads in Florida, but it's a state where process and mechanics matter, Biden's ground game was widely panned as being abysmal in Florida in 2020, and that built on very poor Dem organizing in the 2018 midterms in Florida. To some degree I think the DCCC gave up on Florida (partially because it is heavily gerrymandered, so many House districts are not competitive), which weakened the brand down there, and the Dems have consequently suffered even more in Presidential and Senate races because of it.

Admiral Yi

McConnell supports bipartisan election reform bill.  Bill only deals with the certification stuff that takes place in Congress, i.e. the January 6 stuff.

QuoteThe bill would make clear that the vice president's role in certification is purely ceremonial and would require one-fifth of the House of Representatives and the Senate to agree to challenge a state's results. Current law allows objections to proceed with the support of just one lawmaker from each chamber.


1/5th? I'm sure the GOP could easily wrangle that up.
Being lazy is bad; unless you still get what you want, then it's called "patience".
Hubris must be punished. Severely.


Quote from: HVC on September 27, 2022, 11:07:47 PM1/5th? I'm sure the GOP could easily wrangle that up.

Well it would be less easy than one just one Senator and one Representative.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."


Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 27, 2022, 11:05:28 PMMcConnell supports bipartisan election reform bill.  Bill only deals with the certification stuff that takes place in Congress, i.e. the January 6 stuff.

It actually deals with more. Here is the full text:

And Susan Collins (who drafted it) has a simple one page explainer up on her Senate website going over the bullet points:

Some important points:

  • Specifies that each state's Governor, unless specifically stated otherwise in a State law or constitution in effect on election day, is responsible for submitting the certificate of ascertainment identifying that state's electors. This largely undercuts the failed efforts in 2020 for State legislatures to appoint "alternate slates" of electors. Firstly, in any State that hasn't vested elector certification outside the Governor's office, it means the Governor has the final say. It also additionally has phrasing that means a State legislature couldn't modify whatever certification process they have after election day if they dislike the results. So whatever they use, be it a Secretary of State or whatever, they can't change the process post-election.
  • Creates an expedited judicial review process for certain claims relating to elector certification, which would make any legal challenges faster to resolve.
  • As mentioned it notes the Vice President has a purely ceremonial, ministerial role, and can exercise no political discretion.
  • As mentioned, raises the objection threshold from one member of each house to one-fifth of both.
  • Strikes a provision of an archaic and poorly worded 1845 law that state legislatures (theoretically) could have used to override the popular vote by declaring a "failed election." This makes that explicitly disallowed, significantly curtailing various theories on how a rogue far right State legislature (which many are, even in swing states) can go after election day to steal an election.


So it's actually a legit improvement then? That's good to hear.


Quote from: Jacob on September 28, 2022, 11:03:27 PMSo it's actually a legit improvement then? That's good to hear.

It's mostly just clarification of what has always been the case (bar the increase in the number of congressmen needed to challenge a state electoral slate), but useful clarifications.  Anything Mitch McConnel supports needs to be examined skeptically, but he isn't incapable of supporting something that does good.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar



Yeah, aside from the threshold language, this was all stuff that was "widely agreed upon", but never strenuously tested, if that makes sense. A lot of these linchpins were sources of conspiratorial talk by far right people who believed they could create a new interpretation of the laws and use that to their advantage. Some of that was because the Electoral Count Act itself had some vague wording, that bad actors could use to present bad arguments. This legislation is fairly explicit in saying these things are not legal at all, and explicit that the Vice President when acting as the President of the Senate for certification, is acting in a solely ministerial function--which was the wide understanding before this, but this makes it unambiguous in statutory text.


It is all good, but it also sucks.

Having to make these kinds of laws explicit just makes it seem more legitimate to try to find a loophole in them, rather then relying on more unwritten standards and expectations.
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

The Minsky Moment

It cleans up the potential mischief of rogue state legislatures, but doubles down on the vulnerability to potential mischief by a state governor.  A concern given the possibility of a Mastriano as governor of a swing state.

The other fly in the ointment is whether this Supreme Court would uphold it if challenged.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson