The Political & Philosophy Thread

[CiG]

just politically speaking, I don't recall a moment in my lifetime of this many people showing up across the U.S., let alone predominantly women

Yeah I definitely see that just from an outside/internet perspective, I just can't understand being so emotionally involved as some people have been. It's the wackiest American election of my lifetime easily.

I would have gone to the Trump protests though, if I lived there. Especially so I could see things for myself and avoid the media spin on both sides.

 

[arg]

At least the travel / food industries got a little boost. Trump stimulating the economy!

 

[crimsonfloyd]

I wasn't beaten in any vote, as I didn't vote for either poor option.

To clarify, in that sentence I meant Trump.

Broad wins outside the presidency do provide support to the idea of a "mandate" as conceived. You brought up gerry mandering to under cut gains outside the Presdency directly, which support the "mandate" for Trump.

One could take it broadly, or one could take it narrowly, such as the position of the president. I spoke about it in a narrow manner. You've tried to weasel the conversation in a different direction. Learn to read more carefully and directly respond to your opponent's position.

If the opposite situation were the case, you'd be crowing about a mandate right now.

Nonsense. I've been opposed to the electoral college all of my adult life. Now, I wouldn't be crying for Trump supporters if they won the popular vote but lost the electoral college, but objectively speaking, it certainly wouldn't result in a Clinton mandate.

 

[CiG]

I think UHC is in America's near future.

Arguably the last barrier against UHC, the Republican party, are now headed by a president who is rather warm to the idea of free healthcare. Not really sure where the anti-UHC can go to from here on out.

 

[rms]

Yeah I definitely see that just from an outside/internet perspective, I just can't understand being so emotionally involved as some people have been. It's the wackiest American election of my lifetime easily.

trump is kind of terrible so far though. insane how bad he is

 

[CiG]

trump is kind of terrible so far though. insane how bad he is

Specifically?

 

[rms]

all but two of his staff picks are complete idiots, he still tweets, he worries more about inaug vs protest sizes than trying to understand why people are upset, he removes all this stupid shit off his website and is backing repeal of obamacare

and that's just off the top of my head

 

[CiG]

Oh that stuff, I thought he had done something new I didn't know about yet. I think repealing Obamacare was something everyone knew he'd do though, so no surprise there.

Not that it really matters in the long run, I think Trump is a sign that universal healthcare is in America's future. The whole world is heading that way and America won't hold out forever, especially since the GOP nominated a guy that doesn't seem to really give a fuck about healthcare. I think he's only dismantling Obamacare as a symbolic gesture, he'll probably try to introduce Trumpcare at some point.

 

[arg]

All these dumbasses marching... he has not even said anything about anti-woman or anti-faggot legislation

 

[Dak]

To clarify, in that sentence I meant Trump.

Right, one of the poor options. I haven't voted in over a decade for anyone in any position.

One could take it broadly, or one could take it narrowly, such as the position of the president. I spoke about it in a narrow manner. You've tried to weasel the conversation in a different direction. Learn to read more carefully and directly respond to your opponent's position.

You wanted to take it narrowly because it removes all context. If Trump was an exception in a wave of Democrat wins at other levels, it would make sense. However:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...america-after-tuesday/?utm_term=.1a6d5027482c

25 states with GOP governors and state legislature, and 20 with a split. Only 5 with Dem governors and state legislature. Within that context, also electing a GOP candidate for president certainly looks like a repudiation of Obama era policies - which is the platform Hillary ran on. They have a chart in the article as well charting the decline of Democratic politicians in office since 08. Quite stark.

Furthmore more to the point about city dwellers:

Because Democrats are clustered in one area of the state, they have less of a say in who represents congressional (and state-level) districts in the rest of the state.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...re-seats-gop-dominance-state-legislatures-all

Lot of specific numbers about how dominant the GOP results were, but relative to a "mandate":

”Anyone who said that Donald Trump was going to be a drag on down-ticket races is certainly eating their words right now,” Lisa Nelson, CEO of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) told CNSNews.com.

“When I talk to the states, most of them say they picked up state Senate or House seats because of Donald Trump. And I think that’s because of the forgotten man or woman people are talking about, who hadn’t shown up to vote in the past.”

Nonsense. I've been opposed to the electoral college all of my adult life.

Of course you would be. Frankly I don't even know what sort of "mandate" you would be afraid of from Trump specifically, and the same goes for all these people marching. If the SC overturns RvW (which I doubt happens, regardless of what new picks are made), that's on the bench. What else?

 

[Einherjar86]

I don't get the reference unfortunately.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ion-nominee-betsy-devos-says-wyoming-school-/

Education nominee Betsy DeVos says a Wyoming school might need guns to stop grizzly bears

 

[crimsonfloyd]

Yup, a total mandate: http://www.gallup.com/poll/201977/trump-pre-inauguration-favorables-remain-historically-low.aspx

Pre-Inauguration Favorable Ratings of Presidents-Elect Since 1993

Favorable Unfavorable No opinion
Donald Trump (Jan 4-8, 2017) 40 55 5
Barack Obama (Jan 9-11, 2009) 78 18 5
George W. Bush (Jan 15-16, 2001) 62 36 2
Bill Clinton (Jan 18-19, 1993) 66 26 8

 

[Dak]

Yup, a total mandate: http://www.gallup.com/poll/201977/trump-pre-inauguration-favorables-remain-historically-low.aspx

Favorable Unfavorable No opinion
Donald Trump (Jan 4-8, 2017) 40 55 5

You don't have to like someone on a personal level to select them as the best of two poor options for the job. In fact that's been a pretty consistent talking point when trump supporters get interviewed.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...auguration-popularity-voters-approval/513602/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ion-nominee-betsy-devos-says-wyoming-school-/

Ah. Well, I wouldn't be afraid of grizzlies in Boston either. The situation is a bit different in Wyoming.

The Wapiti school put up a fence to keep the grizzlies out of the playground in 2002, according to the Billings Gazette, a newspaper in Montana. Between 1990 and 2000, 16 grizzly bears were captured within a 4-mile radius of Wapiti, the article said.

Like 1.5 per year but it only takes one time. Here's one of those neat flips on data that give what is presumably accurate information while presenting it in such a way that it seems to state the opposite:

"Without question, guns can protect people from bears," said Tom Smith, a wildlife sciences professor at Brigham Young University. "But, and this is a big but, to be able to use a firearm under duress effectively is limited to a very small group of persons."
......
A study of bear attacks in Alaska found that in 27 percent of cases involving guns, the person couldn’t get their gun ready fast enough to shoot the bear

I could write a similar article but instead state that "a limited group of people, 73% of all bear attack cases involving guns, were able to get their gun ready fast enough to shoot the bear."

 

[Einherjar86]

The point is the ridiculousness of using that example as rationalization for guns in all schools. Come on man, give it a rest.

 

[CiG]

Actually, bear attacks is a pretty sound reason if you ask me. I'd be happy knowing my child's teacher can kill a giant beast if they need to. Happy coincidence, they might also stop someone trying to shoot up the school.

 

[Dak]

The point is the ridiculousness of using that example as rationalization for guns in all schools. Come on man, give it a rest.

Yeah I don't know why DeVos used that as an example since even in Wyoming it isn't like bears are descending into the towns in waves. I'm not in favor of mandating teachers be armed, but at least an armed guard per x number of students is absolutely a "common sense" option. That or take teacher volunteers to carry if funding another body is economically prohibitive.

 

[CiG]

I don't think it should be some sweeping mandate, I think it should be up to the teacher if they want to carry a firearm, let the schools regulate it heavily with extensive check ups or whatever they need to do, but having gun free zones with zero wiggle room is pure insanity at this point, until the mental health issues can be sorted out.

 

[crimsonfloyd]

TYT called the school district and they said they don't need guns becauses they have fences and bear spray.

Sadly, that wasn't even the worst part of the hearing. The fact that she needed clarification on the difference between growth and profiency, as well as the fact that she didn't seem to know what IDEA is, shows how unqualified she is. Sadly, Republicans will probably push her through thanks to her donations.

 

[Dak]

DeVos, Carson, and Perry are probably three of his worst selections in terms of agency success. This might be somewhat intentional, since they are going to head agencies that need to die anyway. The importance of an arm of government to Trump appears somewhat clear if you look through a lens that focuses on who he selects for positions. Not just any generals, but Marine generals in defense/security positions, a CEO from the largest oil company/top ten corp globally in the world for the State department, and an international lawyer that served under Reagan for Trade. Everyone else seems a headscratcher from one perspective or another. It wouldn't surprise me if he was like "get me the marines, the exxon ceo, a top lawyer, and whoever else wants the rest of that bullshit can have it."

 

[rms]

why is an Exxon CEO a good hire for the State dept?