[Aptorian]

Gorefest, on 06 February 2020 - 12:09 AM, said:

Wow, who knew. So he was innocent all along.

No, no. Not innocent. Republican. When Republicans do it, it's okay.

[Macros]

I'm not really sure where to put this.
Its messing with my groove that these people exist, it's political comedy that these people exist and it's real world tragedy that these people exist

http://youtu.be/T35zaB1Vm3g

This post has been edited by Macros: 06 February 2020 - 10:54 AM

[Obdigore]

Aptorian, on 06 February 2020 - 10:21 AM, said:

Gorefest, on 06 February 2020 - 12:09 AM, said:

Wow, who knew. So he was innocent all along.

No, no. Not innocent. Republican. When Republicans do it, it's okay.

Excuses issued:
"Well he did it, but I think he learned his lesson."
"Maybe he didn't know it was illegal?"
"Perfect phone call. The most perfectist call ever."

And... this is where we are at.

[Malankazooie]

The upside to all of this is that president Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will finally get us the pee pee tape when Donald Trump Jr. runs to unseat her in 2028. It will be a perfect call to Putin.

[Cause]

Why is the Iowa caucus important? Is it just because it’s first?

Also it’s called a caucus? But would be called a primary in a different state?

[Terez]

Caucuses and primaries are fundamentally different. Primaries are just done like regular voting, though every state awards delegates by its own rules for the most part. The parties have some rules of their own. The state party branches have some rules of their own.

It's fucked all across the board but caucuses are the worst. There's no secret ballot; everyone has to go in a room with their peers and physically stand for their candidate of choice. There's a viability threshold in every precinct so you get the second alignment adding another layer of complication. Candidates optimally have their own surrogates on hand to make sure everything is above-board.

There are all kinds of arguments for why we do it this way. One is that smaller states are, well, small enough to personally vet candidates. In order to get that first win, presidential candidates have to go all around the state doing rallies and knocking on doors. Theoretically this is supposed to make Iowans take democracy seriously on our behalf, but Iowans these days kinda hate caucusing and it's always a shitshow. They like being first, but many of them wouldn't mind giving it up.

Iowa is supposed to represent the Heartland of America, in that agricultural frontiersman kind of way. Increasingly, it's seen as representing the heartland of white America. The second state, New Hampshire (in New England), is pretty white also. Nevada has a substantial Hispanic population and represents the wild west. South Carolina is next and represents the Deep South, which in the Democratic primary is mostly black people. In the Republican primary, it's still mostly white people.

[Cause]

But it’s similar to a primary in that it will determine which candidate may run for president?

[QuickTidal]

Terez, on 07 February 2020 - 04:05 AM, said:

everyone has to go in a room with their peers and physically stand for their candidate of choice.

WTF? Are you serious? This sounds like highschool nonsense. What is wrong with Iowa?

[Obdigore]

Cause, on 07 February 2020 - 05:22 AM, said:

But it’s similar to a primary in that it will determine which candidate may run for president?

It signifies who that state's representatives are going to vote for at the Party Convention when they pick the candidate the party is going to back. Essentially its a step in deciding who the national party is going to support. Any candidate may still run for president, even if they don't get the party nomination.

It also has a ton of other significance with momentum and different stuff.

[Aptorian]

QuickTidal, on 07 February 2020 - 01:41 PM, said:

Terez, on 07 February 2020 - 04:05 AM, said:

everyone has to go in a room with their peers and physically stand for their candidate of choice.

WTF? Are you serious? This sounds like highschool nonsense. What is wrong with Iowa?

I kind of like that. It makes the process more personal and traditional. Just showing up to a booth and shoving a piece of paper into a box is too detached from the process.

This post has been edited by Aptorian: 07 February 2020 - 04:16 PM

[D'rek]

Yeah, I kinda like the caucus format, too.

It doesn't necessarily work on a big scale with direct election, nor in dense urban centres, but with the U.S. delegation system I think it actually fits for the more rural/average areas.

[amphibian]

The current Iowa caucus format takes like 6 hours to do. It's so time consuming and so often confusing that my Iowan friend, a very enthusiastic left wing civic minded person, got a bit upset just now bc a vote would have been so much faster.

[Kanese S's]

amphibian, on 07 February 2020 - 05:39 PM, said:

The current Iowa caucus format takes like 6 hours to do. It's so time consuming and so often confusing that my Iowan friend, a very enthusiastic left wing civic minded person, got a bit upset just now bc a vote would have been so much faster.

Caucuses are undemocratic.

Only people who can afford to spend basically a whole day not at work, possibly traveling usually further from where they live than a polling place usually is (or, you know, the option of mailing a ballot) can really participate. Naturally, this excludes a lot of the working poor.

Of course, personally I think it would be better if we just did ranked choice, all on the same day, instead of the long drawn out primary system we have.

This post has been edited by Kanese S's: 07 February 2020 - 06:19 PM

[D'rek]

Meh, plenty of U.S. Primaries are undemocratic, too. Only certain people of the state (e.g. only party-registered people) conduct a secret ballot to pick one out of a bunch of delegates no one has ever heard of from their precinct/district/whatever who is not legally bound to follow your wishes when they choose a candidate at the national convention (or do they go to the state/county convention first and pick new national delegates there or something?). And then there's the super delegates...

I think if you're going to have a system where there's the unbound "middle man" delegate between your vote and actually picking a candidate/representative/whatever, then it makes sense to have a system like a caucus where you actually get to meet and see the delegates debate instead of blindly picking the farthest goal on a ballot sheet with no chance to meet or build any trust in the middle man who will (or won't) carry your choice forward.

Though caucuses would be greatly improved by them always being a state-wide holiday so everyone has a better chance to participate, given how lengthy they are.

[Terez]

D, on 07 February 2020 - 06:25 PM, said:

Though caucuses would be greatly improved by them always being a state-wide holiday so everyone has a better chance to participate, given how lengthy they are.

Every time someone brings this up it grinds my gears a little. Not your fault. But doctors, nurses, law enforcement, foodservice and retail workers, and countless others would still have to work. I have never had a job where government holidays were actual days off.

[Tiste Simeon]

I get your point Terez but surely getting rid of Confederate memorial days and replacing them with an election day off instead is a good thing?

https://edition.cnn....trnd/index.html

This post has been edited by Tiste Simeon: 07 February 2020 - 07:30 PM

[Obdigore]

Terez, on 07 February 2020 - 07:00 PM, said:

D, on 07 February 2020 - 06:25 PM, said:

Though caucuses would be greatly improved by them always being a state-wide holiday so everyone has a better chance to participate, given how lengthy they are.

Every time someone brings this up it grinds my gears a little. Not your fault. But doctors, nurses, law enforcement, foodservice and retail workers, and countless others would still have to work. I have never had a job where government holidays were actual days off.

https://www.sos.wa.g...te_by_mail.aspx

Is probably one of out best solutions. It may need tweaks but it's a very good concept.

The issues you bring up mean that many people who wish to vote can't spend the time, or absorb the loss of money (giving up a shift), to go vote.

[Obdigore]

Tiste Simeon, on 07 February 2020 - 07:30 PM, said:

I get your point Terez but surely getting rid of Confederate memorial days and replacing them with an election day off instead is a good thing?

https://edition.cnn....trnd/index.html

It's an ok thing. It helps the generally already enfranchised (middle class and up) who would work for institutions that would give these days off, which are generally finance sector and government-related.

Tearing down a confederate holiday is a plus. Thinking that this actually solves the problem that a large majority of people literally cannot afford to vote, is a very negative thing.

[Malankazooie]

Damn, Trump living his 'brand' and has gone on a firing spree. Not only did he fire Alexander Vindman and had him escorted out by security, but he also fired Vindman's twin brother.

At least Trump waited two days after being acquitted to begin this house cleaning. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Good thing we don't have Gulag like forced-labor camps* somewhere inside the arctic circle in Alaska, I'm guessing some folks would find themselves 'reassigned' there.

*shhhh, we do, don't tell anyone.

[Cause]

I wonder if fireing the brother will open him up to more problems