What's new

2020 Presidential election

The two-party system problem isn't really about the number of parties. It's that we don't have a mechanism for a major political party (in this case the GOP) to naturally die.

In a parliamentary model with lots of parties there's no obvious reason for the white supremacists, the single issue abortion voters and the low tax enthusiasts to be lock step aligned into a single slot of candidates. As demographics and times change narrow issue groups could wax and wane over time naturally. The first past the post system means there's no natural way for the GOP to fade and have something replace it. So the desperate push to prop the infrastructure up become increasingly desperate and weird. Next thing you know, the only person that can unite the base is the most racist and vile one of them all.

While I largely agree with this, I'm not sure if this is 100 percent accurate. Perhaps a more accurate statement could be made that we have "no quick mechanism to quickly kill off a political party." We've seen the GOP essentially "die" before and reinvent itself. Between FDR (1932) and Nixon (1968), the GOP was largely shut out of national politics and "dead" as a party. In 1968, the party that FDR built was "killed" and it was nasty. As the Democratic party died, Nixon and Ailes resurrected the Republican party with the Southern Strategy. They first concentrated on picking up the racists. Then, with Reagan, they picked up the Christian (moral majority) and free market nutjobs. Today, we're seeing a similar "dying" of the party as its power base is primarily in the south and intermountain west. Yet, because it has taken such extremist views and because such is such a moron, this pandemic crisis is only speeding up the death of the party. A similar transformation has happened to the Democratic party through the decades. The party of FDR has changed into a broad party where its strength is in urbanized coastal centers, the college educated, and minorities. Clinton called an "end to the era of big government." While it's pretty obvious now that a new era of big government to keep the economy afloat and rectify inequalities in health care and education might be ready to begin.

We might be in the middle of a new reshuffling of the parties as the GOP suffers a major defeat this fall. The party could essentially "die" this fall if Trump is defeated, Senate control is lost, state governments continue to go blue, and the Biden presidency is at least successful in combating the pandemic and depression. What really complicates the reshuffling is the communication/media bubbles that exist. As we see on this board, there are people who live in completely different realities due to the ease of communicating on the Internet.

Either way, we're going to see drastic changes to either/both parties after this fall, right? If Democrats fail to retake the White House and/or the Senate, we're going to see a wholesale change in Democratic leadership, right? Even if they're largely successful, I'm interested in seeing how the party maintains balance with its left flank and newly picked up conservative suburban voters. If/when the Republicans lose big this fall, they'll have to make major changes, right? I'd hope that they take a look at Reince's 2012 election autopsy.
 
Last edited:
From March 28. I do suppose GF was right that this was handled in a significantly different way than Kavanaugh.
She hasn't been attacked for being a slut. I think there's room to investigate the allegation that doesn't involve "but she asked for it" and that's not the path that has been taken so far.
 
The importance of due process, and it’s force and function in the rule of law, has barely slipped. You’d never know that, though, if you listened to people of your general political persuasion.

And yet the difference in how Kavanaugh and Biden have been treated by the media couldn't be more stark.
 
#believeallwomen

Glad that due process is a valid idea now though.

I was never really a categorical "believe all" person. I literally cancelled my subscription to the Times because I thought the way they handled the #MeToo stuff was pretty awful. I thought the best take on the entire thing was this article by Masha Gessen in the New Yorker.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/when-does-a-watershed-become-a-sex-panic

I lost liberal friends over saying that the relationship between sex and power was complex and multifaceted and that we had to develop a societal agreement around what the appropriate punishment for #MeToo violations was because "you're not allowed to work for the rest of your life" is clearly not a good answer. The only truly prominent politician forced from office due to "believe all women" was Al Franken. Somehow the GOP has convinced themselves they are real victim of the whole thing.
 
I agree that they don't always mean the same thing. The definition of sexual assault is much broader. That said, what she is accusing Biden of is rape.
Huh, I always thought rape had to involve intercourse.
I stand corrected.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Last edited:
#believeallwomen

Glad that due process is a valid idea now though.
When was it not valid? If you are referring to kavanaugh then iirc he got the position he wanted. The accusation did nothing to prevent that.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
When was it not valid? If you are referring to kavanaugh then iirc he got the position he wanted. The accusation did nothing to prevent that.

A white man had to answer uncomfortable questions. Don't you know what a violation of due process is?[/sarcasm]
 
When was it not valid? If you are referring to kavanaugh then iirc he got the position he wanted. The accusation did nothing to prevent that.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app

To repeat Fish, what I am referring to is the double standard and hypocrisy among much of the media, and posters here.

I very much recall quotes such as, "They need to find a new nominee. Anybody who has put themselves in the position to even be accused of this shouldn't be here" OR "It really doesn't matter if he's innocent or guilty (I think he's guilty), this sham needs to be over. Have they no decency? Who would make up a story like this?" And these weren't fringe arguments Fish, they were very popular and common.

But now? Now stories need to be investigated. Now, we can't rush to judgment just quite yet.

The point, Fishie, is not that Kavanaugh still got th appointment (as he should have), the point is that all of a sudden the standards have changed. Even Thriller can't miss that.
 
A white man had to answer uncomfortable questions. Don't you know what a violation of due process is?[/sarcasm]

To repeat what I said to Fish, I'll refer the copious times somebody in the media or here said that due process was irrelevant, somebody accused of those crimes shouldn't be a valid nominee. And somehow, that argument is no longer valid. The hypocrisy, my friend, is obvious.
 
To repeat Fish, what I am referring to is the double standard and hypocrisy among much of the media, and posters here.

I very much recall quotes such as, "They need to find a new nominee. Anybody who has put themselves in the position to even be accused of this shouldn't be here" OR "It really doesn't matter if he's innocent or guilty (I think he's guilty), this sham needs to be over. Have they no decency? Who would make up a story like this?" And these weren't fringe arguments Fish, they were very popular and common.

But now? Now stories need to be investigated. Now, we can't rush to judgment just quite yet.

The point, Fishie, is not that Kavanaugh still got th appointment (as he should have), the point is that all of a sudden the standards have changed. Even Thriller can't miss that.
Have you met Thriller?
 
The point, Fishie, is not that Kavanaugh still got th appointment (as he should have), the point is that all of a sudden the standards have changed. Even Thriller can't miss that.

Serious journalists have seriously investigated both claims.

IMO the best treatment of the Kavanaugh situation is this book: https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/44525767-the-education-of-brett-kavanaugh

The best and most thorough investigation of Biden on this issue is this report from PBS, which conducted nearly 100 interviews of staffers - any person who could possibly have any relevant information about the allegations: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politi...-staffers-think-about-tara-reades-allegations

They come to pretty different conclusions about a number of important issues. Have you read either?

FWIW: I think the Kavanaugh story is as follows. He probably did it, and at minimum he's got some black out drunken episodes he can't account for. It's also almost assuredly true nothing like that has happened in decades and the Brett Kavanaugh of 2019 is a different person than the Brett Kavanaugh of the 1980s. I think he lied about it, but feels justified in lying because it is fundamentally unfair to hold the 2019 version accountable for stuff from three decades ago today. He doesn't want his teenage past to be the thing that defines his whole life.

You know what, I agree with that idea. In general, all the crappy things we did as teenagers probably shouldn't be the definers of the character of our adults lives. I'm for that rule being applied to most criminal convictions from people's 20s to be honest. But Kavanaugh can't say that, as a practical matter. Instead he has to deny the whole thing and pretend like it's obviously unfair and unjust that anyone would question him about it.

There was no real chance this was going to "ruin Kavanaugh's life." The worst case scenario was always that he was going to return to the lifetime appointment at the federal appeals court he enjoyed with a six figure salary and lifetime free baseball tickets and other "definitely not a bribe" perks of being a prominent conservative jurist.

I understand the above doesn't really fit into the "all liberals are evil and dumb" filter of the world, but I think this is as close to reality as we'll ever get barring a deathbed confession from Kavanaugh.
 
My 2 cents

One of Kavanagh’s accusers was credible. Being credible does not mean he did it, but just that there was a plausible story where he might be guilty. All the other accuser’s stories were trash. The press treated him unfairly.

Biden’s accuser was not credible. The press handled this pretty well.

so yes, there was a double standard.
 
And yet the difference in how Kavanaugh and Biden have been treated by the media couldn't be more stark.

that’s certainly debatable. Editorial work isn’t just about equal time and equal treatment. It’s about ferreting out the credible from the incredible.

But maybe the problem isn’t just with the media, but also with the importance/influence you’re granting to certain media outlets?

And, dude, the Biden allegations came at a supremely different time. Ya know.
 
To repeat Fish, what I am referring to is the double standard and hypocrisy among much of the media, and posters here.

I very much recall quotes such as, "They need to find a new nominee. Anybody who has put themselves in the position to even be accused of this shouldn't be here" OR "It really doesn't matter if he's innocent or guilty (I think he's guilty), this sham needs to be over. Have they no decency? Who would make up a story like this?" And these weren't fringe arguments Fish, they were very popular and common.

But now? Now stories need to be investigated. Now, we can't rush to judgment just quite yet.

The point, Fishie, is not that Kavanaugh still got th appointment (as he should have), the point is that all of a sudden the standards have changed. Even Thriller can't miss that.
Actually I have seen a number of posters on this site that you would consider to be on the left or liberal who said that the allegation against Biden should force the DNC to drop Biden.

Didn't see any posters on the right saying that kavanaugh should no longer be considered for supreme court doe.

I guess you see what you want to see cause even you are bias and partisan.

And for the record I didn't think that kavanaugh should have been disqualified because of some accusations from when he was a dumbass kid. I think people can change as they mature. I did think he seemed to be a bit unhinged throughout the process though and maybe shouldn't be a supreme court judge simply based off his behavior. Gotta force your dudes into positions while you have the power to whether it's the right thing to do or not though.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Actually I have seen a number of posters on this site that you would consider to be on the left or liberal who said that the allegation against Biden should force the DNC to drop Biden.

The most aggressive pushers of the Tara Reade story were Bernie Sanders supporters.
 
And with the sizable amount of explanation across many issues I’ve made on this forum, this is your assessment of my world view?
You are totally free to provide your world view.
My view of how you are likely to vote after reading your posts over the years is that you are likely to vote for whoever the Republican dude is.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Top