Politics: 2020 Dem POTUS candidate catch all discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Crimson1967

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2011
18,734
9,918
187
If I lived in a swing state I have held my nose and voted for Clinton in 2016.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

rgw

Suspended
Sep 15, 2003
20,852
1,351
232
Tuscaloosa
You do realize the real progressives in the early 19th century were high on the ideas of eugenics right, and Hitler was highly influenced by their ideas of a master race. So there are huge leftist ideas that influenced Hitler and the third Reich.

I don’t think you realize how and why Nazism rose in the first place. It really wasn’t a “virus” as much as a defibrillator bringing back a body that was near death. The German people mostly fought and rejected Nazism until it was a better option than the option they had. An option they were forced to take, not by a right leaning regime but by liberal powers that forced upon Germany a massive war debt that took nearly 100 years to pay off and a stock market crash.

You can blame Hitler and the far right for the atrocities that happened in WWII but you have to blame the Democratic socialists for WWII happening and Hitler rising to power.

Point is fascism only happens either in hard times or when the left has pushed too far left. I don’t see us being there... yet. Yes there are fascist ideas out there, but at this point they are no more influential than Bernie’s socialism. The real danger with Trump is that he could potentially set the field for a real fascist down the line to declare himself “emperor”, dictator, king, etc.
Fair point but I'd note that just as the American Left as displayed by this topic is not a homogeneous ideological unit. The same was true amongst 19th century progressives. The eugenics movement was popular amongst the middle to upper class. I doubt unionizing coal miners framed their progressive ideology around it because I'm sure many of their skulls and somatotypes were problematic according to the race [pseudo-]science movement at the time.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
Fair point but I'd note that just as the American Left as displayed by this topic is not a homogeneous ideological unit. The same was true amongst 19th century progressives..
But the same can be said about the Right. The Catholic Church's opposition against the eugenics movement kinda proves that the Far Right isn't always the same.

The point is that Hitler wasn't just influenced by Lost Cause veterans of the American Civil War who tried to win back the country, he was equally influenced by progressives like Teddy Roosevelt who were big believers of a master race.

The eugenics movement was popular amongst the middle to upper class. I doubt unionizing coal miners framed their progressive ideology around it because I'm sure many of their skulls and somatotypes were problematic according to the race [pseudo-]science movement at the time.

Yeah, but how many politicians here and around the world don't come from the middle and upper class? More importantly, "How many poor people or blue collard workers are elected?"
 

Crimson1967

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2011
18,734
9,918
187
Biden has promised to cure cancer if he is elected.

Dumb statements like that aren’t going to help his campaign.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

4Q Basket Case

FB|BB Moderator
Staff member
Nov 8, 2004
9,568
12,865
237
Tuscaloosa
The Electoral College thing amuses me.

Theoretical grounds: It was enacted to keep the big-population states from steamrolling the smaller-population states. In other words, to keep the minority relevant.

Which is a classically Democratic concept, and without it, the Constitution would never have been ratified.

Now, with Democrats having huge majorities in New York, California, and to a lesser extent Illinois, they’re all about majority rule. Ignorant of (or conveniently ignoring) the impact that majority rule would have had on their core constituencies up until very recent history.

Practical amusement: to eliminate the Electoral College, you need to amend the Constitution. Which requires a 2/3 vote of both houses of Congress AND concurrence of the legislatures of 2/3 of the states.

Congress is such a cesspool, it’s hard to say how they’d vote. I don’t think they’d get 67 senators AND 290 or so members of the House to concur. But it’s such a world unto itself, that might conceivably happen.

Even if that highly unlikely event materializes, do you really expect that 34 of the 50 state legislatures will effectively cede their voices to New York, California and Illinois? Conversely, do you think that the proponents of the status quo can’t muster 17 state legislatures?

If you do, I want some of what you’re taking.
 
Last edited:

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,319
2,032
187
I love how EC defenders applaud the enshrinement of minority rule as a supposed American ideal. It's especially amusing when one invokes the historical threat of majority rule to minority rights, which requires willful ignorance of the Republican party actively stripping away LGBT rights, reinforcing the institutional inequality for blacks and the poor, and locking brown children in cages at the border.
 
Last edited:

NationalTitles18

TideFans Legend
May 25, 2003
29,633
34,727
362
Mountainous Northern California
I love how EC defenders applaud the enshrinement of minority rule as a supposed American ideal. It's especially amusing when one invokes the historical threat of majority rule to minority rights, which requires willful ignorance of the Republican party actively stripping away LGBT rights, reinforcing the institutional inequality for blacks and the poor, and locking brown children in cages at the border.
I guess that works for R's. What about the rest of us, especially those of us who want to reform the unequal representation without dumping the whole system?
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
I guess that works for R's. What about the rest of us, especially those of us who want to reform the unequal representation without dumping the whole system?
The EC should be reformed but popular vote is the ill advised idea of reforming it. Personally I think the UK parliamentary system works best.
 
Last edited:

Bamaro

TideFans Legend
Oct 19, 2001
26,558
10,617
287
Jacksonville, Md USA
The Electoral College thing amuses me.

Theoretical grounds: It was enacted to keep the big-population states from steamrolling the smaller-population states. In other words, to keep the minority relevant.

Which is a classically Democratic concept, and without it, the Constitution would never have been ratified.

Now, with Democrats having huge majorities in New York, California, and to a lesser extent Illinois, they’re all about majority rule. Ignorant of (or conveniently ignoring) the impact that majority rule would have had on their core constituencies up until very recent history.

Practical amusement: to eliminate the Electoral College, you need to amend the Constitution. Which requires a 2/3 vote of both houses of Congress AND concurrence of the legislatures of 2/3 of the states.

Congress is such a cesspool, it’s hard to say how they’d vote. I don’t think they’d get 67 senators AND 290 or so members of the House to concur. But it’s such a world unto itself, that might conceivably happen.

Even if that highly unlikely event materializes, do you really expect that 34 of the 50 state legislatures will effectively cede their voices to New York, California and Illinois? Conversely, do you think that the proponents of the status quo can’t muster 17 state legislatures?

If you do, I want some of what you’re taking.
It really shouldn't be only about which corrupt party it benefits the most and there are numerous ways to negate it without amending the constitution. It served its purpose 200 years ago but in the 21st century, the president should be elected by the popular vote.
 

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,319
2,032
187
I guess that works for R's. What about the rest of us, especially those of us who want to reform the unequal representation without dumping the whole system?
The most basic changes (that do not scrap the entire system) involve adjusting the balance of representation in the House so that reps and EC voters apportioned by state at least approximate the actual population structure in 2019, and granting D.C. statehood, because it’s absurd that millions of American citizens have no representation in our Senate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.