I Don't Know If Joe Can Do It

[pmv]

Once again, changing the rules for an advantage.
I get it, everyone wants a stacked deck, but everything the democrats can do the republican's can do as well. It won't end well.

Within a couple of decades, 1/3 of the population will elect 2/3 of the Senators. As it is 1/2 of the Senate represents less than 1/5 of the population. And the Senate in turn is the thing supposed to hold the Presidency to account. Which itself is elected via an undemocratic system. And which in turn determines the Supreme Court that makes the decisions to stop anything changing. Seems to me that the US system is an interlocking mechanism designed to ensure the continued supremacy of old white guys.

 

[K1052]

Trump appears to be absolutely hemorrhaging seniors lately. State polling is showing similar movement.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1313442547876978693

 

[Greenman]

Within a couple of decades, 1/3 of the population will elect 2/3 of the Senators. As it is 1/2 of the Senate represents less than 1/5 of the population. And the Senate in turn is the thing supposed to hold the Presidency to account. Which itself is elected via an undemocratic system. And which in turn determines the Supreme Court that makes the decisions to stop anything changing. Seems to me that the US system is an interlocking mechanism designed to ensure the continued supremacy of old white guys.

Or it's a constitutional republic designed to protect the states. I'll go ahead and splain it to you since you missed that day at school. The states elect the president, not the people. The states are equally represented in the senate, and the house is where the people have their voice. This is the bases of the US system, it's not a simple democracy, it was never intended to be.
Most issues about this system stem from the idea that it's "unfair", and always come from the side that isn't in power. The pure democracy you desire is based on the notion that a million stupid people will make better decisions than one stupid person, I've never seen any evidence of that.
Tossing the almost obligatory "old white guys" comment in is little more than cliché. Just so we're clear, there is no "old white guy's" state.

 

[fskimospy]

Or it's a constitutional republic designed to protect the states. I'll go ahead and splain it to you since you missed that day at school. The states elect the president, not the people. The states are equally represented in the senate, and the house is where the people have their voice. This is the bases of the US system, it's not a simple democracy, it was never intended to be.
Most issues about this system stem from the idea that it's "unfair", and always come from the side that isn't in power. The pure democracy you desire is based on the notion that a million stupid people will make better decisions than one stupid person, I've never seen any evidence of that.
Tossing the almost obligatory "old white guys" comment in is little more than cliché. Just so we're clear, there is no "old white guy's" state.

But you’re the one that says adding more states is ‘stacking the deck’?

The states, through their representatives in Congress, may decide that the country could use a few more states to be represented by the senate - since the ability to add more states was written into the basis for the US system it seems like the only reason you’re complaining about it is that you’re worried it won’t keep your preferred side in power.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Or it's a constitutional republic designed to protect the states. I'll go ahead and splain it to you since you missed that day at school. The states elect the president, not the people. The states are equally represented in the senate, and the house is where the people have their voice. This is the bases of the US system, it's not a simple democracy, it was never intended to be.
Most issues about this system stem from the idea that it's "unfair", and always come from the side that isn't in power. The pure democracy you desire is based on the notion that a million stupid people will make better decisions than one stupid person, I've never seen any evidence of that.
Tossing the almost obligatory "old white guys" comment in is little more than cliché. Just so we're clear, there is no "old white guy's" state.

Or
We do what several of the founding fathers believed.
There is a revolution every few generations.

 

[fskimospy]

Or
We do what several of the founding fathers believed.
There is a revolution every few generations.

What I think is funny is that this is the basic argument:

A: the US system was designed to give small states equal representation and if that gives Republicans an advantage that’s just how the system works so don’t say it’s unfair!

B: the system also gives us the ability to add more states so that things aren’t unfair.

A: you can’t do that, it’s unfair!!

 

[Fanatical Meat]

What I think is funny is that this is the basic argument:

A: the US system was designed to give small states equal representation and if that gives Republicans an advantage that’s just how the system works so don’t say it’s unfair!

B: the system also gives us the ability to add more states so that things aren’t unfair.

A: you can’t do that, it’s unfair!!

Excellent point.
I need to remember this when dealing with my deplorable’s

The system was set up so everyone had a fair voice. The house does not provide a fair voice to big states because of the caps

 

[Grey_Beard]

What I think is funny is that this is the basic argument:

A: the US system was designed to give small states equal representation and if that gives Republicans an advantage that’s just how the system works so don’t say it’s unfair!

B: the system also gives us the ability to add more states so that things aren’t unfair.

A: you can’t do that, it’s unfair!!

I wonder if those saying that realize how dizzy they really are from the spin.

 

[fskimospy]

Excellent point.
I need to remember this when dealing with my deplorable’s

The system was set up so everyone had a fair voice. The house does not provide a fair voice to big states because of the caps

I mean there are lots of unfair things about our system and a lot of them that no sane country would ever adopt if we were making a new country today.

That’s entirely separate from my point though, which is that they simultaneously argue that the elements of our system that give conservatives an unfair advantage are legitimate but the elements of that same system that allow us to correct this unfair advantage are illegitimate.

If Greenman wants to argue that things shouldn’t change because he likes how Republicans can routinely achieve minority rule that’s fine but there’s no need to pretend it’s some high minded defense of the system because he rejects the system.

 

[eelw]

Excellent post. The real problem is the senate. Huge disparity in representation between the populous states and the low population ones. One could allow 2 senators per state, and add more based on population. In addition to that, term limits are definitely needed for the Senate and even more drastically needed for the Supreme Court.

Can Dems gerrymander all the fly over states into a single state?

/s

 

[Greenman]

Or
We do what several of the founding fathers believed.
There is a revolution every few generations.

There won't be in this one.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

There won't be in this one.

Point is if there is no balance, like a second term Trump who says “Fuck you Libs” or “Fuck you nasty blue states”
Then there is another after him or the nightmare scenario where the election is decided by the house & senate where one state one vote rules.
We would be ripe for a major modification of government. Hopefully that would be peaceful but who knows. These are areas nobody should want to play in.
I cannot imagine the majority willingly being fucked for decades without blowback.

 

[IronWing]

Seems to me that the US system is an interlocking mechanism designed to ensure the continued supremacy of old white guys.

Replace "old white guys" with "slave-holding, landed aristocracy" and you'd be spot on. That is exactly why the un-democratic aspects of the current system were built into the system. At the time of the founding, Virginia, a slave state, was much richer than the other states and Jefferson and the aristocratic contingent got most of what they wanted in the Constitution.

 

[ewdotson]

Should add about 1000 House of Reps.

Abolish the Senate and give the powers to the House. Or, keep the default "at least" 2 Senators per state, and then add Senators based on population..if we're going to keep the dogshit-tier Senate.

That we're afraid of changing how our government's constitution provides representation... after 250 years and a population increase of approximately 9000%...is pretty exemplar of why the government is dysfunctional. i.e. the people can speak all they want, but the gerrymandered-to-fuck government doesn't have to give a shit.

My Emperor-For-The-Day solution make it so the state lines are redrawn every 50 years. I mean, I think there *are* virtues to having a bicameral legislature where one of the houses has larger, slower changing administrative districts. But ... the state lines are pretty much completely arbitrary and/or based on historical quirks that have long since lost their relevance. Hence its trending in directions where it's becoming non-representative.

Obviously, that's not going to happen any more than abolishing the Senate entirely will. Adding new stars is an entirely viable option though. There's nothing magical about having 50 states.

 

[fskimospy]

Replace "old white guys" with "slave-holding, landed aristocracy" and you'd be spot on. That is exactly why the un-democratic aspects of the current system were built into the system. At the time of the founding, Virginia, a slave state, was much richer than the other states and Jefferson and the aristocratic contingent got most of what they wanted in the Constitution.

Yes, it is kind of funny how people still defend the electoral college as some sort of high minded way to allow small states to have a say in presidential politics. In reality the extra representation given to small states from everyone having two senators was pretty small - the primary effect of the electoral college was to give slave states much more say in who was president by incorporating the 3/5ths compromise in the House over to the presidential vote.mYou don't see people defending the 3/5ths compromise much anymore but you do see them defend other pro-slavery articles of the Constitution.

 

[fskimospy]

My Emperor-For-The-Day solution make it so the state lines are redrawn every 50 years. I mean, I think there *are* virtues to having a bicameral legislature where one of the houses has larger, slower changing administrative districts. But ... the state lines are pretty much completely arbitrary and/or based on historical quirks that have long since lost their relevance. Hence its trending in directions where it's becoming non-representative.

Obviously, that's not going to happen any more than abolishing the Senate entirely will. Adding new stars is an entirely viable option though. There's nothing magical about having 50 states.

I am strongly convinced that if the US had 49 or 51 states that people would mind adding states much less. I think people really do like the idea of 50 states because it's a nice round number.

Now don't get me wrong, this is an extremely dumb reason, but I think it's definitely a reason.

 

[Brainonska511]

My Emperor-For-The-Day solution make it so the state lines are redrawn every 50 years. I mean, I think there *are* virtues to having a bicameral legislature where one of the houses has larger, slower changing administrative districts. But ... the state lines are pretty much completely arbitrary and/or based on historical quirks that have long since lost their relevance. Hence its trending in directions where it's becoming non-representative.

Obviously, that's not going to happen any more than abolishing the Senate entirely will. Adding new stars is an entirely viable option though. There's nothing magical about having 50 states.

In principle, I see value of a bicameral legislature at the federal level. It is at the state level that I don't understand, as both houses are based on population. Bills just stall because of the enormous political effort required to move even popular legislation through two houses and then to the governor's desk.

 

[fskimospy]

In democracies such as ours, the governments are the people. So in effect, the people are electing the president - just not in a way

In principle, I see value of a bicameral legislature at the federal level. It is at the state level that I don't understand, as both houses are based on population. Bills just stall because of the enormous political effort required to move even popular legislation through two houses and then to the governor's desk.

I really don't see much value in it as it has the same problem as the rest of our system - diffusion of responsibility. I think our system would be better off if when we elected someone to run the country they could enact their agenda, within the bounds of the Constitution of course. If we like their agenda, we re-elect them. If we don't like it, we elect someone else.

What happens now though is that we have a cascading series of elections that often install opposing parties at various veto points so no one can enact their agenda and instead we have this muddle where everyone blames everyone else for failure. This is a recipe for eventual autocracy as people are rapidly tiring of it. If we're going to elect leaders, let them lead.

 

[alexruiz]

Can Dems gerrymander all the fly over states into a single state?

/s

Great minds think alike.
I had already proposed to consolidate the dakotas, wyoming and montana into one giant state.
Bison don't vote

 

[K1052]

I don't know what exactly the future holds but if Biden is up double digits on Trump in PA then no amount of shenanigans short of overturning by force numerous state governments is going to stop what's coming.

 

[zinfamous]

My Emperor-For-The-Day solution make it so the state lines are redrawn every 50 years. I mean, I think there *are* virtues to having a bicameral legislature where one of the houses has larger, slower changing administrative districts. But ... the state lines are pretty much completely arbitrary and/or based on historical quirks that have long since lost their relevance. Hence its trending in directions where it's becoming non-representative.

Obviously, that's not going to happen any more than abolishing the Senate entirely will. Adding new stars is an entirely viable option though. There's nothing magical about having 50 states.

This is also a very good point....maybe House districts need not be drawn within states, but within "population regions" that can (as they do) cross borders. So many people commute across state lines and of course within states, across counties and political districts all over the country between home and work. It is arbitrary in the reality of our world, even if you were to objectively redraw lines to boring blocks based on populations with some weight towards historic accuracy.

It would definitely address the perceived problem among say, a lot of Virginians that remain embittered over the northern ~10% land mass border regions (lol--I still chuckle when conservatives try to argue that "geography votes!" It's both precious and sad) pretty much control the national fate of the state. Same with Illinois and the Chicago effect. So, maybe you draw, as an example, a couple of districts that specifically encircle the PA-MD-DE-DC-VA region that pretty much defines Metro DC area, and apportion house membership that way, either on top of state-based districts (and do this nationwide to all commuter zones), or just redraw the nation's districts such that actual population demographics are appreciated for what they are?


...or, on top of of the 2 Senators/state model, maybe each commute zone/metro area gets its own additional senator? I'm sure the GOP would love that! Definitely easier than adding states, and actually addresses the issue of "where all the people actually live" suddenly being held prisoner by, well, Wyoming.

 

[fskimospy]

Great minds think alike.
I had already proposed to consolidate the dakotas, wyoming and montana into one giant state.
Bison don't vote

That would be crazy! After all, the powerhouse state that would emerge from such a merger would have nearly the population of <checks notes>... Connecticut.

 

[zinfamous]

Great minds think alike.
I had already proposed to consolidate the dakotas, wyoming and montana into one giant state.
Bison don't vote

apparently corn plants do, though!

 

[ecogen]

Monmouth Pennsylvania Poll

Biden up 12

54% to 42%

Interestingly the sample is RV and not LV but still.

Unless something major happens in the next month this seems pretty over.

 

[brycejones]

Monmouth Pennsylvania Poll

Biden up 12

54% to 42%

Interestingly the sample is RV and not LV but still.

Unless something major happens in the next month this seems pretty over.

It isn't over till the votes are counted, get out and VOTE as if your life depended on it.....

Oh shit it probably does.