|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: US election aftermath
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
A consequence of non-compulsory voting. Some who were prepared to vote for Obama were not prepared to vote for Clinton and so did not vote at all. Had voting been compulsory, some of those forced to vote may have voted informal or defaced their ballot papers, but perhaps enough would have preferred to vote for Clinton rather than take the risk of a Trump victory.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
fausto
Shipmate
# 13737
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
It is the states which built the Union. It was never the other way around. Even within the gigantic semi-empty-slate territories, it was left to the local people to get their act together, establish a government, and petition for admission as a state—or not, as they chose. The proto-state had to start it.
I disagree. The original 13 states formed the federal Union, because the more consensual Articles of Confederation had proven to be ineffective, and thereafter the Federal government has always exercised sovereign authority over the states (with the limited exception of the "reserved powers"). The only independent sovereign governments that later joined the Union voluntarily were Vermont and Texas. All the rest were first Federal territories (except Maine, Kentucky, and West Virginia, which were formed by partitions of Massachusetts and Virginia). Yes, they chose voluntarily to convert from Federal territorial status to full statehood, but they were always (and still remain) a creation of the Federal government in the fist instance, rather than vice versa.
Moreover, during and after the Civil War it was Federal authority alone that preserved and rebuilt the Union, whereas advocates of state self-determination had sought to destroy it.
This may seem like a picky point, but it goes to the question of whether an Electoral College (and, for that matter, a bicameral legislature) that was conceived in part to reconcile and balance the interests of a small collection of formerly independent and sovereign states has outlived its purpose in a much larger federation comprised for the most part of arbitrarily created subdivisions of a single sovereign body politic.
Myself, I am less concerned with the inequites in the various states' voting power in the EC as I am with the erosion of the EC's other originally intended function as a safeguard against demagoguery. The framers of the Constitution did not intend the President to be elected by direct popular vote, nor did they anticipate the hegemonic rise of strong political parties. I think the party primary election system, combined with the laws that require a state's electors to be pledged in advance to one party's candidate or the other, have unwisely frustrated the original purpose. Instead of requiring a representative body of locally elected delegates from across the nation to deliberate on the choice, we now have what has become an increasingly vulgar and superficial popularity contest.
I've been saying for years (although nobody ever listens) that, if the EC is to be reformed, it should be reconfigured so that it is comprised of the states' actual representatives and senators in Congress meeting in joint session, rather than an equal number of anonymous electors previously pledged by law to a particular candidate. This would make the relationship between President and Congress more parliamentary and encourage a closer working relationship. It would also work against entrenched incumbency in Congress, and make the parties more responsive to the people rather than beholden to special interests, by making them compete harder in far more local congressional districts, to represent the voters on real issues of the moment rather than on their faithfulness orthodox institutional party ideologies. It would also help restore the original function of the EC to select effective administrators and weed out demagogues.
--------------------
"Truth did not come into the world naked, but it came in types and images. The world will not receive truth in any other way." Gospel of Philip, Logion 72
Posts: 407 | From: Boston, Mass. | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Not sure how your changes would be better, fausto.
Though you do not care about the inequities of representation, they are part of the problem and your proposal changes none of those. Short term representatives are no less likely to be beholden to special interests, rather more likely to be.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
fausto quote:
I've been saying for years (although nobody ever listens) that, if the EC is to be reformed, it should be reconfigured so that it is comprised of the states' actual representatives and senators in Congress meeting in joint session, rather than an equal number of anonymous electors previously pledged by law to a particular candidate. This would make the relationship between President and Congress more parliamentary and encourage a closer working relationship.
My immediate reaction to this proposal are two-fold:
1 This system challenges the Separation of Powers because it makes the President dependent for his mandate on the members of Congress.
2. Were this system to be introduced the question of House redistricting would need to come under greater scrutiny, for although the numerical variation in the size of districts has been severely curtailed by Court interpretations of federal electoral law the delineation of boundaries has been left to the partisan preferences of state governors and legislators. In recent years Republican domination of redistricting in most states has been a factor in determining the partisan bias of the House. That bias, under fausto’s proposals, would become reflected in the choice of president as well.
To my mind, if the EC were to be reformed it would be for federal legislation to require that the college votes awarded to each state be distributed in proportion to the popular vote cast for each candidate. (The formula would have to be determined as well as the determination of which candidates should qualify for the distribution of the electoral votes). One problem would be disproportionality in states with few college votes- but there you are! Perhaps the system is unreformable.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
The separation of powers is overblown.
Parliamentary governments are also known as Responsible Government. The government is responsible to the legislature and is required to hold the confidence of the legislature in order to spend money, features the US lacks.
The US separated from the mainstream of parliamentary development a generation too early.
I much prefer the cut-and-thrust of Question Period to the snooze-fest of the US Congress anyway.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Sober Preacher's Kid quote:
The separation of powers is overblown
I'm inclined to agree with what you have to say, but I'm not sure that a root and branch reform of the US constitution was what fausto had in mind. Perhaps he did.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
A cri de coeur. He's been a faithful rescuer all these years -- save us once more, Mr. Obama!
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og, King of Bashan
Ship's giant Amorite
# 9562
|
Posted
Some of you may have a vague memory from the job search thread that I was jerked around by a federal agency this summer- I took time off of work to fly out for a training, where I was assigned future work, and informally welcomed aboard. Two weeks later, I got a call that they had decided to go in a different direction.
Well, that agency just got a new boss. Ladies and gentlemen, your new SBA administrator, former pro wrestling queen Linda McMahon!
I don't know whether I dodged a bullet, or am really upset that I won't be witnessing the insanity from the inside.
I guess she has been working with an organization that aids and encourages women business owners, which is part of what the SBA does, so that may be part of it. The fact that she apparently contributed millions to a pro-Trump PAC and to the Trump foundation probably didn't hurt either.
--------------------
"I like to eat crawfish and drink beer. That's despair?" ― Walker Percy
Posts: 3259 | From: Denver, Colorado, USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
I don't know whether I dodged a bullet, or am really upset that I won't be witnessing the insanity from the inside.
I think the insanity will be quite visible from the outside. From what little I've heard she doesn't sound as horrible as the new Secretary of Education who worked hard to get public school funds diverted to Christian education and managed to make Michigan's abysmal test scores sink lower.
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
I agree -- you're well out of it.
Over in the Washington POST, their conservative columnist calls upon Trump's evangelical supporters to atone. Poor girl, I do believe she has the process in the wrong order. Before you can atone, you need to admit guilt -- that you were wrong. And before you can admit you were wrong, you have to concede that it -was- wrong. In the words of the rock song, before you can eat your pudding, you have to eat your meat. I see no signs of that happening.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
I wonder how many evangelicals see Jennifer Rubin as a moral authority whose opinion matters?
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
She used to be a major conservative flag-carrier -- her support of Mitt Romney was unflinching. But this cycle she's been steadily anti-Trump, so that I am finding her columns much more sensible.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
And the comments reveal how useless her pleas will be.
Unless there is some great revival in which all their hearts are remade within them and they recognise the lies they have been told as lies.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
She used to be a major conservative flag-carrier -- her support of Mitt Romney was unflinching. But this cycle she's been steadily anti-Trump, so that I am finding her columns much more sensible.
Evangelicals voted for Romney. Rubin thought the Republicans could abandon social conservatives and populists and win an election. Bless her heart. There just aren't that many rich people and hipster libertarians. Opinion columns are nice. Money is even better. Ultimately, somebody has to go to the polls and vote.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hedgehog
Ship's Shortstop
# 14125
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
The fact that she apparently contributed millions to a pro-Trump PAC and to the Trump foundation probably didn't hurt either.
<Hedgehog carefully stores comment away for the next time some naive Trump supporter comments how Trump will not be doing politics as usual...>
--------------------
"We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it."--Pope Francis, Laudato Si'
Posts: 2740 | From: Delaware, USA | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
Four million to the Trump Foundation, to put it in the black.
This is frightening.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pangolin Guerre
Shipmate
# 18686
|
Posted
In other news.... It has been reported that Trump intends to remain executive producer of The Apprentice.
I look forward to NBC's news coverage, and claims of, "No, no. We're objective."
Posts: 758 | From: 30 arpents de neige | Registered: Nov 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
I worry about the fate of Saturday Night Live, which is an NBC production. But I trust that SNL makes far more money for the network than Apprentice.
Meanwhile, we know that Trump is a grifter. There may be a reason why he is not divesting himself of his business holdings. He did promise to release his tax returns after he was elected. Of course the word 'after' is very elastic; the year 2100 is after his election.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
And the plot thickens...
"CIA Concludes Russian Interference Aimed To Elect Trump" (NPR).
{Expands fall-out shelter. Adds extra supply of dark chocolate, soft blankets and pillows, and comfort things.}
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
And the plot thickens...
"CIA Concludes Russian Interference Aimed To Elect Trump" (NPR).
{Expands fall-out shelter. Adds extra supply of dark chocolate, soft blankets and pillows, and comfort things.}
Don't worry about the Russians bombing us. Why would they destroy what they spent so much time and money to buy?
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
I worry about the fate of Saturday Night Live, which is an NBC production. But I trust that SNL makes far more money for the network than Apprentice.
I should think some other network would pick it up, or create something roughly equivalent.
[ 11. December 2016, 00:44: Message edited by: mousethief ]
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
Unusually, no less than Teen Vogue ventures into political analysis and points out Tiny Fingers' fondness for gaslighting.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
And the plot thickens...
"CIA Concludes Russian Interference Aimed To Elect Trump" (NPR).
AIUI the interference consisted of hacking the Democratic National Committee and releasing the results to the public. If this threw the election to Trump, it is because the voters found some of the DNC e-mails objectionable enough that they turned against Hillary.
WikiLeaks says that the Russians were not their source. This may or may not be true. If the Russians could hack the website, it's quite likely that others could too.
It's also possible that nothing on the Republican National Committee website was as damaging as what was on the DNC website.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
And the plot thickens...
"CIA Concludes Russian Interference Aimed To Elect Trump" (NPR).
AIUI the interference consisted of hacking the Democratic National Committee and releasing the results to the public. If this threw the election to Trump, it is because the voters found some of the DNC e-mails objectionable enough that they turned against Hillary.
Not how it works. It is that it fuelled a perception. Elections are not won and lost by proper evaluation, but by perception and preconception. And if there was no bias, everyone's site would have been hacked.
[ 11. December 2016, 17:25: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
And, the very next article, evangelicals shedding the name now made odious by Trumpkins.
Boy is that an exercise in doublethink. People who are dropping the name "evangelical" aren't doing so because it means the four basic tenets thingees. They're doing so because they believe it no longer does. The word has moved on; they wish to stay with the four thingees, but "Evangelical" no longer stands for that.
As for Evangelicals (whatever the word means now) holding the Donald's feet to the fire? I want some of what this guy is smoking. Good luck with that, buddy. You're in la-la land.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
From the Atlantic, [URL
And, the very next article, evangelicals shedding the name now made odious by Trumpkins.
Some of us even started a thread asking for suggestions...
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
From the Atlantic, [URL
And, the very next article, evangelicals shedding the name now made odious by Trumpkins. [QUOTE][QUOTE]Originally posted by mousethief:
]Boy is that an exercise in doublethink. People who are dropping the name "evangelical" aren't doing so because it means the four basic tenets thingees. They're doing so because they believe it no longer does. The word has moved on; they wish to stay with the four thingees, but "Evangelical" no longer stands for that.
![[Confused]](confused.gif) As one of those anti-Trump evangelicals who has concluded the name has been irrefutably tainted-- yes, you are correctly assessing our position: we self-identified as "evangelical" due to the "Bebbington quadrilateral" of beliefs, we are seeing the name as now signifying something far, far different, so much so that the name no longer signifies something we want to be associated with. How is that "doublethink"???
[ 11. December 2016, 21:38: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
The author of the piece is assuming the word still means the older meaning, and seems to be implying that the former evangelicals rejecting the word still agree that it means the old meaning, and are being bloody-minded.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
The question is; do they regret what has been done in the name of Evangelical Christians, or this simply a rebranding exercise before continuing the same actions. Trump is a culmination of what the Republican party has become, not an aberration.
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
The question is; do they regret what has been done in the name of Evangelical Christians, or this simply a rebranding exercise before continuing the same actions. Trump is a culmination of what the Republican party has become, not an aberration.
Yeah but reread your post. You're conflating "evangelical" with "Republican" which is precisely the problem and why some of us non-Republican evangelicals are feeling the need to rebrand
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
And the plot thickens...
"CIA Concludes Russian Interference Aimed To Elect Trump" (NPR).
AIUI the interference consisted of hacking the Democratic National Committee and releasing the results to the public. If this threw the election to Trump, it is because the voters found some of the DNC e-mails objectionable enough that they turned against Hillary.
There's also the allegation that the e-mails released are a combination of authentic and doctored communications. This would be consistent with past Russian kompromat operations. The e-mails released were also fairly selective. Nothing containing opposition research on Donald Trump, for example, has been released. Not proof, but we can infer a lot from that.
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
WikiLeaks says that the Russians were not their source. This may or may not be true. If the Russians could hack the website, it's quite likely that others could too.
Another possibility is Russian use of intermediaries, something else supposedly commonplace in past kompromat operations.
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
It's also possible that nothing on the Republican National Committee website was as damaging as what was on the DNC website.
It's also possible that info from the RNC hack is being held back for other reasons. Blackmail is one possibility that comes to mind. I'm still amazed that the one of America's major political parties has been publicly electronically compromised, the other major party has been privately electronically compromised, and the reaction from most Americans is to simply shrug it off.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Host
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
I'm still amazed that the one of America's major political parties has been publicly electronically compromised, the other major party has been privately electronically compromised, and the reaction from most Americans is to simply shrug it off.
It's a worry, that. I suppose folks have become desensitised to all things hacking and fail to see the particular significance.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
I think it is that, in part. ISTM, it is also party because it was the parties that were hacked, not government websites and because what was revealed was either no big deal or fit into preconception
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
I wouldn't discount the effects of election fatigue, news overload and/or news withdrawal, either.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
I wouldn't discount the effects of election fatigue, news overload and/or news withdrawal, either.
And I'd also wager that at least some Democrats are pretty fired up about these allegations. And with the Republicans, at least the Trump-worshippers among them are refusing to believe anything that would call into question the immaculate nature of their hero's ascensrion.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
And the plot thickens...
"CIA Concludes Russian Interference Aimed To Elect Trump" (NPR).
AIUI the interference consisted of hacking the Democratic National Committee and releasing the results to the public. If this threw the election to Trump, it is because the voters found some of the DNC e-mails objectionable enough that they turned against Hillary.
There's also the allegation that the e-mails released are a combination of authentic and doctored communications. This would be consistent with past Russian kompromat operations. The e-mails released were also fairly selective. Nothing containing opposition research on Donald Trump, for example, has been released. Not proof, but we can infer a lot from that.
AFAIK the Democrats never said that any of the released material was faked.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Croeses wrote:
quote:
Another possibility is Russian use of intermediaries, something else supposedly commonplace in past kompromat operations.
One thing I read was that the hackers appeared to be observing Russian holidays(which I assume means their hacking stopped on those days). Which made me wonder: Is hacking the kind of job where you observe the regular working schedule, 9 To 5, and holidays off? My guess woulda been that front-line espionage is the kind of job that doesn't really follow those sorta rules.
One thing I thought was that the holiday shutdowns might have been an attempt to make it appear as if the hackers were working for the Russian government, when in fact they were not.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Croeses wrote:
quote:
Another possibility is Russian use of intermediaries, something else supposedly commonplace in past kompromat operations.
One thing I read was that the hackers appeared to be observing Russian holidays(which I assume means their hacking stopped on those days). Which made me wonder: Is hacking the kind of job where you observe the regular working schedule, 9 To 5, and holidays off? My guess woulda been that front-line espionage is the kind of job that doesn't really follow those sorta rules.
One thing I thought was that the holiday shutdowns might have been an attempt to make it appear as if the hackers were working for the Russian government, when in fact they were not.
But the hackers, who are really Russians, knew that you would come to that conclusion, so they faked being non-Russian hackers faking being Russian.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Hoo boy! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
"Electoral College Members Request Intelligence Briefing On Russia, Trump." (HuffPost)
quote:
Ten Electoral College members have requested an intelligence briefing on Russia’s meddling in the U.S. presidential election, a week before the group is scheduled to formally certify the results.
The bipartisan group made their case to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper in an open letter Monday, arguing that the information is essential to their duties as electors who are tasked to “elect a president who is constitutionally qualified and fit to serve.”
Citing Alexander Hamilton’s writing in The Federalist Papers, the electors argue Russian interference in the election must factor into their decision. In Federalist #68, Hamilton charged the Electoral College with preventing a “desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.”
The article includes quotes from their request, and a link to the Federalist Paper on which it's grounded.
I'm glad they've done this--not only because Trump is already a disaster, and I still hold a ![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif) for the slight hope of a chance that Hillary might be chosen by the Electoral College. But because they're actually trying to do their job, and not just rubber-stamp the results.
Aside from the intense gravity of the situation, the wrangling could be fun.
![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Hoo boy!
"Electoral College Members Request Intelligence Briefing On Russia, Trump." (HuffPost)
quote:
Ten Electoral College members have requested an intelligence briefing on Russia’s meddling in the U.S. presidential election, a week before the group is scheduled to formally certify the results.
The bipartisan group made their case to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper in an open letter Monday, arguing that the information is essential to their duties as electors who are tasked to “elect a president who is constitutionally qualified and fit to serve.”
Citing Alexander Hamilton’s writing in The Federalist Papers, the electors argue Russian interference in the election must factor into their decision. In Federalist #68, Hamilton charged the Electoral College with preventing a “desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.”
The article includes quotes from their request, and a link to the Federalist Paper on which it's grounded.
I'm glad they've done this--not only because Trump is already a disaster, and I still hold a for the slight hope of a chance that Hillary might be chosen by the Electoral College. But because they're actually trying to do their job, and not just rubber-stamp the results.
Aside from the intense gravity of the situation, the wrangling could be fun.
I'm not sure if the EC will/would choose Hillary or if they would choose Pence or some other Republican. The electors who would be switching would be Republicans, chosen to represent the Republicans. They may choose Hillary because she won the popular vote-- and because it's the fastest path to a clean & fairly straightforward result. Or they may choose a Republican, just not Trump due to his been unqualified and having colluded with the Russians.
If 37 Trump electors switch, Trump doesn't have enough to win. If enough go to Hillary, she wins, but if instead the Republicans split so that no one gets 270, it goes to the House. Then we'll have to see what the Tea Partiers will do. We could end up with Paul Ryan, which is NOT a very good option for pretty much anyone who isn't rich, white & male-- but at least we wouldn't worry as much about his tweets starting a nuclear war.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anyuta
Shipmate
# 14692
|
Posted
On Russian hackers and holidays... if they are Russian, there's a damned good chance they are drunk on a holiday (I say this as a Russian). Seriously, it's a tradition. There's a reason the government decided to basically shut everything down between New Years and Orthodox Christmas (Jan. 7)... no one was working anyway because, yeah.. drunk.
On whether Trump is better or worse than a more typical Republican (who could potentially be chosen by the EC or the House): I think I'd actually rather have Trump. He's a joke, and I think he'd be treated by the international leaders as such. I don't think he'd be able to actually launch nukes on his own, on our side there are people who would stop him, and on the other side, I think he'd be treated as crazy uncle Harry who shows up at Thanksgiving ranting about how he want to kill all [insert currently demonized racial or religious group]. They would shake their heads and move on with things, because no one really wants a nuclear war just because Trump ran off at the mouth (or Tweet). The less stable world leaders who might react are always a risk anyway, Trump or no Trump.
But then what do I know? I was SURE Hillary would win.
And now I work for an Agency which will be run by a person who has a stated position of opposing pretty much everything we do. It's gonna be a fun time for the next 4 (or God forbid 8) years.
Posts: 764 | From: USA | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
A friend made me aware of this petition asking the Supreme Court to invalidate the election and order a new one. I've signed it and I've forwarded the link to everyone I know of like mind.
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Anyuta wrote:
quote:
On whether Trump is better or worse than a more typical Republican (who could potentially be chosen by the EC or the House): I think I'd actually rather have Trump. He's a joke, and I think he'd be treated by the international leaders as such.
I can honestly say that, of all the major contenders for the GOP nomination this time around, if one of them had to win, I would rather it be Trump than anyone else. Kasich possibly excepted, but guys like Cruz and the heart-surgeon? Ugh.
And, getting to the appointments, if we HAVE to have a CEO as Secretary Of State, I'd prefer it be someone from a long-standing, high-profile known-entity like Exxon than, say, the creepy multilevel sales cult that Betsy DeVos is married into.
BIAS: My grandfather and both my parents all worked for the Canadian annex of Exxon(or whatever Standard-spin-off preceded it). My folks also did a few, mercifully brief months as Amway distributors. Trust me when I say I know which one is creepier.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
A friend made me aware of this petition asking the Supreme Court to invalidate the election and order a new one. I've signed it and I've forwarded the link to everyone I know of like mind.
While I have sympathy with anything designed to avoid a Trump presidency, the Supreme Court doesn't have the power to do what the petition seeks to have it do. The petition is essentially asking that the Supreme Court act unconstitutionally.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Oh I see, a sexually assaulting incompetent multi-times business cheat vulture capitalist is the best of the lot. I'm dreaming of a White Christmas for the banana republic. ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif) Ctl-alt-delete to that sort of alt-right thinking.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anyuta
Shipmate
# 14692
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Oh I see, a sexually assaulting incompetent multi-times business cheat vulture capitalist is the best of the lot.
Sadly, on the GOP side, yes. At least among the current batch. I'm sure if you dig deep into the party somewhere there is a decent option, but if so they would likely never be supported by the base of the party. The current GOP makes Nixon look like a great guy. I'd trade them all in for Bush senior at this point (except he's old.. so Bush senior as he was when he was prez). not that I think he was great, but in comparison? yeah.
All these little false hope actions, petitions, hopes for faithless electors etc. are rather annoying. It's done. He's going to be president. We'll survive. It will set us back by many years, but we've lived through worse in our history, and we'll rebound. Pretending like it won't really happen just sets us up for another heartbreak when, in fact, it does on Jan 20. And impeaching him after the fact, well, do you really want Pence?? We (liberals) need to figure out how to mitigate, and how to take things back next time around. The wishful thinking really isn't helpful, IMHO.
Posts: 764 | From: USA | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
While I have sympathy with anything designed to avoid a Trump presidency, the Supreme Court doesn't have the power to do what the petition seeks to have it do. The petition is essentially asking that the Supreme Court act unconstitutionally.
I'm not so sure about that. Courts have the power to overturn elections in cases where the electoral process is hopelessly compromised. In fact, if I recall correctly you reside in a state where a federal court recently exercised exactly that power. This has never been done in the case of a presidential election, but the basic principle is the same. I'm dubious that a strong enough case can be made that the recent presidential race falls into the "hopelessly compromised" category, but saying that this power doesn't apply to this particular case is not the same as arguing that they don't have that power at all.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
A friend made me aware of this petition asking the Supreme Court to invalidate the election and order a new one. I've signed it and I've forwarded the link to everyone I know of like mind.
While I have sympathy with anything designed to avoid a Trump presidency, the Supreme Court doesn't have the power to do what the petition seeks to have it do. The petition is essentially asking that the Supreme Court act unconstitutionally.
Indeed...but for the fun it...let's count the ways.
Way Number 1: The Supreme Court cannot rule on a petition. One party with standing must file suit against another party with standing. This brings us to...
Way Number 2: The Supreme Court only has original jurisdiction in a very few instances outlined by the constitution. In all of those cases, either a state or the United States must be a plaintiff. So, to get to the Supreme Court, individual cases would have to be filed in state court or federal district courts. This brings us to...
Way Number 3: The constitution allows each state to choose the method of selecting their electors. So, one would have to prove that Russian interference violated state election laws or federal law in every single state. Your going to need more than a newspaper article to get that. Instead, you'll need a fact finding trial followed by state and federal appeals to reach the Supreme Court. Let's assume the case reaches the Supreme Court. This brings us to...
Way Number 4: The Supreme Court might theoretically rule that the results of the elections in all fifty states are invalid. However, they cannot set a new election date. The constitution allows congress to set election date. Arguably, the House and Senate could just choose a President and Vice President on January 6th. Theoretically, at most and this would be stretching it, the Supreme Court could order the House and Senate to call for new elections. This brings us to...
Way Number 5: Congress can set new election dates. However, in the meantime, each state can change the way they choose their electors and elect the ones already chosen in the last election. Keep in mind, Republicans control the state legislatures in a majority of the states.
In any event, the case will never reach the Supreme Court. If it does, you would need Anthony Kennedy and the Democratic appointees to all agree. Kennedy often favors the rights of individuals over the rights of the state. However, Kennedy is a federalist in that he almost always favors states rights over the federal government. Remember it was Roberts who saved Obamacare not Kennedy.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Way Number 2: The Supreme Court only has original jurisdiction in a very few instances outlined by the constitution. In all of those cases, either a state or the United States must be a plaintiff. So, to get to the Supreme Court, individual cases would have to be filed in state court or federal district courts.
[nitpicking] Technically Art. III, §2 of the U.S. Constitution states "In all Cases . . . in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction." They need not be the plaintiff. [/nitpicking]
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
