AnimeSuki Forums

Kyuu · 2012-02-22, 00:23

Quote:

WASHINGTON – Five wealthy people, led by Dallas industrialist Harold Simmons and Las Vegas casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, have donated nearly $1 of every $4 flowing to the super PACs raising unlimited money in this year's presidential race, a USA TODAY analysis shows.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...ors/53196658/1

Just some info. on the Super PAC money.

Vexx · 2012-02-22, 00:46

Right.. when you follow the money on the right, it rapidly comes down to literally a handful of people -- not even the top 1% but the top .001%.

These people are so disconnected from the rest of us, they might as well *be* aliens from space. Romney and Santorum are like the poor guys that live in the crappy house near the tracks, they get a shinier hat for doing their bidding.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/us...uperdonor.html

Ithekro · 2012-02-22, 01:02

The more it makes me wonder if I even could run for office even at 35 as a nobody.

Vallen Chaos Valiant · 2012-02-22, 02:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ithekro

The more it makes me wonder if I even could run for office even at 35 as a nobody.

You can't win an election as a nobody. You win an election via one way and one way only; make voters trust you. All that money you need to spend are just so you can become more familiar to people.

Keep in mind that everyone starts up being unknown. I am just saying that you can't stay as a nobody if you want to have a chance at elected office.

ganbaru · 2012-02-22, 04:24

Santorum's push on social issues a challenge for Romney
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...81L02F20120222

Vexx · 2012-02-22, 05:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Santorum's push on social issues a challenge for Romney
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...81L02F20120222

I figure Romney knows if he tries to match Santorum's lunacy on social issues, he's toast in the general election... but he may just lose the primary anyway as all the shrieking wingnuts seem to be driving that boat lately.

Vallen Chaos Valiant · 2012-02-22, 05:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vexx

I figure Romney knows if he tries to match Santorum's lunacy on social issues, he's toast in the general election... but he may just lose the primary anyway as all the shrieking wingnuts seem to be driving that boat lately.

And to think, it was all thanks to Obama...

I am prepared to think of it as a happy accident. But those more inclined to see conspiracies, might be prepared to believe that Obama changed the narrative to Santorum's advantage.

Dhomochevsky · 2012-02-22, 06:15

So on the voting systems, after skimming the youtube channel there is this method proposed as the solution:

This seems like a good idea, but it still has the major flaw, that the winner of the FPTP-round is guaranteed 50% of the votes and such to rule the country alone, even if he was a minority.
I mean, all those other parties get in proportional to their votes, but they are guaranteed to be the minority, so they don't actually have anything to say.
They could as well not be there.

What's wrong with doing a real Proportional Representation?

Vallen Chaos Valiant · 2012-02-22, 07:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dhomochevsky

So on the voting systems, after skimming the youtube channel there is this method proposed as the solution:
This seems like a good idea, but it still has the major flaw, that the winner of the FPTP-round is guaranteed 50% of the votes and such to rule the country alone, even if he was a minority.
I mean, all those other parties get in proportional to their votes, but they are guaranteed to be the minority, so they don't actually have anything to say.
They could as well not be there.

What's wrong with doing a real Proportional Representation?

The point is to have local council elections, so people have representatives in their area rather than being ruled from afar. It's not just proportional representation, but to have local politicians covering every county etc.

As for the 50% vote, that's only true in the example because the party won the election in every contest. If you won every conquest then you certainly deserve to have the majority. In a more realistic scenario the winning party would likely only win 60-70% of the electorates.

Dhomochevsky · 2012-02-22, 08:07

I was assuming that the "right" half of the 'counil' was a winner takes all system overall.

But if it's not, then this makes more sense. So this is a system that might require coalitions to form a viable government?

Vallen Chaos Valiant · 2012-02-22, 08:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dhomochevsky

I was assuming that the "right" half of the 'counil' was a winner takes all system overall.

But if it's not, then this makes more sense. So this is a system that might require coalitions to form a viable government?

The biggest party in the example only held 49% of the overall population vote. Since the video is trying to portray population representation, it is certainly the desired outcome that 49% representation would require coalition building to form government.

This is actually similar to what happened to Australia last election. Neither party got over 50%, and just 4 independents plus a Green candidate decided the election by tipping the balance in a coalition minority government. But in the end, that represents the population sentiment. It is the two parties' own fault that they had became clones of one another in public policy.

I note that after the election, the two parties have started to differentiate. People learn their lessons.

Dhomochevsky · 2012-02-22, 09:01

In that case, this is pretty similar to the German system minus some extra rules. The implementation is kind of backwards, but works out the same. This seems to be mainly about the impact of party lists on the personal choices.
I endorse this system.

Too bad for the US, the only ones who could change anything are the already elected officials who really have no interest in doing so.

Vallen Chaos Valiant · 2012-02-22, 09:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dhomochevsky

In that case, this is pretty similar to the German system. The implementation is kind of backwards, but works out the same. This seems to be mainly about the impact of party lists on the personal choices.

The video is really focused on minimising gerrymandering; the idea is that one should not lose representation just because of deliberate line drawing. And the only way to do that, is to make sure to NOT have a winner-takes-all system. On this aspect, America is one of the least democratic nations that holds elections. It's sort of why so few contested states needed to be visited by a general election presidential candidate; everywhere else had been gerryandered to irrelevance. And both sides are all guilty of it.

But worst of all, both sides believe it is acceptable to manipulate the elections this way.

The winner-takes-all is simplistic and convenient back when elections were done manually and slowly. But in the end the closer the representation of the voter population in the elected officials, the closer we are to a democracy.

GDB · 2012-02-22, 13:33

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/geithn...165554751.html

Yeah, I'm sure this has about as much of a chance as an ice-cube in hell. Only way I see this passing is if it gets bareboned down to the point that it closes maybe 1-2 loopholes that in the end don't really do anything, and lowering the tax to the 28%.

Xellos-_^ · 2012-02-22, 15:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dhomochevsky

In that case, this is pretty similar to the German system minus some extra rules. The implementation is kind of backwards, but works out the same. This seems to be mainly about the impact of party lists on the personal choices.
I endorse this system.

Too bad for the US, the only ones who could change anything are the already elected officials who really have no interest in doing so.

a constitutional convention by the voter could amend the constitution but it would be extremely hard(borderline impossible) to do.

Ithekro · 2012-02-22, 15:42

The ERA shows how hard it is to go the States route when it comes to the Constitution.

Vexx · 2012-02-22, 18:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ithekro

The ERA shows how hard it is to go the States route when it comes to the Constitution.

That's been a prick in my hide for decades. It should be a slam-dunk duh... but apparently "women get the same rights men do" is an utterly scary concept to these retro-brained twits (no, I'm not going to pretend to be civil to them at this point)

Ithekro · 2012-02-22, 18:23

I recall that some women were against the idea based on the idea that they could get drafted into the military just like men. Even though there hasn't been a call for the draft since Vietnam. But in the days of the ERA that was a very recent memory.

monsta666 · 2012-02-22, 19:10

Obama slashes the corporate tax rate from 35% to 28% so the US tax rate is now in line with the average rate of most advanced economies. This reduction in tax has come at the cost of reducing the amount of tax breaks given to corporations. In addition to reduced tax breaks Obama wants to impose a minimum tax rate for multinational companies profit from abroad although no figure has been determined as yet. He will also remove a tax deduction given to multinationals for moving expenses abroad and to encourage more US investment, Obama will introduce a 20% tax credit on domestic expenses if a multinational decides to move operations back to the US. Obama also pledges to simplify the taxes for small businesses. For the full story read the link below:

Obama: Slash corporate tax breaks and rates

On the service it would appear to be a sound proposal although I am sure the GOP would say Obama did not go far enough with the tax cut and would claim that 25% or below corporate tax rates is required to fuel a good economic recovery and bring back jobs to the masses.

Whoops didn't realise a similar link was added earlier in the thread! :P

GDB · 2012-02-22, 19:26

=P

Personally, I'd be fine with 25% if, and only if, every single loophole were closed as a result. Closed in a way that they wouldn't like, not by merely making the loophole a stated option.

2012-02-22, 00:46	Link #2942
Vexx Obey the Darkly Cute ... Author Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ... Age: 66	Right.. when you follow the money on the right, it rapidly comes down to literally a handful of people -- not even the top 1% but the top .001%. These people are so disconnected from the rest of us, they might as well be aliens from space. Romney and Santorum are like the poor guys that live in the crappy house near the tracks, they get a shinier hat for doing their bidding. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/us...uperdonor.html __________________ "It Really IS Rocket Science", Novel series rough drafts; vol. 1 thru vol. 3 complete Volume 4 in work, Visit the thread for short stories!

2012-02-22, 01:02	Link #2943
Ithekro Gamilas Falls Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Republic of California Age: 46	The more it makes me wonder if I even could run for office even at 35 as a nobody. __________________

2012-02-22, 04:24	Link #2945
ganbaru books-eater youkai Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity	Santorum's push on social issues a challenge for Romney http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...81L02F20120222 __________________

2012-02-22, 06:15	Link #2948
Dhomochevsky temporary safeguard Join Date: May 2004 Location: Germany	So on the voting systems, after skimming the youtube channel there is this method proposed as the solution: <p>No iframe support, please <a href="http://youtu.be/QT0I-sdoSXU">watch on YouTube</a>.</p> This seems like a good idea, but it still has the major flaw, that the winner of the FPTP-round is guaranteed 50% of the votes and such to rule the country alone, even if he was a minority. I mean, all those other parties get in proportional to their votes, but they are guaranteed to be the minority, so they don't actually have anything to say. They could as well not be there. What's wrong with doing a real Proportional Representation?

2012-02-22, 15:42	Link #2956
Ithekro Gamilas Falls Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Republic of California Age: 46	The ERA shows how hard it is to go the States route when it comes to the Constitution. __________________

2012-02-22, 08:07	Link #2950
Dhomochevsky temporary safeguard Join Date: May 2004 Location: Germany	I was assuming that the "right" half of the 'counil' was a winner takes all system overall. But if it's not, then this makes more sense. So this is a system that might require coalitions to form a viable government?

2012-02-22, 09:01	Link #2952
Dhomochevsky temporary safeguard Join Date: May 2004 Location: Germany	In that case, this is pretty similar to the German system minus some extra rules. The implementation is kind of backwards, but works out the same. This seems to be mainly about the impact of party lists on the personal choices. I endorse this system. Too bad for the US, the only ones who could change anything are the already elected officials who really have no interest in doing so.

2012-02-22, 13:33	Link #2954
GDB Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Age: 38	http://finance.yahoo.com/news/geithn...165554751.html Yeah, I'm sure this has about as much of a chance as an ice-cube in hell. Only way I see this passing is if it gets bareboned down to the point that it closes maybe 1-2 loopholes that in the end don't really do anything, and lowering the tax to the 28%.

2012-02-22, 18:23	Link #2958
Ithekro Gamilas Falls Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Republic of California Age: 46	I recall that some women were against the idea based on the idea that they could get drafted into the military just like men. Even though there hasn't been a call for the draft since Vietnam. But in the days of the ERA that was a very recent memory. __________________

2012-02-22, 19:10	Link #2959
monsta666 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: London, England Age: 37	Obama slashes the corporate tax rate from 35% to 28% so the US tax rate is now in line with the average rate of most advanced economies. This reduction in tax has come at the cost of reducing the amount of tax breaks given to corporations. In addition to reduced tax breaks Obama wants to impose a minimum tax rate for multinational companies profit from abroad although no figure has been determined as yet. He will also remove a tax deduction given to multinationals for moving expenses abroad and to encourage more US investment, Obama will introduce a 20% tax credit on domestic expenses if a multinational decides to move operations back to the US. Obama also pledges to simplify the taxes for small businesses. For the full story read the link below: Obama: Slash corporate tax breaks and rates On the service it would appear to be a sound proposal although I am sure the GOP would say Obama did not go far enough with the tax cut and would claim that 25% or below corporate tax rates is required to fuel a good economic recovery and bring back jobs to the masses. Whoops didn't realise a similar link was added earlier in the thread! :P Last edited by monsta666; 2012-02-22 at 19:18. Reason: realised mistake

2012-02-22, 19:26	Link #2960
GDB Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Age: 38	=P Personally, I'd be fine with 25% if, and only if, every single loophole were closed as a result. Closed in a way that they wouldn't like, not by merely making the loophole a stated option.