Let's pretend for one moment that he does die before the election, just for the funsies. What happens then? Will the nomination revert to option number 2, aka Bernie Sanders? Or will his running mate automatically replace him just the way Vice-President is supposted to step in after the Big Man in the White House chokes on a piece of matzo? Does he even have a running mate yet?
US Joe Biden News Megathread - The Other Biden Derangement Syndrome Thread (with a side order of Fauci Derangement Syndrome)
- Thread starter Borscht
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2014
This is my dumbass political take, but I think the political compass of the country is in the process of moving from the traditional "Left-Right" model into a "Populist-Elitist" framework.
What I hope to see is a merging of left-populists and right-populists into a unified front against the left-elitists and right-elitists. Remember, the Elitists are unified to protect their interests. Populists can only win by unifying to protect theirs.
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
Let me start this by saying "This is unprecedented, so I have no historical analogues that properly fit". I can look at other countries which followed similar paths, but none are truly applicable due to varying factors. That being said, widespread civil disobedience is basically a given. Short of enforcing it by force, the number of people willing to go for round 2 will be... slim. Though don't expect that right off the bat. Most people are likely to give it a go initially, a "Tough it up" attitude. If the Democrats keep it to -exactly- two weeks they'll skate away with only damaging their position more.
If they don't though...
If they don't is where the models break down. Political Analysis is fundamentally about understanding human psychology in groups, understanding historical precedent, being able to gauge and predict human patterns off of this, and ending it in forming that into coherent explanations. The problem once you enter unprecedented territory is you are relying on half the info. So psychology wise? If the Democrats keep it up expect a lot more anger, a slowly then quickly building resentment once a critical mass is reached. And from there?
It depends on if someone does something stupid. A police officer being too heavy-handed, someone deciding they had enough and killing some people, a photogenic death. Anything to focus that hatred towards a target, and give a reason to unleash it. And with that resentment aimed towards Washington... well, there are a lot of possibilities and not enough data to narrow down the likeliest path.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2020
Interesting take...
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
It's an admirable but bad take. The Left-Right divide is much, MUCH too strong. That being said, it's only a bad take because it seems to expect a permanent change. There is an offshoot possibility to create some bipartisanship along those lines in the future. Though not in the present state, it would be much down the line assuming Trumpian Populism continues to spread through the party.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2016
A federal lockdown sounds like a Supreme Court case waiting to happen.
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2019
He won't cuck out until he's an elected Manchurian Candidate, as a safety net for 2024/2028. If he was a real threat to the corporate establishment order they would barely be talking about him. The negative press push I'm sure, from under my tin foil, is reverse psychology.
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
Nah, someone being a legit threat makes them -necessary- to talk about. Your line of thought would likely be "If they ignore a serious threat, they won't gain traction due to lack of coverage", yes?
The problem is that it doesn't really work that way. The left doesn't have a monopoly on news. Leaving aside the every present word-of-mouth, you have political campaign events, right-leaning news sites and outlets, and the ever-present internet and radio news sources. Put simply, a good candidate WILL be known eventually. So why not ignore it until then? Well, because it would let them -entrench-, locking down the right-wing vote in its entirety. And with it locked down they would have absolute free reign to begin their sales pitch to independents.
Ironically, ignoring them would allow them to create an unassailable position of strength.
- Joined
- May 25, 2013
I obviously don't have any real hard numbers in front of me but I can easily imagine a case made that there's a lot of the vocal "the left" that now consists of micro minorities like trans, tech hyperrich/big pharma, uniparty, etc to a point that a populist group could continue to suck up more alienated people
if it happens it isn't tomorrow, but I can at least entertain a case for the concept in general however optimistic that might be
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2018
It could work, if the left-populists weren't the useful idiots for the elitists, and are too busy eating their own tails to be anything other than election season cronies.
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
I do have the numbers, and yes this is happening.
It is -slow-, really really slow and would require a decade at least. But it's why I keep harping on why the Democrats depressing their own vote is bad.
Effectively, it works like this. Assume the Democrats have 100 voters. 50 are absolute, dyed in the Blue voters. 30 are Strong Blue. and 20 are Lean Blue. They then do something stupid, 10 of those Lean Blue decide to not vote next time. Come the next election, with 90 votes, they do something else stupid. 10 more Lean Blue stop voting, and the damage has made 10 each of Strong and Dyed in the Wool go down a step. So now it's 40 Dyed, 30 Strong, and 10 Lean, with 18 depressed. Wait... 18?
Yah, 2 of those from the initial drop are now Lean Red.
It's really slow, but a slowly growing trendline. A Depressed vote has a chance to nudge over to an opposing Lean vote whenever the thing that depressed them continues. Also, statistically, once a vote is Depressed it won't come back ever.
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2019
I miss my Thunkful Rating to respond to a post as "I don't completely agree but I think you have good points" with out having to clutter up the thread with a post.
I'm not trying to say they can cover up an actually threatening outsider populist, but I think they wouldn't give one the coverage they are giving Desantis. We're years out from the next election, and he's already getting national name recognition and a genuine push to think of him as the a Real™ Conservative to support over Trump. It gives him a huge leg up if there was an actually locally popular politician that wasn't under the heel of the national elites.
Blake Chortles
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2020
I'd rather be ruled by fatcat elites then leftist 'populists'.
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
Ah, that specific thing. You then come close to it. It's not that DeSantis is being controlled, it's that the left really, REALLY doesn't want Trump. The common consensus is that if Trump gets in again he is going to be a -vengeful bastard-. A good bit of the schizophrenic media coverage on DeSantis (The stuff that praises him when not building him up as the Next Mega Hitler) is an attempt to build him up in the hopes that the media can trigger a feud between the two where DeSantis wins and not Trump. Because no matter DeSantis politics, he won't be anywhere near as driven to crush the media, the establishment, and the left in general.
Now, there is some hope that DeSantis will be more willing to 'play ball' as well. But he just... lacks the usual connections to be a puppet.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
Seems like they're going to use the eviction crisis to justify the lockdowns - a 2 week lockdown while Congress goes on vacation and no one can be kicked out while the lockdown is in effect. So why are they doing this instead of just legislating it? IDK, but maybe its a test on the limits of Executive power? If they can create a real crisis and then force the SC to evaluate their solution, it puts lots of pressure on the SC to allow this, setting precedent, or to strike it down, making them eat the fallout.
The SC is a target. If they're going to force a crisis to destroy the Constitution, then they need to erode the SC.
The SC is a target. If they're going to force a crisis to destroy the Constitution, then they need to erode the SC.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2018
I don't have the time to post all of the tweets, but Bill Melugin has a lot of coverage of the situation, just scroll down his profile:
https://twitter.com/BillFOXLA/ (https://archive.ph/w4JUq)
Here's what's going on today:
https://twitter.com/BillFOXLA/status/1422230282791436290 (https://archive.ph/ADVOu)
https://twitter.com/BillFOXLA/status/1422247796715970562 (https://archive.ph/T23CM)
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2020
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2020
Guess they will replace us.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2020
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2017
And yet they'll threaten you to get the jab and let unvaccinated illegal immigrants spread across the country to small communities, bussed there by the very people screaming at you to stay home.
Guess it's so you won't notice the feds stuffing a few million voters into your nice little red community.
Billy Beer
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2021
If only a load of houses could suddenly become available, then these poor, innocent, Pre-Americans could have a roof over their heads.
How do we make loads of houses empty in one fell swoop? Hmmm
- Status