RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Rebkell’s Official Democratic Primary Ballot
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Which ticket is your choice for POTUS and VP for the Democratic nomination?
Joe Biden (P) Stacey Abrams (VP)
64%
 64%  [ 16 ]
Bernie Sanders (P) Elizabeth Warren (VP)
36%
 36%  [ 9 ]
Total Votes : 25

Author Message
Genero36



Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 10809



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 3:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Kansas City mayor is turned away from polls, told he 'wasn't in the system'

Quote:
“I made a video this morning about the importance of voting and then got turned away because I wasn’t in the system even though I’ve voted there for 11 years, including for myself four times!” Lucas said.


Quote:
“A lot of people won’t come back either because they have to go to work or because it has the opportunity to be a slightly embarrassing experience,” Lucas said.

‘Only issue’

Lauri Ealom, the Democratic director of the Kansas City Board of Elections, said the poll worker entered Lucas’ first and last names in the wrong order.


Quote:
Voters are not required to show a photo ID to cast a ballot, but they must provide documentation that contains their name and address. A utility bill, bank statement or paycheck can suffice.

Anyone who cannot provide ID but is still registered to vote may cast a provisional ballot that will be counted if they return to the polling place on Election Day with ID or if the signature on the provisional ballot envelope is determined by local election authority to match the signature on the voter’s registration record.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/kansas-city-mayor-is-turned-away-from-polls-told-he-wasnt-in-the-system/ar-BB110dNL?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=mailsignout



_________________
I'm all for the separation of church and hate.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12717
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 3:56 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
The Democratic Party establishment would rather Donald Trump win a second term than for either Bernie Sanders or even Elizabeth Warren to get anywhere near the levers of power. It’s about politics. Money and privilege and the establishment elites maintaining their hold on all of it. Not sexism, sexual orientation or religion or ethnicity.


Total truth. I can never foresee myself favoring the GOP over Democrats, but they are basically cut from the same cloth when it comes to maintaining power, and being beholden to the dictates of Corporate America and The Wealthy Elite. I have no doubt that's how Bernie got squeezed out of contention 4 years ago. Bernie/Elizabeth/AOC et.al., are NOT what Dems really want as their Power Brokers.

justintyme wrote:
The fact that this perception is so prevalent .... screams for us to explore how we might be falling prey to our implicit biases.


What's to *explore*? We have already learned how the majority of the American Electorate remains ill-informed and devoid of critical thinking skills, as they base their decisions on gottdamm fb feeds. It is this population that both parties manipulate mightily. It IS The American Way.

Personal Fantasy: Bernie runs as an Independent with [Stacey, Elizabeth, Oprah, Michelle, etc.] as his running mate, and Bloomberg finances Weld's independent campaign to siphon off disgruntled Trumpettes that can't bring themselves to vote Dem. 4 way race. Razz Cool


I like it. And ranked-choice voting would be good.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20164



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 3:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
The Democratic Party establishment would rather Donald Trump win a second term than for either Bernie Sanders or even Elizabeth Warren to get anywhere near the levers of power. It’s about politics. Money and privilege and the establishment elites maintaining their hold on all of it. Not sexism, sexual orientation or religion or ethnicity.


Total truth.


Damn straight, Howee.




_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 7753



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 4:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:
tfan wrote:
PUmatty wrote:


You realize that Buttigieg ran statewide in Indiana and lost by a much, much bigger margin than Abrams?


I know it because Amy Klobuchar pointed it out in the debates at least once. She seemed to be the only one of the federal-level candidates who was irritated that a local-level guy was up on the stage. My guess is that being the “gay mayor of South Bend” versus the “mayor of South Bend” was critical in getting him up there. But his speaking modulation and cadence (oratory skills?) is top notch and he may have done it even if a straight white male.


Yes. Because so many gay men done that before. It's such an advantage ...


Have you seen any change in attitudes to gays over your lifetime, particularly among Democrats (who will frequently say that they are the party of diversity and inclusion and complain when they don’t see enough diversity)? I believe it is an advantage in 2020 in the Democratic primary among some swath of voters. The type of thing to move him above some amount of straight white male Senators and Governors in the eyes of primary voters. But it is still a disadvantage with regard to a lot of voters.




Last edited by tfan on 03/10/20 5:09 pm; edited 3 times in total
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 7753



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 4:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

In an interview I saw yesterday Bernie Sanders said that he speaks for 45 minutes to an hour at a rally because he has a lot of issues to cover. Then he said that Biden had a rally/event recently where he spoke for seven minutes. Seven minutes? There is also a claim that Biden has asked for the next debate to be seated.


Mysticwiz



Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 701



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 4:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I picked the not Bernie ticket by default.I'll keep my rant short.I don't agree with most of his policy prescriptions.Even IF i could put that aside, he does not have the votes for what he's advocating,and has NO ability to build the coalition to get it done.Bernie and his surrogates say(and do) things DAILY that's a spit in the face.Every day Bernie burns another bridge then wonders why he has a ceiling to his support


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 12733
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 7:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
Have you seen any change in attitudes to gays over your lifetime, particularly among Democrats (who will frequently say that they are the party of diversity and inclusion and complain when they don’t see enough diversity)?


I shall trust you're serious with this question to PUMatty's response. And I shall presume PUMatty is older than 20, so....YEAH. Any gay person over 30 can probably testify to something approaching a 150-degree turn on attitudes towards gay people, ESPECIALLY among Democrats.

...Or is that not what you meant?? Shocked



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6157
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 8:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
Howee wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
The Democratic Party establishment would rather Donald Trump win a second term than for either Bernie Sanders or even Elizabeth Warren to get anywhere near the levers of power. It’s about politics. Money and privilege and the establishment elites maintaining their hold on all of it. Not sexism, sexual orientation or religion or ethnicity.


Total truth. I can never foresee myself favoring the GOP over Democrats, but they are basically cut from the same cloth when it comes to maintaining power, and being beholden to the dictates of Corporate America and The Wealthy Elite. I have no doubt that's how Bernie got squeezed out of contention 4 years ago. Bernie/Elizabeth/AOC et.al., are NOT what Dems really want as their Power Brokers.

justintyme wrote:
The fact that this perception is so prevalent .... screams for us to explore how we might be falling prey to our implicit biases.


What's to *explore*? We have already learned how the majority of the American Electorate remains ill-informed and devoid of critical thinking skills, as they base their decisions on gottdamm fb feeds. It is this population that both parties manipulate mightily. It IS The American Way.

Personal Fantasy: Bernie runs as an Independent with [Stacey, Elizabeth, Oprah, Michelle, etc.] as his running mate, and Bloomberg finances Weld's independent campaign to siphon off disgruntled Trumpettes that can't bring themselves to vote Dem. 4 way race. Razz Cool


I like it. And ranked-choice voting would be good.


I like it too. Ain't harmony wonderful.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8087
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 8:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I think just about every person in this country would rejoice at the idea of a viable multi-party system--except the Democratic and Republican parties themselves.

The two-party system does nothing but create an us vs. them mentality that encourages building and maintaining power for one's party at the expense of everything else, rather than compromise and coalition building. It, more than anything, is responsible for the deterioration of our democracy.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 7753



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 8:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
Have you seen any change in attitudes to gays over your lifetime, particularly among Democrats (who will frequently say that they are the party of diversity and inclusion and complain when they don’t see enough diversity)?


I shall trust you're serious with this question to PUMatty's response. And I shall presume PUMatty is older than 20, so....YEAH. Any gay person over 30 can probably testify to something approaching a 150-degree turn on attitudes towards gay people, ESPECIALLY among Democrats.

...Or is that not what you meant?? Shocked


It was a rhetorical question.


Genero36



Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 10809



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 9:14 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Bernie is all but DONE.




_________________
I'm all for the separation of church and hate.
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 18653



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 9:19 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
I think just about every person in this country would rejoice at the idea of a viable multi-party system--except the Democratic and Republican parties themselves.

The two-party system does nothing but create an us vs. them mentality that encourages building and maintaining power for one's party at the expense of everything else, rather than compromise and coalition building. It, more than anything, is responsible for the deterioration of our democracy.


Have to get rid of the electoral college first, and ranked voting would be a must, or we'll just end up with someone 20 percent of the voters wanted, which would be worse than what it is right now.

But, btw...black voters are not the establishment. They are the base of the Democratic party. Bernie has been running for President for five years, and failed miserably at getting those voters. His loss is his fault. Just like 2016.



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
Genero36



Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 10809



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 9:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Yang is endorsing Biden. I hope he gets a cabinet position if Biden wins in November (and I don't think he will).

Warren still hasn't endorsed anyone and at this point she doesn't need to. Her base voted for Biden tonight.



_________________
I'm all for the separation of church and hate.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12717
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 9:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
justintyme wrote:
I think just about every person in this country would rejoice at the idea of a viable multi-party system--except the Democratic and Republican parties themselves.

The two-party system does nothing but create an us vs. them mentality that encourages building and maintaining power for one's party at the expense of everything else, rather than compromise and coalition building. It, more than anything, is responsible for the deterioration of our democracy.


Have to get rid of the electoral college first, and ranked voting would be a must, or we'll just end up with someone 20 percent of the voters wanted, which would be worse than what it is right now.

But, btw...black voters are not the establishment. They are the base of the Democratic party. Bernie has been running for President for five years, and failed miserably at getting those voters. His loss is his fault. Just like 2016.



Aha! So the black vote IS monolithic!

And when Trump is re-elected, it won't be Bernie's fault. Just like 2016.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6157
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 9:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Please, world, stop with the electoral college fantasy rhetoric. It's in the Constitution and not going anywhere.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 7753



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 9:50 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
Please, world, stop with the electoral college fantasy rhetoric. It's in the Constitution and not going anywhere.


It is more compelling if you argue for the electoral college based on merit, not based on it being in a document written back when everyone rode horses and lit candles.


justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8087
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 10:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
Please, world, stop with the electoral college fantasy rhetoric. It's in the Constitution and not going anywhere.

If we were able to actually convince the parties to give up their power (in other words there was such a ground swell of public demand for it that it could not be ignored), and moved to a multi-party system, as part of establishing that system with things like ranked choice voting it's very possible--I'd even go as far as to say it's very likely-- there would be enough support to allow for amending the Constitution.

But I do agree that the EC is unlikely to go away under the status quo. One party (whichever it currently happens to benefit when the issue is broached) will always oppose the change.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6157
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 11:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
Please, world, stop with the electoral college fantasy rhetoric. It's in the Constitution and not going anywhere.


It is more compelling if you argue for the electoral college based on merit, not based on it being in a document written back when everyone rode horses and lit candles.


I don't understand what you are saying.

The electoral college is required by the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land. It cannot be abolished or altered except by amendment of the Constitution, which requires a 2/3 vote in both the House and Senate plus ratification by 3/4 of the states (38). Never going to happen.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 7753



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 11:56 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
tfan wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
Please, world, stop with the electoral college fantasy rhetoric. It's in the Constitution and not going anywhere.


It is more compelling if you argue for the electoral college based on merit, not based on it being in a document written back when everyone rode horses and lit candles.


I don't understand what you are saying.

The electoral college is required by the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land. It cannot be abolished or altered except by amendment of the Constitution, which requires a 2/3 vote in both the House and Senate plus ratification by 3/4 of the states (3Cool. Never going to happen.


I was asking you to justify the electoral college based on it being a good thing.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 12733
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/20 12:04 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
tfan wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
Please, world, stop with the electoral college fantasy rhetoric. It's in the Constitution and not going anywhere.


It is more compelling if you argue for the electoral college based on merit, not based on it being in a document written back when everyone rode horses and lit candles.


I don't understand what you are saying.

The electoral college is required by the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land. It cannot be abolished or altered except by amendment of the Constitution, which requires a 2/3 vote in both the House and Senate plus ratification by 3/4 of the states (3Cool. Never going to happen.

"Never" is an awfully long time. What's to keep Don the Con from modeling things after Xi Jinping, or pulling the latest Putin move, and getting "his" Congress to begin altering the Constitution. Just ban elections, and the Electoral College is dead. You KNOW he actually thinks that way.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6157
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/20 12:24 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
tfan wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
Please, world, stop with the electoral college fantasy rhetoric. It's in the Constitution and not going anywhere.


It is more compelling if you argue for the electoral college based on merit, not based on it being in a document written back when everyone rode horses and lit candles.


I don't understand what you are saying.

The electoral college is required by the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land. It cannot be abolished or altered except by amendment of the Constitution, which requires a 2/3 vote in both the House and Senate plus ratification by 3/4 of the states (3Cool. Never going to happen.


I was asking you to justify the electoral college based on it being a good thing.


I never said it was a good thing. Moreover, it's irrelevant whether I, or you, think it's a good or bad thing. The electoral college will stay in place unless and until 2/3 of the Senate and House and 3/4 of the states all simutaneously think it's a bad thing. Not going to happen.

I've written before about the history of the electoral college and don't feel like repeating myself. Anyone can look it up. Briefly, it was put in place by the Founders because they did not trust a democratic popular vote for president by the easily duped, parochial and block-voting masses. They rejected the idea of Congress selecting the president because of separation of powers concerns. So, they decided to give the voting power for president to the states, just as they did the election of senators. They did this by giving states a proportional number of electors in a "college", which the states can select however they want. The states don't have to hold popular elections to select electors -- e.g., they could have their legislature or governor select the electors -- though all states over time decided to have popular elections in different ways.
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 53883



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/20 1:01 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote




_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 18653



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/20 4:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The Constitution is a living document. It can and has changed.



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 18653



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/20 4:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:


And when Trump is re-elected, it won't be Bernie's fault. Just like 2016.


Bernie didn't help matters last time, and him staying in the race is just as ridiculous this time as it was last time. Biden will now be taking hits from two sides.

That being said, voter suppression, Russian disinformation, and the general ineptness of the press (because Donald makes them money)..all 2016 issues that haven't been fixed..add too it that, this time, we have an 80 year old man running, who isn't breaking a glass ceiling, and doesn't have the ground game nor the money that our last nominee had.. makes me think you are right about the 2020 election winner.



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6157
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/20 6:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
The Constitution is a living document. It can and has changed.


Yes, it's been changed 27 times in 232 years, by the process I've outlined.

One of the changes happened in 1913. The original Constitution provided that senators are elected by the legislatures of each state, and that's the way it was for the first 125 years of our country. In 1913, the 17th Amendment changed that and required that senators thereafter would be elected by popular vote in each state.

On a more general level, it baffles and saddens me that politicians promise and voters believe they will do things when elected that are legally, scientifically, or economically impossible. No president can change the electoral college. No president can take away all guns or do anything by executive action inconsistent with the 2nd Amendment. No president can change the earth's climate. No president can implement programs that would cost tens of trillions of dollars, such as free medical care for all, free universities for all, or a so-called green new deal. Any candidate that promises such things is a pandering phony, and anyone that believes and votes on such promises is ill-informed, a sucker, or a hopelessly unrealistic utopian idealist.

In general, and in my opinion.
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin