Support NeoGAF

[Particle Physicist]

There is absolutely nothing anyone can say to convince me that the vast majority of the hate Obama gets from the Right isn't race related, either subconsciously or not. You could maybe, MAYBE argue that most of the elected GOP officials don't truly hate him (

yeah right), but their base? Nope. Nope. NOPE.

Their base hates him because he's black and their ignorant, selfish assholes. You've had six (SIX FFS!!!) goddamn years of ridiculous amounts of evidence, dog whistling, dumb as fuck scandals, outright made up shit, yet we still have people in this thread trying to deny it?

Come the fuck on, peeps.

The GOP is a party that's fundamentally built on racism and hatred of non-whites.

Completely and utterly agree with you.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

According to this: http://acasignups.net/spreadsheet

The number is about 93%

I was messing around, because that's the GOPs new talking point

 

[Aaron Strife]

Edit: 28% of the sign-ups were 18-34

The transcript on dailykos says 35%, is that correct?

 

[AntoneM]

New York joined California, Illinois, New Jersey, Washington, and Massachusetts in campaign to assign their electoral colleges to national popular vote instead of state popular vote.

Seems like a great idea to me, but it's not going to happen unless at least a couple Republican states sign on too.

So why aren't republican states signing on? Don't they know the electoral college is completely against them right now? Romney probably would have easily lost with even a 2% popular vote going his way. Do they expect the map to drastically change by itself after Obama? Do they really expect their voter suppression and campaign finance deregulation to turn those swing states completely in republican favor again?

I don't really get it.

Let me get this straight. If they can get enough support, then states that want to use this method can, but not all states have to use this method? So theoretically if the red states GOTV like crazy and have like 60% lopsided votes for the republican, so much so that the republican wins the popular vote; then California would have to delegate its electoral votes to a republican even if the majority of Californians vote democrat?

 

[speculawyer]

Let me get this straight. If they can get enough support, then states that want to use this method can, but not all states have to use this method? So theoretically if the red states GOTV like crazy and have like 60% lopsided votes for the republican, so much so that the republican wins the popular vote; then California would have to delegate its electoral votes to a republican even if the majority of Californians vote democrat?

It is a cleverly written system wherein the end result is that once enough states sign up, the popular vote will determine who wins the presidency. However, it doesn't come into affect until enough states to determine the outcome of the election sign up.

 

[Aaron Strife]

It is a cleverly written system wherein the end result is that once enough states sign up, the popular vote will determine who wins the presidency. End of story.

This. It won't go into effect until the states signed up for it total over 270 votes.

 

[AndyD]

It is a cleverly written system wherein the end result is that once enough states sign up, the popular vote will determine who wins the presidency. However, it doesn't come into affect until enough states to determine the outcome of the election sign up.

Yep. Although individually, it's the small states who currently have over-power in the electoral system that stand to lose the most. And of course the swing states that now get all the attention may see themselves abandoned for the most populous states that are also somewhat internally uniform and so with a disinterested low turnout.

 

[AntoneM]

It is a cleverly written system wherein the end result is that once enough states sign up, the popular vote will determine who wins the presidency. However, it doesn't come into affect until enough states to determine the outcome of the election sign up.

So all states would have to use this system? How does that not violate Article II section I of the constitution?

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

I don't see an ammendment that alters the bolded part.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Obamacare news today

 

[speculawyer]

So all states would have to use this system? How does that not violate Article II section I of the constitution?

No, you don't need all the states. It is basically cleverly done such that once enough states sign up for the system, it won't matter how the other states apportion their electoral votes.

 

[AndyD]

So all states would have to use this system? How does that not violate Article II section I of the constitution?

I don't see an ammendment that alters the bolded part.

They don't change the electoral system's presence. Only that the appointed electors will vote based on the national popular vote, not the state popular vote. So they will wait for the national vote outcome, then cast their votes for that winner, regardless of who was the winner of the state vote outcome.

 

[Aaron Strife]

So all states would have to use this system? How does that not violate Article II section I of the constitution?


I don't see an ammendment that alters the bolded part.

No.

The states in agreement would cast their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote. This would render the EC pointless effectively. They're not forcing the other states to do anything.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Loving Vox:

http://www.vox.com/2014/4/1/5570780/the-two-reasons-obamacare-hit-7-million-enrollees

It was hard to sign up for Obamacare. But what too many insured pundits forgot is it's much worse to be uninsured, or underinsured. And that's true, too, for the people who saw their plans canceled by Obamacare and then needed to decide whether to sign up for a new one.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Does that 93% number only count people who signed up before January first? I doubt the pay rate is 93% for 2014 largely due to premiuns not even being due for many people who signed up in the last couple months.

Let's say it's fundamentally built on classism, which can be hard to fully separate from racism.

I don't think the ideology is the issue, it's the strategy that is used to sell it. The southern strategy has been the GOP's bread and butter since the late 1960s and they show no sign of changing, despite demographic shifts staring them in the face. Let's not forget that for much of the early 60s, republicans were rather sensible on civil rights and a variety of other issues. The Civil Rights and "law and order" movements completely changed US politics.

It's also worth mentioning the demographic cliff is a double edged sword. It benefits republicans every two years in midterm elections but tends to go against them every four years in a presidential election (at least since 2000). The days of the south plus a couple swing states determining the presidency are long gone. Republicans want Jeb Bush to run so bad because they seem to believe Florida is still the key to the presidency. Yet 2012 seemed to prove quite decisively that democrats don't need it (or Ohio...) to win due to demographic shifts in Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, and Colorado (although perhaps Colorado could remain a swing state due to gun issues, who knows).

 

[Aaron Strife]

I doubt gun rights alone will keep Colorado a swing state. A low turnout off-off-year election ousted two state Senate Democrats who will probably be replaced by new Democrats in November. Special elections are horrible predictors.

 

[zargle]

Does that 93% number only count people who signed up before January first? I doubt the pay rate is 93% for 2014 largely due to premiuns not even being due for many people who signed up in the last couple months.

When I signed up in March it pointed me towards paying pretty much right away before the coverage would take effect. Took about an extra day or two for me to be able to while I got into the insurer's system.

 

[StopMakingSense]

Does that 93% number only count people who signed up before January first? I doubt the pay rate is 93% for 2014 largely due to premiuns not even being due for many people who signed up in the last couple months.

He hasn't updated his Paid vs. Unpaid blog post that explains his numbers in the past few weeks, but it looks like the several states are purging the unpaids from their total signups.

 

[WayneMorse]

Looks like Chelsea Clinton is pregnant!

William P. Clinton 2060!

 

[Wilsongt]

Looks like Chelsea Clinton is pregnant!

William P. Clinton 2060!

Damnit! I came here to post that!

 

[The Technomancer]

Looks like Chelsea Clinton is pregnant!

William P. Clinton 2060!

I actually do kind of wish that there was another strong candidate in 2016, just because while I like Hillary, the thought that 6 of the last 8 presidential terms were served by two families makes me a bit uneasy.

 

[WayneMorse]

Beau Biden 2024
George P. Bush 2032
Malia Obama 2040

 

[RustyNails]

Beau Biden 2024
George P. Bush 2032
Malia Obama 2040

Ron Paul 2048

 

[WayneMorse]

Ron Paul 2048

Ron Paul 2048: DEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHED

 

[Oblivion]

I was reading some article on Wapo that said solar energy only makes up 1% of our energy resources? Is that true? That number seems pitifully low.

 

[Mario]

I was reading some article on Wapo that said solar energy only makes up 1% of our energy resources? Is that true? That number seems pitifully low.

If it's talking about resources rather than consumption, are they factoring in oil, gas, and coal reserves perhaps?

 

[sc0la]

The transcript on dailykos says 35%, is that correct?

35% is all under 35 including kids, 18-34 is 28%

 

[benjipwns]

So all states would have to use this system? How does that not violate Article II section I of the constitution?


I don't see an ammendment that alters the bolded part.

If the state legislature agrees to it, why can't they do it?

They can let that octopus who selects World Cup winners or whatever pick the electoral votes if they want. Even if it did die four years ago or whenever.

 

[zero shift]

So how much longer do we have to wait for demographic shifts to work their magic before the GOP falls to irrelevancy?

 

[zero_suit]

So how much longer do we have to wait for demographic shifts to work their magic before the GOP falls to irrelevancy?

Hopefully very soon

 

[Wilsongt]

Reid called the Nevada rancher folks domestic terrorist, which is true. But, the right is now gonna go all in on it, I am sure.

 

[speculawyer]

Reid called the Nevada rancher folks domestic terrorist, which is true. But, the right is now gonna go all in on it, I am sure.

Good! They are gonna end up looking like fools.

This guy was a moocher who was already getting a below market rate to allow his cattle graze on our land but then decided not to even pay that subsidized rate.

Q. What do you call a man who mooches off Uncle Sugar for decades?
A. A conservative hero!

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Reid called the Nevada rancher folks domestic terrorist, which is true. But, the right is now gonna go all in on it, I am sure.

LOL Hannity (Eric Bolling is subbing) is leading with this.

 

[Wilsongt]

LOL Hannity (Eric Bolling is subbing) is leading with this.

I read some where a few days ago that, other than local news stations, Fox News was the only news truck on site, lol

Why oh why is the daily show on break?!

Never mind: Maddow's got my fix.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rachel-maddow-tears-apart-fox-news-pitiful-bundy-ranch-coverage/

 

[Gotchaye]

New York joined California, Illinois, New Jersey, Washington, and Massachusetts in campaign to assign their electoral colleges to national popular vote instead of state popular vote.

Seems like a great idea to me, but it's not going to happen unless at least a couple Republican states sign on too.

So why aren't republican states signing on? Don't they know the electoral college is completely against them right now? Romney probably would have easily lost with even a 2% popular vote going his way. Do they expect the map to drastically change by itself after Obama? Do they really expect their voter suppression and campaign finance deregulation to turn those swing states completely in republican favor again?

I don't really get it.

As it is now, the NPV compact would significantly disadvantage Republicans because it doesn't have any sort of inter-state vote normalization. Republicans might be more competitive in the popular vote than in the electoral college now, but that doesn't mean much. What happens when California makes voting mandatory? Democrats do better in higher turnout elections, and under NPV states matter in proportion to their population and voter turnout, so Democrats stand to gain in the popular vote by boosting turnout in blue states. Republicans can try to boost turnout in red states, but they have less room to grow, and would do worse in each state, proportionally, than they do now.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

lol rand paul: "there is a legitimate constitutional question on if the Endangered Species Act should be enforced by the state of the federal government"

"I hope the government doesn't provoke anything"

"the important needs of property owners"

As it is now, the NPV compact would significantly disadvantage Republicans because it doesn't have any sort of inter-state vote normalization. Republicans might be more competitive in the popular vote than in the electoral college now, but that doesn't mean much. What happens when California makes voting mandatory? Democrats do better in higher turnout elections, and under NPV states matter in proportion to their population and voter turnout, so Democrats stand to gain in the popular vote by boosting turnout in blue states. Republicans can try to boost turnout in red states, but they have less room to grow, and would do worse in each state, proportionally, than they do now.

probably unconstitutional but yeah that kind of thing would mean dems turn up the turn out machine in strongholds. We have a numerical majority.

edit:
omg there are more non-religious people on this panel agreeing to christian overreach on Hannity. HOLY CRAP THERE IS SANITY ON HANNITY

 

[Oblivion]

If it's talking about resources rather than consumption, are they factoring in oil, gas, and coal reserves perhaps?

They didn't say. Here's the quote (was on the Hill, not Wapo like I originally thought):

The initiative is an attempt to boost the share of renewable sources in the nation’s energy portfolio. Currently, 1 percent of U.S. energy comes from solar installations, according to the Energy Department's stat shop.

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2...e-pushes-solar-energy-to-fight-climate-change

Reid called the Nevada rancher folks domestic terrorist, which is true. But, the right is now gonna go all in on it, I am sure.

Haha, nice. I didn't think Reid was gonna agitate these dipshits any further, though.

 

[Chichikov]

Clinton's second term successes were largely due to triangulation, ie taking republican talking points and passing them. Obama hasn't really been willing to do that outside of a few olive branches. I think part of his failure is due to him being a bad politician, at least with respect to working in Washington; obviously he's a great politician in terms of campaigning.

So now we're faulting Obama for not gutting welfare in order to get re-elected?
Fuck that noise.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

edit:
omg there are more non-religious people on this panel agreeing to christian overreach on Hannity. HOLY CRAP THERE IS SANITY ON HANNITY

dont u dare give him a new tagline for his show

 

[Averon]

Haha, nice. I didn't think Reid was gonna agitate these dipshits any further, though.

I'm not surprised. Reid has been far more willing to get aggressive with the right over the pass couple years.

 

[RustyNails]

Meanwhile in opposite land

“This law has disrupted health care for millions of Americans, sent premiums skyrocketing, limited access to doctors, and cancelled plans, and even after all of that havoc, its ability to add to the insurance rolls is based largely on the fact that it forced Americans to purchase government-mandated coverage under the threat of costly penalties from the IRS,” said House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Michigan. “The administration still has not answered basic questions about enrollment and why it will not support fairness for all.”

 

[PhoenixDark]

So now we're faulting Obama for not gutting welfare in order to get re-elected?
Fuck that noise.

Of course I'm not saying that.

 

[Chichikov]

Of course I'm not saying that.

I'm not sure what are you saying then.
Clinton "got shit done" mostly because he caved, he was smart enough to make it look like he didn't (mainly by giving up before hand), but that's nothing to be celebrated.
Also, Obama gave waaaaay more to the GOP than a few olive branches, shit, the ACA is pretty much Clintonian triangulation.

edit: that came out a bit too angry, I'm not angry at you, I'm angry at Clinton.

 

[Piecake]

Meanwhile in opposite land

What is he referring to when he says fairness to all? Can't imagine its the fairness to be blocked from insurance for having a pre-existing condition...

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Haha, nice. I didn't think Reid was gonna agitate these dipshits any further, though.

I can't tell if he's getting ready for 2016 or not gonna run and just trolling

 

[Aaron Strife]

I'm not sure what are you saying then.
Clinton "got shit done" mostly because he caved, he was smart enough to make it look like he didn't (mainly by giving up before hand), but that's nothing to be celebrated.
Also, Obama gave waaaaay more to the GOP than a few olive branches, shit, the ACA is pretty much Clintonian triangulation.

edit: that came out a bit too angry, I'm not angry at you, I'm angry at Clinton.

Look, Obama's a failure because he didn't triangulate the way Clinton did, which was bad, but Clinton was a success because he triangulated.

 

[Oblivion]

I've always hated Clinton's eagerness to give into Newt and his shithead cohorts in congress.

The great Ronald Reagan gave into Democratic policies too, but at least he got something in return. What did Clinton get throughout all that time? SCHIP? While it's a good program, it certainly wasn't worth doing shit like welfare reform, cutting the capital gains tax and all those stupid social pieces of legislation (DOMA, DADT, etc.)

 

[cartoon_soldier]

http://www.thewire.com/global/2014/...hy-an-american-plane-ended-up-in-iran/360872/

Taking bets on how much time before conspiracy theorists pop up

 

[The Librarian]

So now we're faulting Obama for not gutting welfare in order to get re-elected?
Fuck that noise.

He's trolling.

 

[RustyNails]

What is he referring to when he says fairness to all? Can't imagine its the fairness to be blocked from insurance for having a pre-existing condition...

I vaguely recall that there was a GOP talking point about federal workers having a better government sponsored healthcare than anyone on the exchanges, and the part of the law that said Congress and their staff were exempt from having to enroll on the exchanges.

 

[FyreWulff]

Yep. Although individually, it's the small states who currently have over-power in the electoral system that stand to lose the most. And of course the swing states that now get all the attention may see themselves abandoned for the most populous states that are also somewhat internally uniform and so with a disinterested low turnout.

I think CGPGrey's video does a good job explaining why the electoral college actually makes that worse, and popular vote system wouldn't just let the big cities run the country:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k