Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Ted Cruz

7 (6.5%)

Rick Santorum

16 (14.8%)

Michelle Bachmann

13 (12%)

Chris Christie

23 (21.3%)

Rand Paul

49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107

[MetalSlimeHunt]

What Iran's people want ultimately isn't that relevant to what Iran is and does. It was and is an Islamist theocracy.

A dictatorial regime going against the will of the people doesn't last long. Especially not when the economy goes bad.

The Iranian Theocracy is not as absolute as it sometimes seems.

Bread and Circuses, man. Bread and Circuses. The Guardian Council has several times struck down even basic women's rights laws, ones that were supported by the traditionalists, no less.

[10ebbor10]

Of course, but it still means the poor get fed, rather than shot, in the event of a revolution.

[FearfulJesuit]

It's important to remember that it's the middle class who are the theocracy's biggest problem, not the poor. It was the poor who supported the Ayatollah in '79, because he preached honest (if backwards) religious values, and looked much better than the hypocrisy of the Shah.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I would say it is more akin to the poor being fed, and then shot if they aren't happy with that, and just shot if they're too outside the government's viewpoint.

[FearfulJesuit]

Government shutdown is a near certainty. About all I can say is: it was going to happen one of these days, and perhaps the sooner the better so the GOP is forced to confront its demons.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The sooner they are relegated to history, the better off we will all be. Between this and immigration reform, 2014 is going to be a reckoning.

[FearfulJesuit]

The sooner they are relegated to history, the better off we will all be. Between this and immigration reform, 2014 is going to be a reckoning.

I would cast doubt on 2014, because the demographics of midterm elections are not the same as the demographics of presidential year elections. The Republicans might well lose the House if their fuckup is widely recognized, but it's an uphill battle. (The Democrats need to win at least 17 seats to retake the House; the largest gain by an incumbent in the House during a midterm year is nine.) But, hey. The current Congress is exceptionally screwed up, so exceptional things might happen.

If they do lose, it will be by the slimmest of margins, provoking (even more) mass lunacy and hysteria within the GOP. If they keep the House, it will send exactly the wrong message, namely that extremism and holding the country's economy hostage is a winning tactic; a replay of this year's shenanigans is likely to provoke an even worse response come 2016. As for individual GOP congressmen, at this point, they are fucked six ways from Sunday, and they only have themselves to blame for it. Show signs of sanity at the last minute to rescue the impending debt ceiling and be primaried; stay the course and- possibly- lose your party's seat. I know gerrymandering is widely cited as a reason that the GOP is able to maintain its cycle of lunacy...but a lot of the Democrats' key constituencies don't vote as often as white evangelical Baby Boomers, and if we enter anything like serious double-dip recession, with only Your Republican Congressman to blame, those otherwise invisible Democrats will likely surge to the polls to unseat him. It's probably too early to see what will happen. But we'll have a clearer view on Tuesday.

[10ebbor10]

And that's why I like mandatory voting. Prevents situations where the extreme/ more outspoken  parties/politicians get a disproportionally large part of the votes.

[FearfulJesuit]

I'm not sure about that. If you're too apathetic to care that the extremists are taking power, why should we consider you informed enough to be heard? Sure, it might prevent loons from taking power...but it just ensures the opposition is mediocre.

[Frumple]

... honestly, I'd half wager that just changing the damned voting day would do a lot to help out with turnout.

[Helgoland]

A good friend of my family (New Yorker) once told me he considered the votin day one of the most undemocratic things in US politics, right up there with disenfranchisement for criminals.

[10ebbor10]

Well, making voting mandatory ensures that the local government must provide everyone with the ability to vote, otherwise, they're breaking their own laws.

[LordSlowpoke]

So essentially, one of the parties in the US two party system is going to collapse very soon. Leaving them with one party only. That's possibly the only way to make democracy more wonderful than it already is.

[Frumple]

Well, making voting mandatory ensures that the local government must provide everyone with the ability to vote, otherwise, they're breaking their own laws.

Yeah, technically they've got the ability to vote right now... usually, anyway. It's just, y'know, on a freaking tuesday. Many aren't able until work lets out and the logistic and psychological issues with that should be bloody obvious. It's also not an actual holiday bloody anywhere, insofar as I could tell. It's a civic holiday in a handful of states* -- that is, they have to give workers time off, with pay, to go vote -- but that's the extent of it. Distance voting of varying sorts is... fairly painless, somewhat, sometimes, but it's still a fair pain in the ass and there's eternal effort to limit voter access to it. Mandatory voting would be less attractive if the voting process as-is wasn't quite so, well. Vote blocking. Really is a kinda' fucked up situation, t'be honest. One of those, "Who the hell thought this was a good idea" things.

*I didn't even know this was a thing until I checked wikipedia. It's not where I'm at.

[Sheb]

Yeah, why don't you hold polls on Sunday?