RBG’s dead and Mitch is gonna do it

dreng3

Elite Member
Apr 24, 2020
301
161
48
Country
Denmark
Yeah, people try to get rid of parties, but it just doesn't work.

Preferential voting allows more parties, though in Australia we've still only got 2 really viable options (Labor and the Liberal/National coalition), with the Greens way below either of them.
It would definitely require a change in mentality, here in Denmark we have 14 parties in what is equivalent to congress and senate. There is a total of 179 representatives and the smallest parties have a single member, while the largest have 42 and 48 respectively.
But, as you might note, 48 is still pretty far from the 90 votes you'll need to pass anything. That way coalition building becomes a requirement, the parties are forced to interact and negotiate with each other.
That's what I'd want for the US, instead of this all or nothing BS.
 

Houseman

I'm Captain Basch fon Ronsenburg of Dalmasca!
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
2,132
542
118
I'm sorry. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings by calling out sexist statements.
Oh, so you really weren't asking a good faith question, you were just trying to "call out" something.
Just be honest and up-front about what you're trying to do instead of being passive-aggressive about it. That's much more constructive.
 

Avnger

Trash Goblin
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
317
256
68
Country
United States
Oh, so you really weren't asking a good faith question, you were just trying to "call out" something.
Just be honest and up-front about what you're trying to do instead of being passive-aggressive about it. That's much more constructive.
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
1,709
797
118
It would definitely require a change in mentality,
Yeah well, good luck with that. We still have a depressingly large percent of our population that thinks things like ,the world is flat, that it's only 6000 years old, and that eating a cracker and grape juice (or wine if your fancy) will protect you from negative energy from the dawn of time that is stuck to your person because one gullible lady ate an apple that a snake told her to, and sky daddy got pissed and cursed everyone of her loins until the end of time.

So.....if they still think THAT shit is perfectly reasonable, the idea that "hey, maybe we should have more points of view in our government system" is a pipe dream by comparison.
 

dreng3

Elite Member
Apr 24, 2020
301
161
48
Country
Denmark
Yeah well, good luck with that. We still have a depressingly large percent of our population that thinks things like ,the world is flat, that it's only 6000 years old, and that eating a cracker and grape juice (or wine if your fancy) will protect you from negative energy from the dawn of time that is stuck to your person because one gullible lady ate an apple that a snake told her to, and sky daddy got pissed and cursed everyone of her loins until the end of time.

So.....if they still think THAT shit is perfectly reasonable, the idea that "hey, maybe we should have more points of view in our government system" is a pipe dream by comparison.
Naah, those people aren't the problem, most of them are simply misled, the problem is the ones making money off of them. Whatever evangelical will usually believe what the local pastor says because that's how they've been trained, we need to nab the pastor, or even the seminary school. We can't go straight for the top with politicians, they're too entrenched and make their living preaching what the people already believe in order to get reelected. And we can't start from the bottom because many of these people are, frankly speaking, too stupid or disinterested to educate themselves.
We must aim at the middle, the institutions that guide the people.
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
1,709
797
118
Naah, those people aren't the problem, most of them are simply misled, the problem is the ones making money off of them. Whatever evangelical will usually believe what the local pastor says because that's how they've been trained, we need to nab the pastor, or even the seminary school. We can't go straight for the top with politicians, they're too entrenched and make their living preaching what the people already believe in order to get reelected. And we can't start from the bottom because many of these people are, frankly speaking, too stupid or disinterested to educate themselves.
We must aim at the middle, the institutions that guide the people.
No, those people very much ARE part of the problem, because they represent a significant percent of the voting population, that helps to keep these systems stagnant and archaic.

And they are not beyond reforming, as the majority of people who don't believe those things, often started believing them,and were convinced otherwise over time. I agree the institutions also need to be addressed, but as long as a not insignificant portion of the population keeps allowing the shit to happen because they think it's a good idea, it won't change the institutions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lil devils x

dreng3

Elite Member
Apr 24, 2020
301
161
48
Country
Denmark
No, those people very much ARE part of the problem, because they represent a significant percent of the voting population, that helps to keep these systems stagnant and archaic.

And they are not beyond reforming, as the majority of people who don't believe those things, often started believing them,and were convinced otherwise over time. I agree the institutions also need to be addressed, but as long as a not insignificant portion of the population keeps allowing the shit to happen because they think it's a good idea, it won't change the institutions.
But you can't deal with those people without handling the institutions that keep instilling the incorrect notions.
You can shut down Alex Jones or Sean Hannity if you want, but it won't matter, because they're products of a system, and that system starts with the institutions that raise them.
People need outside influences to shape them, but another person simply doesn't appear authoritative enough to change beliefs that affirm worldviews or grant special privileges(real or false). It requires a concentrated effort and the backing of an institution from which to derive authority.
The people we're talking about is like the head of the hydre, cutting off a single head does nothing, instead the body, the institutions, must become the target.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
1,945
686
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Actually the President/Executive Branch cannot make any laws. Only Congress can actually make laws or change existing laws:

"All legislative power in the government is vested in Congress, meaning that it is the only part of the government that can make new laws or change existing laws. "
.

And even though women are more than half the population, women ONLY make up 25 % of the Senate and 23 % of the House. So yea, this idea of women controlling much of anything right now is beyond absurd.
Yes your correct

I deliberately picked this picture because a cabinet showing a pic of ALL representatives would have been hard to see, this has been a problem from both sides of politics and cabinet usually leads policy
 

Schadrach

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 25, 2020
135
40
33
Country
US
If over turned by non-activists as such, abortion does not become illegal: the issue is returned to the states.
Roe is the only reason abortion is legal in WV at all. Our old law banning abortion was never repealed, merely deemed unconstitutional and unenforceable (at the state level as well as due to Roe). Then in 2018 we passed a constitutional amendment reading: “Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires funding of abortion”, which is there specifically to circumvent the state Supreme Court ruling against said abortion law. It passed with 52% of the vote and I personally know several people who were misinformed (they thought that voting against the amendment was specifically voting for state funding of abortions through increased taxes - because that's the best way to sell it to people who have a strong opinion about how much they pay in taxes and what those taxes fund but not as strong a position regarding abortion).

And even though women are more than half the population, women ONLY make up 25 % of the Senate and 23 % of the House. So yea, this idea of women controlling much of anything right now is beyond absurd.
Largely because not enough women run. Women who run for office have a similar rate of success to men running under similar conditions. Now, if you're a Dem woman running against an incumbent GOP man in a deep red state, well, it's not your gender that's keeping you out of office.

Even then, it's worth noting that only 25% of Senate and 23% of the House are women because that's who was voted for, by a group of voters that is slight majority female.

I wonder, would you support a law akin that CA affirmative action bill regarding corporate boards (which if you read carefully mandates either firing men from those positions or having at least 3 women, regardless of the size of the board beforehand - adding a spot for a woman instead of replacing a man with a woman makes the board bigger requiring another spot for a woman until there are at least 3) that mandated that at least one US Senator from each state must be female?

Though this is STILL not represented in top schools, as top schools still often discriminate against women
Both of these are an example of a fallacy of composition used often in gender discussion where a tiny slice is cut such that that slice favors men and is then used to argue that men are favored more generally (same reason we went from talking about women in college to women in STEM, because looking at women in college started favoring women so there was a need to look at only the majors that strongly favor men). What's interesting is that in many of those same cases taking a slice from the bottom of the scale also favors men (for example men are overrepresented as billionaires but also as rough-sleeping homeless, the former being proof of patriarchy and the latter something to be quietly ignored).

Example: In California, when forming corporate boards, by law, they are required to engage in bigotry against men.
If you read that one carefully if you have a board larger than 3 people and aren't meeting the quota you either have to fire men or alternately expand the board to include at least three women. Why three? Because adding a spot for a woman to a board that was larger than three to begin with makes the board big enough to require an additional woman until three are required.