World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[BogusMeatFactory]

The most dangerous and disturbing thing Trump has said this entire election is by saying that the election is rigged so that he will lose. He is encouraging his supporters to patrol the polls. Even though he said in the debate he would support the result during the first debate, he has flat out said he won't in his rallies. This is insane. Voter fraud is insanely rare, insanely difficult to do and what instances that have happened are a result of a mistake in the poll (checking off the wrong name).

He is inciting his followers to protest and revolt if the election doesn't go his way regardless of the validity of the result.

[CRTGAMER]

Voters are aware that Hillary is married to Bill. They were also aware that George Bush Jr. was the son of George Bush senior. There may be potential political dynasty problems, but it's different than nepotism because we can vote for a different candidate during the primaries, or during the actual election.

You aren't kidding, look at all the Kennedys in office back in the day and even now. Locally, a son of a congressman took over his spot. Sometimes it seems many tend to vote on name recognition only!

Voter fraud is insanely rare, insanely difficult to do and what instances that have happened are a result of a mistake in the poll (checking off the wrong name).

I know what you mean with miscounts and ballots not included. In another area, I consider the Electoral College the biggest Voter Fraud! Usually they go by the popular vote by state, but sometimes (though not often) do not! It had a purpose a century ago when states were so isolated, but today the country should really just stick to the actual vote totals of who gets elected. Take the total counts nationwide and not rounded off to each state.

EDIT
Do any states still count by hand? That really needs to be abolished and have everything counted by an automated reader. No, not the dreaded chads, but either the #2 pencil (mail in ballot) or computers with public friendly touch screen set at every polling station.

[prfsnl_gmr]

The most dangerous and disturbing thing Trump has said this entire election is by saying that the election is rigged so that he will lose.

I agree with this completely. His rhetoric is, IMO, extremely irresponsible, and it undercuts our democracy. (To a lesser extent, he did the same thing with Barack Obama, and called every primary he lost "rigged" too. So, this is not entirely unexpected from him.) Honestly, early voting in NC starts on October 20, and I cannot get to the polls soon enough to vote against him (and our incumbent governor). He is such an awful, awful candidate, and he brings out the very worst in American society.

[dsheinem]

I know what you mean with miscounts and ballots not included. In another area, I consider the Electoral College the biggest Voter Fraud! Usually they go by the popular vote by state, but sometimes (though not often) do not!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless ... to_present

These "faithless electors" haven't really ever made any kind of difference - certainly not in modern politics. It's a bit of a red herring to raise suspicion about the electoral college as being some kind of potential problem.

[prfsnl_gmr]

I know what you mean with miscounts and ballots not included. In another area, I consider the Electoral College the biggest Voter Fraud! Usually they go by the popular vote by state, but sometimes (though not often) do not!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless ... to_present

These "faithless electors" haven't really ever made any kind of difference - certainly not in modern politics. It's a bit of a red herring to raise suspicion about the electoral college as being some kind of potential problem.

The electoral college is a brilliant system:

http://www.heritage.org/research/report ... -democracy

It really demonstrates the framers' genius, and it ensures that all parts of the country are represented in a national election.

[samsonlonghair]

it ensures that all parts of the country are represented in a national election.

But are they? If the Democrats stand no chance of winning Texas, and the Republicans stand no chance of winning California, how exactly are all parts of the country represented? It seems to me that both major parties concentrate on trying to win the eleven or twelve swing states, and the other thirty-eight or thirty-nine states are taken for granted.

[Ack]

The corruption claims against Hillary are overblown, though arguments that she isn't trustworthy do have merit due to her history of changing opinions over time on controversial topics such as gay marriage, the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, etc. The real question is whether this stems from a personal evolution or political expediency, which I admit likely only she can know. That said, while it means her opinions may be more difficult to pin down in the long run, we have an idea of where she is in the short term, and we can vote based on how we feel about her statements. We can also look to her voting record in Congress as well as her tenure as the Secretary of State, which I consider a mixed bag.

I support her decision to create an annual review process for the Department of State and appreciate her focus on civilian diplomacy as well as encouraging women's rights and gay rights throughout the world. I greatly disliked the Russian reset and felt the invasion of Libya was an ideological mistake for President Obama and Secretary Clinton. As for whether it was a strategic boon or mistake, I'm not sure whether a Libya with Gaddafi in charge and committing human rights abuses is preferable to the quagmire failed state it has become(not that I have any love lost for Gaddafi. I'm glad the prick is dead, just as I am that Saddam is). I do think we failed to capitalize on the Arab Spring revolts, and in particular I don't believe we handled the 2011 Egyptian protests well. As for Syria, Clinton devised a plan early on with then-CIA director David Petraeus to arm rebel groups that I supported, but unfortunately it was not implemented. Also of note is Clinton's work towards the 2011 political reforms in Myanmar, which I do agree with.

So yes, mixed bag. More important than the Middle East mess we are currently facing are how we handle China and particularly Russia. Vladimir Putin openly loathes Hillary Clinton and blames the Clinton family for Russia's economic problems of the 1990s(the Clintons are routinely blamed for it), and his threats of open warfare have me highly concerned, both in that he might actually go that far(Russian nuclear warfare policy in the last decade has become a frightening subject) and that he feels the need to saber-rattle this drastically. I worry that if Clinton is elected, there will be no manner by which we can deescalate from an inevitable conflict.

================================================

Now to talk about Trump...whom I have not heard any concrete policy proposals from which have not at some point then been dropped or heavily modified. If Hillary is an untrustworthy political opportunist, Trump is an entire unknown who is possibly also an opportunist, possibly an eccentric who doesn't understand the weight of what he says, and possibly a potential dictator based on the language he uses and the manner by which he asserts himself. Trump frightens me in many ways, in that he seems to have no appreciation for the how and why our system works, in his willingness to indulge in the prejudice of the masses as a means to attract votes or may actually believe such things himself, and in that he seems entirely inconsistent but willing to browbeat anyone who gets in his way.

When I see his declarations regarding immigration, mass-deportations, self-policing and profiling, and his attempts at "outreach" to minority communities, I am reminded of the continuous waves of anti-immigration groups or manners by which we have contained "unwanted" minorities in the past: the Know Nothing Party, the Chinese Exclusion Act, the Japanese internment camps, etc.. I think of how racism and prejudice led to the rise of organized crime in minority communities and is always inevitably used as propaganda against us by our international opponents as proof that we cannot and do not live up to our ideals.

I cannot vote for this man. I do not want to vote for Hillary over concerns of the US-Russian relationship, but I cannot vote for Trump.

================================================

As for how I'm leaning now...well, truth be told, I'm not particularly happy about my choices. During the Republican primaries I took my time forming an opinion and decided John Kasich was the best choice of the lot. Unfortunately Trump ended up winning the Republican nomination process, and with Clinton ending up as the Democratic nominee, I began to look at third parties as potentials. Then Gary Johnson had his multiple foreign policy gaffes, and I decided that he would not be the best choice either. As of this point, I'm cautiously watching independent candidate Evan McMullin. I'm also interested in seeing if some of the NeverTrump movement members, such as Mitt Romney or Condoleezza Rice, decide to endorse him, or whether Republicans I respect such as Jon Hunstman and John McCain decide to support him after backing away from Trump.

[prfsnl_gmr]

it ensures that all parts of the country are represented in a national election.

But are they? If the Democrats stand no chance of winning Texas, and the Republicans stand no chance of winning California, how exactly are all parts of the country represented? It seems to me that both major parties concentrate on trying to win the eleven or twelve swing states, and the other thirty-eight or thirty-nine states are taken for granted.

The electoral college is a check on the power of vocal minorities, and it ensure somewhat proportional representation in a presidential election regardless of voter turnout. So, for example, if people in Texas were really sore about an issue and the voter turnout there was 100% while the voter turnout in the rest of the country was only 25%, the electoral college would prevent the group in Texas from having and outsized effect on the election.

<Ack being awesome>

Keep being awesome. Great post, Ack.

[Sarge]

I'm a fan of the electoral college, myself. It slightly tilts things back in favor of less populous states. If it weren't in place, politicians could completely ignore more rural states and just concentrate on the largest population centers. It's almost there as it is, since we've clustered a lot more than in the past, but it's still useful.

[Xeogred]

Interesting thing I'm finding about Gary Johnson is that a lot of strong long time libertarians don't seem to like him at all haha.

I've really not touched this topic at all and don't know how much I'll dip in, but don't some of you guys think globalism is probably faulty and bad? That's been one of the most interesting topics as of late for me. I don't think Obama has been that great and it really does seem like Hillary will be more of the same, and the tension with Russia seems very severe. I've briefly heard that because we waste so much spending, their nuclear development has far surpassed ours by this point. Very frightening.

I do think the media has greatly overblown things against Trump, but I'm with others above in that I don't really grasp exactly what he would actually do and if his plans have merit. He's got nice subtitles for his plans but I'm not really seeing the bullet points and breakdowns.

I hate to say admit that I'm not voting. It's been frustrating and I don't really side with anyone fully and I don't want to play the counter vote. I liked Dan Carlin's latest Common Sense podcast episode... unless things change for the better in the coming years I think we're looking at some serious revolt or revolution of sorts by 2020. The tension isn't getting any lighter.