Octopus Overlords

Rumpy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 7:37 pm What happens if an Independent wins in the U.S? I think Bernie Sanders got the closest. That's more of a likelihood in Canada with its myriad of parties

Do you mean winning a general election as a third-party or independent candidate? Nobody has ever come close to doing that, but there have been several major spoilers. Ralph Nader, for example, cost Al Gore Florida and the presidency. Theodore Roosevelt took second place as a progressive in 1912 with 27% of the vote, beating the Republican contender, but as my BIL likes to say "second place is first loser." H Ross Perot got 19% of the popular vote in 1992 and people thought a viable third party was being born.

If you mean an independent taking the nomination from one of the established parties, that could describe trump, who was neither a politician nor a partisan before he took over the R Party. His political convictions are only what will benefit him personally and Republicans were already leaning authoritarian after losing to Obama. Before trump upset their apple cart, it looked like they were going to nominate another Bush (Jeb). Trump could just as well have tried to capture the Democratic Party. Would he have fizzled out early if he'd gone that route, or would he have snatched the nomination from the reviled Hillary Clinton? (Unlikely, since she had a firm grip on the party machinery and Democrats are less susceptible to snake oil, but it's not impossible.)

Anyway, the short answer to your question is trump happened.

Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:37 pm

Rumpy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 7:37 pm What happens if an Independent wins in the U.S? I think Bernie Sanders got the closest. That's more of a likelihood in Canada with its myriad of parties

Do you mean winning a general election as a third-party or independent candidate?

Yeah, that's pretty much it. They all end up having to get backed by one of the two parties anytime they get close. On the other hand, probably safer to be vouched by one of the two what with all the chaos going on, and new party addition would require a major reform to even let it happen. You've all had two parties since you became a Country, and there'd be some growing pains to adding more, just like we'd have trouble seeing just two parties in Canada. But there's some food for thought. I wonder if it will eventually evolve.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 1:44 pm I have to agree with Goo here, and that some of the comments are off the chart in terms of American exceptionalism.

I think some of you have not had much exposure to non-UK Europe, or your heads are stuck in the 90’s.

While right-wing populism does seem to be on the rise (again) globally, many liberal democracies around the world are stronger today than ever. Many have evolved more than ours, whereas we seem to be stuck in the past, pointing at the brilliance of the Founders and their foresight as we rapidly devolve into political, civic and societal chaos.

Unless we are able to pivot outside of our standard “America is the greatest country in the world and always will be” mentality, we’re toast. IMVHO.

Our typical democratic peers and allies around the world have been shaking their heads for years at our situation: not out of any sense of schadenfreude (ok maybe a little of that), but I think more out of shock, dismay and sadness.

We may already be the cautionary tale that those peers are pointing to in order to shore up their own systems.

Whenever I think American exceptionalism I watch this video:



But this isn't just a US issue. The conservative far right are aligning across the world. A MAGA Republican feels far more in common with a Russian nationalist than they do their Democrat neighbour. This is a major issue; and our continued freedom requires vigilance and a matching alliance of democratic loving people who accept that we are different and want to build a better world that respects those differences.

The UK has had Boris Johnson and the French have had Le Pen while Australia had Scott Morrison and Tony Abbott. German far right wingers attempted to attack the Reichstag before Jan 6. The Brazilians and the Philippines have had their democracies undermined by Bolsanaro and Duterte.

Rumpy wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 12:36 am

Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:37 pm

Rumpy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 7:37 pm What happens if an Independent wins in the U.S? I think Bernie Sanders got the closest. That's more of a likelihood in Canada with its myriad of parties

Do you mean winning a general election as a third-party or independent candidate?

Yeah, that's pretty much it. They all end up having to get backed by one of the two parties anytime they get close. On the other hand, probably safer to be vouched by one of the two what with all the chaos going on, and new party addition would require a major reform to even let it happen. You've all had two parties since you became a Country, and there'd be some growing pains to adding more, just like we'd have trouble seeing just two parties in Canada. But there's some food for thought. I wonder if it will eventually evolve.

I often wish we had a parliamentary structure where minor parties could achieve minor representation that gives them a seat at the table. Democracy depends on coalitions and compromise, which our system doesn't reward. Minor parties get nothing in national elections. It takes a ridiculous amount of money and organization to compete, and they can tilt the balance but they can never win.

That said, I "threw my vote away" a time or two on spoiler candidates back in the day. If you don't live in a swing state, you can vote your conscience without affecting anything whatsoever. But nowadays the stakes are too high to make protest votes feel good, so I dutifully choose not-evil over evil.

I'm not arguing that the US has no influence on Canada. That's absurd. I'm not turning on anyone either. But if you're going to make fantasy claims, I'm going to be incredulous. Hell, we even discussed some of the fact based reasons why the fantasy is going to experience a lot of resistance.

The UK, Australia and Canada all have parliamentary systems with multiple parties already in place. That alone makes it more difficult (not impossible) for any one party to consolidate power. They aren't bulletproof by any means, but they are more robust and flexible than the US system (imo). I don't really know much about most of Europe's systems. Maybe they are ripe for collapse.

And let's not forget that despite myself and others seeing Drumpf as the face of this crisis, malchior and others will explain that the collapse has been occurring for decades. The US isn't facing a short term crisis triggered by one man. Hell, the GOP stole a SCOTUS seat before Drumpf was even a politician.

My point being, the US's fall (if it happens) did not happen over night. The idea that the rest of the western democracy will crumble immediately afterward is not based on reality. Am I concerned? Yes. With good reason. Our neighbour, who just so happens to have the greatest influence in the world across multiple areas, is toying with authoritarianism.

I just don't think the rest of us are going to fall in line quickly just because America starts pressuring us and our own internal rot.

Unless your definition of quickly is measured in decades. But even then, I don't think it's a sure thing, only a very real possibility.

Good night and good luck everyone. We're going to need it.

Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:37 pm Anyway, the short answer to your question is trump happened.

I can actually remember in the previous drumpf run and early days in the later one where he floated ideas that were designed for mass appeal to left leaning people. It failed to gain traction so he tried something else until it did.

Drumpf has no political viewpoints. Whatever works is what he states is his position. He'll contradict himself in the same speech. It's crazy. No one cares. Insane. Pure demagoguery.

In other words, he's a used car salesman.

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:54 am

Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 9:37 pm Anyway, the short answer to your question is trump happened.

I can actually remember in the previous drumpf run and early days in the later one where he floated ideas that were designed for mass appeal to left leaning people. It failed to gain traction so he tried something else until it did.

Drumpf has no political viewpoints. Whatever works is what he states is his position. He'll contradict himself in the same speech. It's crazy. No one cares. Insane. Pure demagoguery.

According to a documentary I saw on Netflix about him, he got all his advice and pointers from a former wrestler (He'd hosted Wrestlemania at one of his hotels, a bankrupted one no less) , so that's where all that showmanship comes from, where he learned to be loud and aggressive. The name of the wrestler escapes me, but he was quite a piece of work himself with political aspirations of his own.

Kraken wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 2:05 am
I often wish we had a parliamentary structure where minor parties could achieve minor representation that gives them a seat at the table. Democracy depends on coalitions and compromise, which our system doesn't reward. Minor parties get nothing in national elections. It takes a ridiculous amount of money and organization to compete, and they can tilt the balance but they can never win.

That said, I "threw my vote away" a time or two on spoiler candidates back in the day. If you don't live in a swing state, you can vote your conscience without affecting anything whatsoever. But nowadays the stakes are too high to make protest votes feel good, so I dutifully choose not-evil over evil.

Independents winning seats via minor representation is something that does occur in Canada, maybe not at the Federal, but certainly at the Provincial. I just find it odd that in the U.S one can claim themselves as independent and go quite far with it, but never cross the finish line as one. It's like telling someone, well you can be independent, as long as you choose sides.

Of course we knew this:

https://www.the-independent.com/news/wo ... 12435.html

In case you don't want to click through:

Marjorie Taylor Greene admits aim of Biden impeachment is to ensure Democrats ‘lose big’ at next election

May it badly backfire.

That would be great, but given our current political climate, not sure how, or with whom.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 12:29 pm That would be great, but given our current political climate, not sure how, or with whom.

Voters who have been staying home and the coming generations. They turned out in 2022 fairly strong. See SC and abortion. "The base" couldn't be more fired up than they were in 2020 and 2022. But voters being convinced the economy is terrible under Biden and leaning toward both sides are corrupt could stay home in 2024. If the investigation proves to be stupid wheel spinning with no other intent but "to ensure Democrats ‘lose big’" it could very well implode. I'm feeling occasionally optimistic when I see what's happening.

LordMortis wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 12:41 pm

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 12:29 pm That would be great, but given our current political climate, not sure how, or with whom.

Voters who have been staying home and the coming generations. They turned out in 2022 fairly strong. See SC and abortion. "The base" couldn't be more fired up than they were in 2020 and 2022. But voters being convinced the economy is terrible under Biden and leaning toward both sides are corrupt could stay home in 2024. If the investigation proves to be stupid wheel spinning with no other intent but "to ensure Democrats ‘lose big’" it could very well implode. I'm feeling occasionally optimistic when I see what's happening.

Interesting. I just don't see voters who have been staying at home suddenly being outraged at even more shenanigans, incompetency and corruption, no matter who's side is to blame (but I could be very wrong on that...just a "feels" comment). I see these people as completely put out with the whole thing, and this is exactly the kind of thing they are sick of, further cementing their butts to couch on election day.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 12:46 pm

LordMortis wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 12:41 pm

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 12:29 pm That would be great, but given our current political climate, not sure how, or with whom.

Voters who have been staying home and the coming generations. They turned out in 2022 fairly strong. See SC and abortion. "The base" couldn't be more fired up than they were in 2020 and 2022. But voters being convinced the economy is terrible under Biden and leaning toward both sides are corrupt could stay home in 2024. If the investigation proves to be stupid wheel spinning with no other intent but "to ensure Democrats ‘lose big’" it could very well implode. I'm feeling occasionally optimistic when I see what's happening.

Interesting. I just don't see voters who have been staying at home suddenly being outraged at even more shenanigans, incompetency and corruption, no matter who's side is to blame (but I could be very wrong on that...just a "feels" comment). I see these people as completely put out with the whole thing, and this is exactly the kind of thing they are sick of, further cementing their butts to couch on election day.

I think they came out in 2020 and 2022 but I also fear they could return home, especially as the media has spent two years trying to convince them Biden's economy has ruined their lives. Also every two years is the potential for two years of generation landslide. Shenanigans whose sole goal is political theatre should favor the victims. Or at least I am hopeful.

stessier wrote: ↑Sat Sep 16, 2023 4:13 pm In case you don't want to click through:

Marjorie Taylor Greene admits aim of Biden impeachment is to ensure Democrats ‘lose big’ at next election

All I need to know is that it involves Marjorie Taylor Green. It says it all, really. At this point, they're pissing into the wind.

And from the outside looking in, from a Canadian perspective, Biden has been far better and more stable for us and hasn't treated us with disdain.

Canada has an advantage that Australia, the Uk and Us don’t have.

No Murdoch media.

We haven’t seen nearly the level of political instability as a result in Canada.

Since 2012 Australia has had 6 prime ministers with the Murdoch press basically being the reason why this all occurred in all but one of these.

Since 2016 the Uk has had 5 prime ministers. From the same party!

The closest thing to a PM in US politics is the speaker of the house and look at the instability there.

This or Justin is doing some thing bad and this invasion is the only solution.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/01 ... ade-canada

Question is would Biden be being impeached if the Murdoch media wasn’t present? Would Trump be in play?

I guess free press is a bad thing? Maybe those government that have strict control on their press got it right.

Monopolies are bad.

Corporations are people.

Foreign controlled press has no loyalty to anything but money. Foreign oligarchs are like local oligarchs, but worse.

waitingtoconnect wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 10:35 pm Canada has an advantage that Australia, the Uk and Us don’t have.

No Murdoch media.

Sure, but we had a bad seed of our own in Conrad Black a few decades ago. Was pardoned by Trump.

Victoria Raverna wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 5:59 am I guess free press is a bad thing? Maybe need those government that have strict control on their press got it right.

In the UK they have freedom of speech but they have regulations about what news can be.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-o ... y-accuracy

This doesn’t include opinion.

waitingtoconnect wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 5:47 pm

Victoria Raverna wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 5:59 am I guess free press is a bad thing? Maybe need those government that have strict control on their press got it right.

In the UK they have freedom of speech but they have regulations about what news can be.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-o ... y-accuracy

This doesn’t include opinion.

But that didn't help them against Murdoch's press.

So maybe not strict enough.

There is no freedom of speech if the government has to approve of it first. That's the entire point.

In the end, a government of the people, by the people and for the people is only as good as the people.

Gov't of the money, by the money and for the money. The people are like a 5th order concern. No, I don't have a list of what else comes in between. The people are definitely on the list, but certainly not on top.

Off the top of my head:

1. Money
2. Military
3. Pharmaceuticals
4. Guns
5. (Some) People

Jaymann wrote: ↑Wed Sep 20, 2023 1:36 pm Off the top of my head:

1. Money
2. Military
3. Pharmaceuticals
4. Guns
5. (Some) People

You missed property. Which includes some people in the original definition.

Victoria Raverna wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 8:24 pm

waitingtoconnect wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 5:47 pm

Victoria Raverna wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 5:59 am I guess free press is a bad thing? Maybe need those government that have strict control on their press got it right.

In the UK they have freedom of speech but they have regulations about what news can be.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-o ... y-accuracy

This doesn’t include opinion.

But that didn't help them against Murdoch's press.

So maybe not strict enough.

What it meant was that the UK news equivalents of Fox, CNN etc had to give fair hearing to the views of men like Farange alongside moderate opinion. So by regulation these people got mainstream voices across the whole media landscape rather than needing a patron like Murdoch.

That meant that UK news didn’t stratify as much as say Fox News v MSNBC but it gave men like farange legitimacy in the eyes of older voters in particular.

What you haven’t seen in the UK that you see in the US is a widespread tolerance of shocking behaviour - even Boris was not immune to this when he behaved badly.

I would say that Canada is much the same way as the UK in that respect. But with a major difference. And I think GreenGoo was saying something similar, in that Canada often is on the outside looking in, and therefore much more influenced via its media and what we consume, hence why we got the kind of behavior we did with the Convoy and the FauxNews crowd encouraging them. We are more susceptible in that sense. We'd also never got a foreign network trying to interfere in that manner before either.

In my experience in the US there is an undercurrent of fear of an ever impending apocalypse, and if there isn't something to channel that fear into (the British royals, the Japanese, the Soviets etc) the country starts to either lash out against other countries or worse starts to turn on itself.

Canadians are far more realistic and thus less angry.

I'd like to think we are fairly grounded, but with the rise of the vocal far-right and the convoy protesters giving them a voice, I'm not so sure we are anymore. This is a group that protested over nothingburgers at a time when nearly the whole world were following WHO guidelines, a group wanting to depose Trudeau for tyranny (yeah right), and wanting to install its own government and police force. That moment in time felt like such an out-of-character moment for Canada, and while I'd hope something like this doesn't happen again, I think it's only the start of the kind of behavior we'll be seeing in Canada for some time.

“Fox News' Neil Cavuto: “I don't know what was achieved over these last 6+ hours," adds, "this was built up where there's smoke there would be fire... where there's smoke today, we got more smoke." “

https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/17 ... NcXCfN8s1g

You know you have problems when you are losing FOX News.

Casar: Will members of the oversight committee raise their hands if you believe both Hunter and Trump should be held accountable for any of indictments if convicted?

Of course Empty G interrupts with something stupid.

Alefroth wrote: ↑Thu Sep 28, 2023 11:54 pm Of course Empty G interrupts with something stupid.

Yep. Don’t like the question, or it makes you uncomfortable? Throw a verbal grenade (that failed to detonate in this case). Pathetic.

this is high-larious

Went all out on the visual aids. Love it.

Republican congressman left out the context of text messages to make it seemed like there is an evidence of corruption?

Victoria Raverna wrote: ↑Fri Sep 29, 2023 11:13 am Republican congressman left out the context of text messages to make it seemed like this is an evidence of corruption?
<snip twitter link>

can be viewed on youtube.

Also - a little Jamie Raskin