A New Presidential Election Method

[Timur]

Just now, Timur said:

 

Who's they?

[Timur]

Just now, Patine said:

A deliberately hyperbolic statement about the two Major Party campaign machine's views of Third Party and Independent candidate. The hyperbole and melodrama, as I said, is deliberate, to make a point. I don't believe in the Lyndon LaRouche (not originally Steven Bannon, Donald Trump, and friends), "Deep State," idea.

They did block Perot in 1996.

[Timur]

Just now, Timur said:

They did block Perot in 1996.

I also think the eligibility for debates should be 5% or full ballot access in 270 electoral votes.

[Timur]

2 minutes ago, Patine said:

And ballot access should be easier, and consistent, and determined by State (at least for U.S. Presidential and Congressional elections). And, either every party should have taxpayer-funded, media-covered, and FEC-managed Primary elections, or all Parties should have them as privately managed and funded conventions. And PBS should have free and equal-length campaign ad slots for all parties and candidates, like the main public broadcasters in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand do (and has been debated about in Canada). And the threshold to get FEC funding should be lowered. And, the dinosaur that is the EC needs to go do, and the House should become MMP, and lose the Majority and Minority caucus and leadership only, with others expected to, "caucus with," either side expectation. Maybe then, the U.S. could rise out of being in the five worst nations in the First World for political culture, choice, and competitiveness.

I think the House should be PR and the Senate should be two-round or ranked choice.

[Timur]

Also, I like the primary system they used in the Conservative Party leadership elections in Canada. I don't think Trump would be President if they used such a system in the US.

[pilight]

21 minutes ago, Timur said:

I also think the eligibility for debates should be 5% or full ballot access in 270 electoral votes.

Never gonna happen.  General Election Presidential debates were removed from the hands of independent groups like the League of Women Voters specifically to exclude smaller party candidates.  When the bi-partisan Commission on Presidential Debates was formed, the founders said as much.

[Timur]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

Electoral organizations should be mandated to be NON-partisan, not BIpartisan. You, know, Non-partisan, like in most other First World Nations. Like one of the requirements for true free-and-fair elections. Like not having dominant incumbent-run electoral agencies as in many Emerging Democracies and Post-Soviet Party of Power States the U.S. Department of State hypocritically and in two-faced chutzpah scolds for their shoddy and unfair elections...

Or maybe, elections should be non-partisan like Nunavut.

[MrPotatoTed]

I found Kasich to be one of the more harmless Republican candidates in 2016, and had no major complaints living in the state under his governorship.  Same for our new Governor, Mike DeWine -- a Republican who has done an outstanding job leading the state through COVID in a smart, healthy way despite constant opposition from his own party.

It's remarkable that the state is devolving into being a major red state, while we somehow continue to elect moderate Governors.

But for myself, I did not vote for Kasich in this forum election because I don't think he has what it takes to be President.  I like the guy, and as Republicans go he's not a bad one.  But he's just not ready for the seriousness of the position.  During the 2016 debates, he looked like a kid playing dress-up in dad's suits.

I also wasn't sure what timeframe this election is supposed to take place in.  I noted AOC is there, but currently too young to run, so I assume it's like 2024.  With that assumption, I moved past Clinton who could have been a great President in her prime but has now wisely decided to take a step back for the good of the party.  

[vcczar]

4 minutes ago, Patine said:

Did you read this, @vcczar? I made a real effort on parsing, and to not make it a rant, and it's meant to illustrate some of the realities behind the hood of being, and campaigning and planning as, a Third Party in the United States' political environment you may have overlooked or perhaps been unaware of.

I told you, despite what you are saying here, that I don't read texts that are all in a one block paragraph. If a writer makes no attempts at "ease of the reader," I ignore the post. I probably don't read 85% of what you post, even if it is addressed to me.

If I have to re-read a sentence to make sense of it, I skip it also. This goes for everyone. 

I responded to this comment of yours because it is relatively concise. Based off this comment, it might be good to put your list of "realities behind the hood" in a list format. Here's a template:

Comment and brief primary reason behind responding to the post. 

• Underlining reason #1
• Underlining reason #2
• Underlining reason #3

Concise paragraph elaborating on #1

Concise paragraph elaborating on #2

Concise paragraph elaborating on #3

Brief conclusion or follow up question. 

I know we all have off days on writing, I certainly do. I get lazy from time to time because I know I only have 5 minute to post something. However, I also know there's a higher chance that my readers will no read me or misunderstand what I am saying if don't write in a way that makes it easy for them to read and understand what I'm saying. 

In short. I did not read what you wrote. From now on, if you tag me and I don't respond within 8 hours via a comment or emoji, assume I gave up trying to read what you wrote. 

[vcczar]

I'll lock the thread once we get 20 votes. This is a nail-biter.

[Eugene]

2 hours ago, vcczar said:

Here's a template:

Comment and brief primary reason behind responding to the post. 

• Underlining reason #1
• Underlining reason #2
• Underlining reason #3

Concise paragraph elaborating on #1

Concise paragraph elaborating on #2

Concise paragraph elaborating on #3

Brief conclusion or follow up question. 

 

In the 17th Century, the Enlightenment began to occur in Europe, as a jumpstart to new ideas in Europe, which would spread across the world as European colonization occurred heavily. The Enlightenment ideas led to new concepts and ideas for what equality was and meant, which was held as a leading cause for social change in Europe and their empires, causing revolution and uprisings in European countries and their colonies. As a part of the Enlightenment, the scientific revolution helped to transform how European culture worked, how they thought about the world, and led to sweeping changes across the world.

    Because of how European Culture changed, there were a series of revolutions not only in Europe, but in their own colonies. A large part of the cause of these revolutions and rebellions was because of new Enlightenment thinking that had to do with equality among the people. A bright example is the French Revolution of 1789, which occurred at a very large hand because of Enlightenment ideals. The new liberalism presented by the Enlightenment government led to a great need for change, with many in France wanting to get away from the aristocratic monarchical system. Enlightenment thinking changed European culture to be more reasonable, and more individualistic. This led to many middle class French and other Europeans wanting liberal, Enlightenment-led change to give them more power and reason to be around. In France, this came to a head when the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen was adopted by the French National Assembly, to attempt and transition the French State to one with more Enlightened ideas, such as equal opportunity, representative government, and freedom of speech. 

This French revolution was important because it shows just how the Enlightenment was able to change the culture in European countries and the acts of the people. They were much more involved in ideas of equality, and were willing to go for it, as society became ever-increasingly liberal in Europe. Another clear example of Enlightenment ideas causing a revolution was in one of Britain’s colonies. When the American Revolution happened, it was a clear example of Enlightenment Ideals coming to a height. Many of the American founding fathers were influenced by the Enlightenment, Thomas Jefferson taking influence from John Locke when writing “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” to the Declaration of Independence, a clear take from John Locke saying that the government ought to protect life, liberty, and property. Coincidentally, this Enlightenment-fueled American Revolution would help cause the French to go underneath which was a lead into the Enlightenment fueled French revolution. This all matters because it shows how far-reaching the effects of the Enlightenment were, making all the way into the European Colonies, contributing to their need for independence from European overlords.

    The Scientific revolution, which began in the 16th century and lasted through to become a part of the Enlightenment, representing certain ideals of rationalism and skepticism that were heavy in the enlightenment. A large part of the scientific revolution was the challenging of old religious ideas and ideals, especially with the challenging of the Geocentric theories of the old church by astronomers such as Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, and Newton. These scientists and their new ideas, help in the weakening of the clergy in some parts of Europe, because their challenging of old ideas as well as new skepticism helped to grow scientific thinking. This matters to how the Enlightenment changed European culture because it led to new thinking, and led to new discoveries in areas such as mechanics, physics, biology, and chemistry. These helped the Europeans to create their new technology and inventions, which helped to change European culture and how the everyday European lived their life. New discoveries in Physics by men such as Isaac Newton helped to show how the world worked, and yet again helped to challenge the old beliefs of the world, much to the dismay of the church. While these ideas took many many years to dry down to the everyday European, it certainly had an effect once they did. People such as Descartes and Francis Bacon helped to form a new scientific method, giving the European cultures and people a new method of thinking, leading to more discoveries over the times.

Because of the Enlightenment and the changes that it brought to thinking, European culture was changed. These new changes became very important in the future of not only the European mainland, but also the European Colonies, leading to changes in the common man, and leading to a vast amount of revolutions, and although only some were successful, the ones that were became very important, such as the French and American revolutions, which became crucial in the future of the world. The Enlightenment also brought the Scientific revolution with it, leading to new ways of thinking among the people, and leading to changes in how the world was viewed and worked, and gave reason to challenge the ideals of the old world.

[Dobs]

10 minutes ago, Patine said:

I'm not really sure what @Pringles and @Dobs find funny, but their wonky conduct and responses of late, and inexplicable (and even inappropriate) humour should maybe recommend an appointment with a reputable psychiatrist, frankly.

Are you feeling ok bud.

[Pringles]

10 minutes ago, Patine said:

I'm not really sure what @Pringles and @Dobs find funny, but their wonky conduct and responses of late, and inexplicable (and even inappropriate) humour should maybe recommend an appointment with a reputable psychiatrist, frankly.

I don't know about a psychiatrist... I do have a psychologist though. Sort of... his name is Dr. Phil. 

[Pringles]

Just now, Patine said:

Don't mock me. It's becoming when you're being called out for alleged mockery.

Dr. Phil is a feel-good quack put on the air originally to aid Oprah Winfrey's ratings.

[Dobs]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

Don't mock me. It's becoming when you're being called out for alleged mockery.

If you’re going to impugn my psychological state for finding Eugenes incredibly well done joke funny, then I am unfortunately going to have to resort to humor to deal with your silly allegations.

[Eugene]

4 minutes ago, Patine said:

It struck me as a well-placed example of what @vcczar (whose reaction also seemed to take it as such) was trying to ask of me. Your take strikes me as needlessly cynical. @Eugene knows his intention, for sure, however...

It was a joke, poking fun at vcczar’s request that responses be formatted like essays

[Eugene]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

Well, @vcczar actually IS a college professor in real life for a living, to be fair.

Well, we are not pupils. Although it appears that some of us are still at that level in terms of maturity, although they may be better fitting for a middle school professor 

[Dobs]

6 minutes ago, Patine said:

And, unfortunate, most of my allegations are NOT, "silly," - despite you flippantly dismissing them often as such, and them likely being, "inconvenient," or, "troublesome," to an ideally smooth conduct. It's unfortunate you've rarely shown the maturity to even acknowledge complaints made about you as even having validity or seriousness, let among any desire or appetite to redress them. Even I have admitted to a fair degree of flaws in conduct, and things that need work, in my own affairs. From your own appraisal, and what you, yourself, have ever admitted alone, you would think you were Angelic in nature and behaviour. 😬

Bring forth a common concern and I’ll be sure to address it. As far as I’m concerned, laughing at Eugenes perfectly executed joke is within both my rights and a socially acceptable reaction. 

[Eugene]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

Ah, so @Pringles disagrees with my analysis that @Dobs does not admit to, acknowledge, or seek to redress problems in his conduct and behaviour on the this, and the last, forum, but usually ignores them being pointed out and, at times, ridicules those pointing these things. Very well, @Pringles, please give me some examples of when @Dobshas ever admitted to flawed or faulted conduct, or taken feedback or criticism on it seriously, and strove to at least admit to consciously fix the issue. I may have missed it, after all, as I don't scrupulously follow the RP's and stuff. So, I lay this challenge before your, "disagree," response."

By any chance, have you ever heard of Lou Bega? You remind me of him.

[Pringles]

Just now, Patine said:

Ah, so @Pringles disagrees with my analysis that @Dobs does not admit to, acknowledge, or seek to redress problems in his conduct and behaviour on the this, and the last, forum, but usually ignores them being pointed out and, at times, ridicules those pointing these things. Very well, @Pringles, please give me some examples of when @Dobshas ever admitted to flawed or faulted conduct, or taken feedback or criticism on it seriously, and strove to at least admit to consciously fix the issue. I may have missed it, after all, as I don't scrupulously follow the RP's and stuff. So, I lay this challenge before your, "disagree," response."

I'm gonna take it even a step further hoss... I've never seen Mr. Dob do anything that he'd need to admit fault, or apologize for his conduct on this forum. But then again, my outlook on the internet is very, VERY, different from yours. I think the fundamental difference is that I can tolerate the debating, arguing, and shit talk. Some of us cannot. I just really don't care what's said on the internet at the end of the day. If I wanna have a professional conversation, I'll have a professional conversation.

But yeah, I haven't seen any flawed conduct from Dobs ever really. 

[Eugene]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

I just deleted that post for a very good reason.

A little bit of Monica in my life

[Eugene]

11 minutes ago, Patine said:

Well, you haven't been around the community as long. He used to be quite the firestorm, and said some pretty inexplicable and bizarre things with conviction. He has grown up and matured greatly, I fully admit. Which is why I deleted the post you were responding to, and gave the response to him I did, instead.

Heh. Old Dobs. A changed man.

[Timur]

6 hours ago, vcczar said:

I told you, despite what you are saying here, that I don't read texts that are all in a one block paragraph. If a writer makes no attempts at "ease of the reader," I ignore the post. I probably don't read 85% of what you post, even if it is addressed to me.

If I have to re-read a sentence to make sense of it, I skip it also. This goes for everyone. 

I responded to this comment of yours because it is relatively concise. Based off this comment, it might be good to put your list of "realities behind the hood" in a list format. Here's a template:

Comment and brief primary reason behind responding to the post. 

• Underlining reason #1
• Underlining reason #2
• Underlining reason #3

Concise paragraph elaborating on #1

Concise paragraph elaborating on #2

Concise paragraph elaborating on #3

Brief conclusion or follow up question. 

I know we all have off days on writing, I certainly do. I get lazy from time to time because I know I only have 5 minute to post something. However, I also know there's a higher chance that my readers will no read me or misunderstand what I am saying if don't write in a way that makes it easy for them to read and understand what I'm saying. 

In short. I did not read what you wrote. From now on, if you tag me and I don't respond within 8 hours via a comment or emoji, assume I gave up trying to read what you wrote. 

It's really hard to read LONG blocks of paragraphs. I honestly find 16th century works more readable if they are in shorter paragraphs.

[Timur]

6 minutes ago, Patine said:

I think, frankly, at this stage, your emote here was counter-productive and non-contributory, @Timur. You're late to the party, and your entry was quite clumsy.

Doesn't sound very courteous here. Rather insulting, TBH.

2 minutes ago, Patine said:

Stacking, "disagree," emotes on my chiding posts of the pointlessness and inappropriate or untimely context of using previous, "disagree," will end up quite puerile after a while...

I'll use emotes when I want to.

[Timur]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

Not an insult, just a frank appraisal of the situation and timing of your emote, even if you, personally, take objection with it (with a strong personal situational bias obviously affecting your viewpoint).

And I can comment on, or criticize, emotes made on my posts when I want to. Aren't inalienable rights grand?

Look, I sometimes log in when the conversation has already finished, and I will give my occasional thoughts.