General US Politics

[Sasori]

It's basically just Juncker. And maybe a few seats in the European parliament. Most are against it.

I'm sure there are some seats stupid enough to push for an EU superstate in this anti EU climate, but it means very little other then that the populist parties have something to scare people with. The EU itself is mostly against it and the different countries still need to approve of an EU superstate. I have a feeling no political party will start pushing for that idea anytime soon.

[Life]

Got a source for this? Because this still seems as much of a conspiracy theory as any Alex Jones nonsense.

The president of the EU has stated this. Like Excellen said, the vast majority of the EU is currently against it but it's far from a conspiracy theory.

[BrightBow]

Wait, the EU has a president? That's the first time I've heard of that.

Edited December 19, 2016 by BrightBow

[Yojinbo]

The EU commision has a president.

Nobody actually elected him but he's there.

[Excellen Browning]

The president of the european commission is Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the European Council is Donald Tusk. The European Commission is essentially the bureaucratic machine under the Council and Parliament, and holds no political power.

[Tryhard]

The president of the EU has stated this. Like Excellen said, the vast majority of the EU is currently against it but it's far from a conspiracy theory.

It would still require a unanimous decision. Like Sasori said I somehow doubt that every country will be fine with this.

[Life]

It would still require a unanimous decision. Like Sasori said I somehow doubt that every country will be fine with this.

Sure but that doesn't make it a conspiracy theory. It makes it a very possible outcome (albeit unlikely in its current state) and it is the head of EU who wants it to happen.

[Excellen Browning]

Which of the two heads are you referring to?

[Tryhard]

Sure but that doesn't make it a conspiracy theory. It makes it a very possible outcome (albeit unlikely in its current state) and it is the head of EU who wants it to happen.

I mean, conspiracy theories could be possible - they are just highly, highly, unlikely and are usually treated correctly as such. Just as the idea of a European superstate currently is highly unlikely and I wouldn't want to place my bets on it unless we had, like, any more convincing information. Which frankly is the same in regards to Russian hacking and fucking Pizzagate, by the way.

I don't even really consider it worth talking about, especially in a topic about US politics, but oh well.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Tryhard

[CyborgZeta]

At least one of the key figures in Trump's forum of economic advisors, Elon Musk, is a strong proponent of renewable energies. I'm not sure how influential Musk will be but I think it's somewhat likely that Trump didn't include him for no reason.

SpaceX is heavily reliant on federal funding and government contracts. It wouldn't surprise me if Musk all but forced himself into that position so he'd be in the next administration's good graces.

[Phoenix Wright]

China signing the climate agreement is more significant than Trump's decision to revert Obama's approval.

Withdrawing from it will take Trump at least one whole term of office, probably a good bit longer than that. By that time Trump may very well no longer be president and his decision could once again be reverted by a democratic president following him.

Although Trump has claimed that he's going to re-industrialize the USA it's questionable whether he'll actually be able to. Contrary to what he claims the US industry didn't lose its former glory to a mass-exodus of production to China but largely to the process digitalization. The jobs that have been lost in the process are lost forever. They cannot be brought back. And if these industry jobs can't be brought back it doesn't matter how much/little he or his cabinet cares about climate change - he can't just increase CO2 emmisions out of the thin air. Meanwhile, digitalization will continue to take its course eliminating more and more industrial jobs and Trump's opinions on that will not mean a thing. He can't undo reality.

At least one of the key figures in Trump's forum of econimi advisors, Elon Musk, is a strong proponent of renewable energies. I'm not sure how influential Musk will be but I think it's somewhat likely that Trump didn't include him for no reason.

Speaking of Musk and renewable Energies - should a major breakthrough happen during the ~5+ years it would take Trump to withdraw from the climate agreement his opinions and decisions could become even more irrelevant. In terms of climate politics the USA are already isolated enough as it is. Once certain technologies start to make their way to countries like India, China, Indonesia or the Philipines big time all of Trumps attempts to turn back time will turn out to be exactly as futile as everybody should have already known them to be anyway.

the deal is nice, but vague. we need action now. if the administration's plan is to halt action, and congress agrees, we are possibly fucked. the administration can change the future via inaction.

Lol no.

You have a serious overestimation of Russian military capabilities if you think it is or (ever really was) a conventional military superpower. Russia is a regional power at best.

what about ww2 and the cold war?

@life, again, point out evidence for your claims that i'm authoritarian when it suits me. unless of course you admit you were lying.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Phoenix Wright

[Excellen Browning]

what about ww2 and the cold war?

What about Russia in WW2? Their army was outdated, poorly equipped, incompetently led and they had little in the way of industrial capacity. It is consensus among historians and Russian command from the period (notably Stalin and Kruschev) that they would have lost had they not had lend-lease support. Then during the cold war, America and Russia have a nice big nuclear arms race, and a bit of a sort of a military technology race where due to blatant incompetence of American intelligence, everyone there severely overestimated the quality of Russian hardware, and their numbers. In reality Russia and the Communist Block were economic backwaters, generally lagged behind in tech, and conventional Russian forces were still poorly trained and equipped. The myth that Russia was a superpower through any other means than its nuclear arsenal is just that; a myth. An American myth that was so overblown that American command believed that a conventional war between the USSR and NATO would see Europe overrun.

[Rezzy]

It's surprising how hard it is to get straightforward coverage of the electoral vote coverage. I've seen 6 faithless electors so far, all against Hillary. 1 in Maine for Sanders, 1 in Minnesota for Sanders, but his vote was rejected, and 4 in Washington, 3 of which went to Colin Powell. So far, none have gone against Trump, but I haven't heard if Texas had done theirs yet. You would think the major networks would be covering this.

[Tryhard]

It's surprising how hard it is to get straightforward coverage of the electoral vote coverage. I've seen 6 faithless electors so far, all against Hillary. 1 in Maine for Sanders, 1 in Minnesota for Sanders, but his vote was rejected, and 4 in Washington, 3 of which went to Colin Powell. So far, none have gone against Trump, but I haven't heard if Texas had done theirs yet. You would think the major networks would be covering this.

I thought the result wasn't revealed until like, 6th January?

[Moblin Major General]

@life, again, point out evidence for your claims that i'm authoritarian when it suits me. unless of course you admit you were lying.

You would have no problem if a government outlawed teaching creationism or Christianity as a whole. There is documented evidence on this forum you are an antitheist, and that you tend to regard users who hold these beliefs as "uninformed and unintelligent." I refuse to answer your arguments because you devalue my position as a whole, meaning you devalue my worth as a person. Also, I see you too often supporting Frey, a radical who doesn't tolerate the slightest hint of even disliking LGBT, which is not the least bit tolerant. I don't see you or a lot of people on here heeding Voltaire's words on free speech, probably because it says that bigotry is okay, but the fact is, it has to be, otherwise even something minor like a casual joke could be a hate crime, and some truths would be decried as discriminatory, leading to misinformation, demagoguery, and a whole other mess of bad things associated with this slippery slope.

[Rezzy]

I thought the result wasn't revealed until like, 6th January?

That's when they officially announce the results, but the state electors votes are not secret, and if they wanted to, it would be easy to keep a comprehensive tally.

[eclipse]

You would have no problem if a government outlawed teaching creationism or Christianity as a whole. There is documented evidence on this forum you are an antitheist, and that you tend to regard users who hold these beliefs as "uninformed and unintelligent." I refuse to answer your arguments because you devalue my position as a whole, meaning you devalue my worth as a person. Also, I see you too often supporting Frey, a radical who doesn't tolerate the slightest hint of even disliking LGBT, which is not the least bit tolerant. I don't see you or a lot of people on here heeding Voltaire's words on free speech, probably because it says that bigotry is okay, but the fact is, it has to be, otherwise even something minor like a casual joke could be a hate crime, and some truths would be decried as discriminatory, leading to misinformation, demagoguery, and a whole other mess of bad things associated with this slippery slope.

Please don't do this. I've had enough forum mod work for the rest of the year.

[Dark Holy Elf]

The electoral college vote is essentially ceremonial and I'm not really sure how much news coverage it deserves. That there are more faithless electors than usual this year is kinda interesting but I'm not sure what it speaks to, beyond perhaps the widespread discontent about this election.

I'm not surprised that none are against Trump; it's much "safer" to be a faithless elector if you were pledged to support a loser since your action can not possibly affect the final result. A quick check of Wikipedia confirms my suspicions: there hasn't been a faithless elector from the victorious candidate's side in a long time (specifically since 1972), though there have been quite a few from the losing candidate's side.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector#List_of_faithless_electors

[UNLEASH IT]

According to Wikipedia, it's been more than a century since an American presidental election has had more than one faithless elector. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector#List_of_faithless_electors

[Moblin Major General]

Please don't do this. I've had enough forum mod work for the rest of the year.

Noted. I'm sorry I was neither respectful nor tactful in my speech, and I will certainly take care in responding to its rebuttal, if I even respond at all to them.

[Rezzy]

It looks like the final count has 6 faithless electors, all from Washington and Texas, unless anybody from Nevada, California, or Hawaii does. There were attempts in several other states, all ones Clinton won, but they were rejected I foresee a crackdown on faithless elector laws before next election cycle.

[CyborgZeta]

Washington already has laws against faithless electors, but since they accepted the faithless votes, I presume the penalty there is just a $1,000 fine.

In Colorado and Minnesota, the votes were thrown out and the electors replaced with someone who would vote for the winner. Maine had the faithless vote thrown out, and the elector changed his vote to Clinton in the next one.

As for Texas, the current governor mentioned just after the vote that he's already filed a bill to make electors' commitments binding and punish faithless ones.

https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/810979644967124992

[Phoenix Wright]

gerrymandering is an amazingly powerful tool. the ec needs to be done away with, because it's what makes it so powerful.

You would have no problem if a government outlawed teaching creationism or Christianity as a whole. There is documented evidence on this forum you are an antitheist, and that you tend to regard users who hold these beliefs as "uninformed and unintelligent." I refuse to answer your arguments because you devalue my position as a whole, meaning you devalue my worth as a person. Also, I see you too often supporting Frey, a radical who doesn't tolerate the slightest hint of even disliking LGBT, which is not the least bit tolerant. I don't see you or a lot of people on here heeding Voltaire's words on free speech, probably because it says that bigotry is okay, but the fact is, it has to be, otherwise even something minor like a casual joke could be a hate crime, and some truths would be decried as discriminatory, leading to misinformation, demagoguery, and a whole other mess of bad things associated with this slippery slope.

that is because creationism is wrong. outlawing the teaching of flat earth theory, similarly, doesn't make me an authoritarian. religion holds no place in secular government, so christianity wouldn't be "taught" anyway (whatever that means). i don't think religious people as a whole are uninformed or unintelligent (you must be an avid proponent of selective reading). also, you missed my post about anti-theism, which is in the sd subforum 1st page still so i won't bother linking.

i don't know who frey is, and i doubt i have voiced active support for their ideas. in recent memory i pretty much only ever mention dondon and lord raven.

i have no idea how you got that i would outlaw bigoted speech. i actively make posts saying i don't support it. i cannot be blamed for your lack of comprehension.

"truths" like what? lol.

pm me if necessary.

Edited December 20, 2016 by Phoenix Wright

[Rezzy]

gerrymandering is an amazingly powerful tool. the ec needs to be done away with, because it's what makes it so powerful.

that is because creationism is wrong. outlawing the teaching of flat earth theory, similarly, doesn't make me an authoritarian. religion holds no place in secular government, so christianity wouldn't be "taught" anyway (whatever that means). i don't think religious people as a whole are uninformed or unintelligent (you must be an avid proponent of selective reading). also, you missed my post about anti-theism, which is in the sd subforum 1st page still so i won't bother linking.

i don't know who frey is, and i doubt i have voiced active support for their ideas. in recent memory i pretty much only ever mention dondon and lord raven.

i have no idea how you got that i would outlaw bigoted speech. i actively make posts saying i don't support it. i cannot be blamed for your lack of comprehension.

"truths" like what? lol.

pm me if necessary.

Gerrymandering is a separate issue and has no effect on the EC, since all the state's votes go toward one state total, regardless of congressional distract. Only the House of Representatives is affected by Gerrymandering.

[CyborgZeta]

Maine and Nebraska are the only states that split their electoral votes by congressional district, so they're the only states that would be affected by gerrymandering in the EC.