Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (214203)	10/9/2021 2:52:25 PM
From: Lane3	4 Recommendations Recommended By bentway CentralParkRanger Mannie Terry Maloney Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 356107

washingtonpost.com ...Scholars who study democratic breakdown, like myself, can point to a laundry list of reforms that would stabilize U.S. democracy and diminish the risk of American autocracy. After all, most other democracies aren’t facing the same existential risks to their systems that we are, so we can learn from them. In most functioning democracies, politicians don’t draw their own district maps. Their campaigns aren’t driven by effectively unlimited cash flowing in from special interests. Prominent media outlets aren’t headlined by conspiracy theorists or white nationalists. Citizens get a voice proportionate to population size. The judiciary isn’t politicized and senior judges don’t serve for life. Elections are managed by nonpartisan technical experts, not elected partisans. Central pillars of the U.S. system are fundamentally undemocratic. There is, however, no mystery over what would fix U.S. democracy. Other countries have confronted similar issues — and solved them. We could follow suit by borrowing their best ideas, such as replicating Canada’s nonpartisan election management system, and setting out stricter campaign finance limits. We could adopt media impartiality rules, like the British, or implement elements of proportionality in our elections, like the Germans. And that’s just the low-hanging fruit. Other innovative reforms would also be effective. They include implementing open primaries with ranked-choice voting to dampen the voices of political extremists, passing a constitutional amendment that guarantees the right to vote, or drawing electoral districts to maximize competitiveness, thereby fostering political compromise and consensus. More unconventional thinking would help, too. Given the population disparities between Wyoming and California, Julia Azari, a political science professor at Marquette University, told me that she favors the concept of major cities also being represented by senators. Lee Drutman, a political scientist at Johns Hopkins University, has long advocated reducing polarization by using proportional representation to elect the House of Representatives, drawing on the Australian model. Neither is likely any time soon. Both are worth discussing....

To: Lane3 who wrote (214203)	10/9/2021 3:03:52 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 356107

>> You are in the old paradigm where we blithely choose presidents by issue with the assumed confidence and comfort that the foundation is solid. We discovered during the last five years that our Enlightenment foundation is in even worse condition than our crumbling physical infrastructure and needs at least shoring up if not reconstruction. In general, I find political candidates offer a "package" of issues built on a platform of fundamentals. Trump's fundamentals, in some cases, had changed over time as he grew older -- which is pretty normal outside the political sphere. Mine did, too, so I can't criticize it. But Trump had the issues right. Biden hasn't had one right yet. For example, on the border, Trump understands the fundamental notion that immigration has good and bad elements by default, but if a country doesn't abide by reasonable principles --as is now happening -- it is terrible in every respect. As with most things in life, if you can't get the basics right you ought to just stay away from it. And I find it difficult to believe that you accept what is happening on our southern border as acceptable in any way, shape or form. If you do accept that, I'd really like to understand your rationale for it. But similar principles apply to all major issues. It doesn't matter if you're discussing economics, the pandemic, trade, crime, budget issues, war, etc -- there are upsides and downsides to all issues, and if you don't have fundamental principles to guide you, you can screw every last one of them up. The reason Biden's approval is in the tank today is he has screwed up everything he has touched. This distinguishes him from Trump: Biden has not really gotten anything right in the first eight months. Trump basically had everything right, which is why neither you nor anyone else truthfully criticizes him on his execution. We either hear lies, or personal attacks, but seldom legitimate criticism (if we do, it comes from himself or honest people on the Right).