This post did not contain any content.
-
Have I mentioned how much I love that our democracy here in the United States is basically incapable of changing? And by love, I mean fucking hate.
This party, that party, who cares, nothing material ever changes. Wake me up when one of these three things happens, if ever:
An actual 1787 style constitutional convention, led by CA, NY and TX, the only possible coalition that can work
The liberal justices on the supreme court resign in protest.
We ever pass another constitutional amendment of any significance whatsoever.
(I'll also add it'd be nice to have more than 2 parties so actual coalitions could be formed, but that's also probably never going to happen.)
-
This party, that party, who cares, nothing material ever changes. Wake me up when one of these three things happens, if ever:
An actual 1787 style constitutional convention, led by CA, NY and TX, the only possible coalition that can work
The liberal justices on the supreme court resign in protest.
We ever pass another constitutional amendment of any significance whatsoever.
(I'll also add it'd be nice to have more than 2 parties so actual coalitions could be formed, but that's also probably never going to happen.)
@codinghorror don't forget NJ in there
-
@codinghorror don't forget NJ in there
@alpha1beta NJ is nice but not nearly powerful enough as a state. We need TX. FL is just not happening, because, well, Florida Man speaks for himself and always has.
-
@alpha1beta NJ is nice but not nearly powerful enough as a state. We need TX. FL is just not happening, because, well, Florida Man speaks for himself and always has.
@codinghorror TX has a long way to go before being a blue state again. I have hope, but NJ, IL and a few others like MN have a long history of passing progressive reforms, often by moderates - often before CA and NY.
FL's just toast. The ocean can have it.
-
This party, that party, who cares, nothing material ever changes. Wake me up when one of these three things happens, if ever:
An actual 1787 style constitutional convention, led by CA, NY and TX, the only possible coalition that can work
The liberal justices on the supreme court resign in protest.
We ever pass another constitutional amendment of any significance whatsoever.
(I'll also add it'd be nice to have more than 2 parties so actual coalitions could be formed, but that's also probably never going to happen.)
@codinghorror I'd love to see first-past-the-post replaced with a voting system that doesn't systematically encourage eventual two-party politics, and that doesn't leave a massive chunk of the population feeling like they have no representation. But that's basically a pipe dream
I feel like there's a more graceful way to word the representation bit but whatever; I'm sure you know what I mean lol
-
This party, that party, who cares, nothing material ever changes. Wake me up when one of these three things happens, if ever:
An actual 1787 style constitutional convention, led by CA, NY and TX, the only possible coalition that can work
The liberal justices on the supreme court resign in protest.
We ever pass another constitutional amendment of any significance whatsoever.
(I'll also add it'd be nice to have more than 2 parties so actual coalitions could be formed, but that's also probably never going to happen.)
@codinghorror Remember, if TX is invited they will hold out for a strictly white nationalist Christian Theocracy.
-
@codinghorror TX has a long way to go before being a blue state again. I have hope, but NJ, IL and a few others like MN have a long history of passing progressive reforms, often by moderates - often before CA and NY.
FL's just toast. The ocean can have it.
@alpha1beta TX and NC are predicted blue within 10 years and I absolutely agree. TX is a bit nuts, but it's a great state, lots of internal diversity, and most of all, pragmatic.. emphasis mine
-
This party, that party, who cares, nothing material ever changes. Wake me up when one of these three things happens, if ever:
An actual 1787 style constitutional convention, led by CA, NY and TX, the only possible coalition that can work
The liberal justices on the supreme court resign in protest.
We ever pass another constitutional amendment of any significance whatsoever.
(I'll also add it'd be nice to have more than 2 parties so actual coalitions could be formed, but that's also probably never going to happen.)
@codinghorror "It's adorable that you think that voting will solve a problem that voting created."
-
This party, that party, who cares, nothing material ever changes. Wake me up when one of these three things happens, if ever:
An actual 1787 style constitutional convention, led by CA, NY and TX, the only possible coalition that can work
The liberal justices on the supreme court resign in protest.
We ever pass another constitutional amendment of any significance whatsoever.
(I'll also add it'd be nice to have more than 2 parties so actual coalitions could be formed, but that's also probably never going to happen.)
@codinghorror yeah sadly this system was originally designed to favor individuals rather than parties - which gives little systemic incentive for coalitions. Worse, it turns out that this system is super susceptible to corrup*ahem* influence by deep pocketed entities like corporations.
-
@codinghorror yeah sadly this system was originally designed to favor individuals rather than parties - which gives little systemic incentive for coalitions. Worse, it turns out that this system is super susceptible to corrup*ahem* influence by deep pocketed entities like corporations.
@codinghorror I've long wondered whether anyone has been working on creating a better system and modeling / stress testing it, for whenever this one collapses and people need to create something better to replace it
-
Have I mentioned how much I love that our democracy here in the United States is basically incapable of changing? And by love, I mean fucking hate.
@codinghorror was talking with a friend about this today. This is by design. It was built so as to be purposefully exhausting to make changes. Absolutely exhausting.
-
@codinghorror was talking with a friend about this today. This is by design. It was built so as to be purposefully exhausting to make changes. Absolutely exhausting.
@Pippz that's not the correct take; it should be challenging but not IMPOSSIBLE, but the system has been heavily gamed. You don't want willy-nilly changes for whatevs reasons, but you also don't want total and complete us vs. them two party calcification. There is a middle ground here. They tried. The biggest mistake was SCOTUS and lifetime terms, IMO.
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
