Much harder to be a controlled opposition and continue enacting the will of a fascist kleptocracy without close battles that can be won or lost by a small number of sacrificial turncoats every couple of years.
"Nothing will fundamentally change" — Joe Biden to corporations (2023?)
The dude saying the U.S. is the "stabilizing superpower of the world" still like we haven't systematically driven off our allies, courted dictators, shown ourselves to be a paper tiger(even before Iran), and started just taking over other countries, kidnapping the leaders of other countries, bombing random small boats in the middle of the ocean, and that we keep trying to permanently end the global dollar economy via reckless debt spending and deregulation. 👀
Also "Do non-partisan / bi-partisan redistricting commities work?" The article literally just goes: "What if they don't?" THEY DO. I Live in Michigan. Things are infinitely more fair now that we have one in our state. They're just better. They just are.
Also also "Make sure you mention Donald Trump. That'll really get them on our side."
The entire argument is "there will be issues" like the last 250 years of U.S. politics hasn't been us desperately trying to duct tape over the massive issues in our constitution rather than reasonably updating/replacing it. They literally mention the Gore / Bush race and don't mention the PARTISAN Supreme Court literally just handed the election to Bush. SURE LET'S KEEP THE CURRENT SYSTEM, IT'S CLEARLY BETTER.
I don't generally get worked up about fluff pieces but man this one is just like, agregious.
Manufacture that consent, Vox.
“If the whole idea is that the national popular vote is fairly counted, it’s hard unless there’s buy-in by the counters everywhere, including in red states.”
Expecting Republican states to bypass a system that favors them is asinine. It's already only going to reach 270 if enough swing states join, some of which would selfishly prefer it if more attention were paid per capita to their citizens and issues during presidential elections, the exact opposite of what a fair and proportional representative democracy should be.
The least glitchy version is the one I imagined in 2001. My specific proposal involves a lot of interstate uniformity, and using an independent bipartisan mechanism. But it means going back to square one in each of the states.
That's far less likely to occur than even a constitutional amendment. Again, the problem is that using the popular vote is not a bipartisan issue; not only is the Electoral College designed to boost states with small populations, favoring Republicans, but many of those same Republican states intentionally suppress voter participation by various means to diminish the importance of the popular vote.
The only reason to have 2nd thoughts is that without Texas the electoral college is basically unwinable for Republicans
Yeah, it's not going to happen. Status quo above all.
Of course they are. It’s meant to be a carrot, forever out of reach, and not threatening the investor class.
His concerns boil down to:
1 comment