By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Official 2020 US Presidential Election Thread

Hilarious Sacha Baron Cohen Tweet to tRump. 

OWNED.

I watched Borat 2 on Prime Video on Friday BTW, not as good as the first, but still pretty funny, especially the dance off and White House scene. tRump and the GOP are in no position to call Biden or Democrats creeps or pedophiles seeing how his fucking lawyer got off on who he thought was a 15-year-old, "tucking in his shirt" my ass, I don't buy that shit for one second.



Around the Network
KManX89 said:

Hilarious Sacha Baron Cohen Tweet to tRump. 

OWNED.

I watched Borat 2 on Prime Video on Friday BTW, not as good as the first, but still pretty funny, especially the dance off and White House scene. tRump and the GOP are in no position to call Biden or Democrats creeps or pedophiles seeing how his fucking lawyer got off on who he thought was a 15-year-old, "tucking in his shirt" my ass, I don't buy that shit for one second.

To be fair, he probably didn't think she was 15. *Minor spoilers* Borat screams that after he gets caught. The actress is 25, and you'd assume someone interviewing you is over 18.

Aside from the creepiness, the big thing here is how gullible Rudy is. There are tons of red flags that there's something sketchy about that interview, and Rudy is oblivious to all of them. Makes you question if you should be trusting his investigations... 



JWeinCom said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Keep in mind that mandatory voting also holds true for European elections, so your size comparisons are not exactly true here.

As for your second point, if Brazil can do it and enforce it through the deepest jungle, why shouldn't the US be able to do so if it's constitutional? 

According to the EU's official website...

"Voting is compulsory in Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, and Luxembourg."

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/residence/elections-abroad/european-elections/index_en.htm#

Greece is the biggest of those, and is about the size of Louisiana. I believe all of them could fit within the state of Montana. 


As for the second point, I don't know a whole lot about Brazil and their elections, so it's hard to compare directly. I read that the voting rates in Brazil are about 80%, which is way higher than the US, but shows that mandatory voting doesn't get you close to 100%. And, with the minor fine assessed, it seems like the cost would probably outweigh the benefit.

The biggest issue though would be the US' federalist system. Protecting voting is typically a state power, and any federal laws would be unconstitutional. There are ways to get around that (for instance by using federal funds as a carrot to get states to agree to voting reform), but there would be a lot of legal challenges in the US to establishing mandatory voting on a federal level. I don't know if that would apply in Brazil.

States might be able to mandate voting, but that also might be unconstitutional. In Brazil, you can send back a blank ballot which may alleviate the problem, but the First Amendment is read very broadly, and even limiting the option of not sending it at all might be unconstitutional.


So, there would be challenges. I wouldn't say they couldn't do it, but I just don't think it'd be worth it. If there's a 20% gap or so between what would be accomplished via mandatory voting (using Brazil as a guide) and what we have now, I think there are better ways to close that gap. Moving election day to Sunday, making election day a national holiday, mailing out ballots to all voters, etc. would be better means to getting more votes imo.

Mandatory voting doesn't get you to 100% because it's generally only compulsive for working age people and not for permanent residents with a foreign citizenship. Both them and elderly people may normally still vote, but it's not compulsory for them. In fact, here in Luxembourg, since we have over 50% foreign population, we barely reach 50% voting participation despite the mandatory voting for all luxembourgish citizens of working age.



JWeinCom said:
KManX89 said:

Hilarious Sacha Baron Cohen Tweet to tRump. 

OWNED.

I watched Borat 2 on Prime Video on Friday BTW, not as good as the first, but still pretty funny, especially the dance off and White House scene. tRump and the GOP are in no position to call Biden or Democrats creeps or pedophiles seeing how his fucking lawyer got off on who he thought was a 15-year-old, "tucking in his shirt" my ass, I don't buy that shit for one second.

To be fair, he probably didn't think she was 15. *Minor spoilers* Borat screams that after he gets caught. The actress is 25, and you'd assume someone interviewing you is over 18.

Aside from the creepiness, the big thing here is how gullible Rudy is. There are tons of red flags that there's something sketchy about that interview, and Rudy is oblivious to all of them. Makes you question if you should be trusting his investigations... 

As much as I'd love to dunk on Rudolph, there's clearly an element of BS involved. That's how editing works and even within the movie nothing was said of her supposed age until Borat comes in screaming it. Much as Rudy's a creep and a shit person, I don't think he was in the wrong here. 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

Ka-pi96 said:
It still seems crazy to me that somebody would actually be in favour of mandatory voting. Why do you hate freedom?

You just have to show up at the polls. You can give a blank paper if you want, nobody forcing you to actually vote for somebody. Also, your employer must let you go to the polls, no matter what you are doing. You could technically leave the operating theater in the midst of a surgery and your employer couldn't legally stop you from doing so since you're just using your right to vote.

I was in an argument like this with a teacher in Germany, who thought that mandatory military service would be the pinnacle to democracy. I pointed out that with mandatory voting, Adolf would never have been able to get in power. With the reintroduction of mandatory military service, he was able to start both a world war and a genocide. She BSoD for the next 15 minutes, needing her brain to reboot after that.

I do get your argument. But what good is that freedom if it brings people in power that restrain it much further than just having to vote once every couple years?



Around the Network

Here's a good video about polling and the differences between 2016 and 2020 from 538, and how they adapted their methodology to counter the problem of 2016 polling data:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TambSayfCOE



Ka-pi96 said:

Every single time freedom has been restrained in a democracy it's because people voted for it, or those that enacted it. Not because people chose not to vote.

That is a highly questionable statement...



Ka-pi96 said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

You just have to show up at the polls. You can give a blank paper if you want, nobody forcing you to actually vote for somebody. Also, your employer must let you go to the polls, no matter what you are doing. You could technically leave the operating theater in the midst of a surgery and your employer couldn't legally stop you from doing so since you're just using your right to vote.

I was in an argument like this with a teacher in Germany, who thought that mandatory military service would be the pinnacle to democracy. I pointed out that with mandatory voting, Adolf would never have been able to get in power. With the reintroduction of mandatory military service, he was able to start both a world war and a genocide. She BSoD for the next 15 minutes, needing her brain to reboot after that.

I do get your argument. But what good is that freedom if it brings people in power that restrain it much further than just having to vote once every couple years?

On what basis?

The elections around his appointment as chancellor had 80%+ turnout already, which is what you're saying Luxembourg has with mandatory voting. So would it have even increased? Besides Hindenburg appointed him due to overwhelming pressure from the massive amount of support he had, even if more people had voted would there have been enough that chose somebody else in order to counteract that support?

Every single time freedom has been restrained in a democracy it's because people voted for it, or those that enacted it. Not because people chose not to vote.

That's not totally accurate, it was quite a bit lower due to lots of people not accounted for. But it's true that the main problem was actually that he got away with terrorizing and locking up the opposition leaders, which couldn't show up for registration and thus Hitler ran against little opposition in the elections. And still, when he got appointed, that was after his party dropped by about a third in votes. The democratic parties should have waited a little bit more and Hitler would have lost all his appeal, as the economy started to recover...



Ka-pi96 said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Every single time freedom has been restrained in a democracy it's because people voted for it, or those that enacted it. Not because people chose not to vote.

Voter apathy is literally how Putin and Erdogan got where they are... it was also appointed as the number one cause of authoritarian governments in the Middle East as suggested by Pew Research and other think tanks.



 

 

 

 

 

In another showing of stupidity, Donnie Dumb Dumb threatens to slash funds for Pennsylvania unless their governor helps him win.

LOL, what an idiot. Threatening to blackmail a crucial swing state that he barely won in 2016 vs. a much less popular candidate a week before the election, fucking moron.

It's the Mitt Romney 47% and tRump "grab 'em by the pussy" all over again.