It depends. Obviously court battle(s) are a wild card. WI, MI, and PA not changing their laws to allow early counting of mail-in ballots definitely delays things. But Biden could still have an election night (tentative) win depending on the map. Trump’s roads to victory do really depend on the 3 states above so if he ends up the victor, it won’t be for a while
2 Likes
I think a decisive Trump victory would mean no court battle, because Biden would concede. But even a decisive Biden win, Trump is going to accuse the states of ballot fraud. He has said multiple times he won’t accept a loss.
2 Likes
For sure, he can make it messy. But if there really is a massive blue wave and, for instance, TX and GA go blue, he’s not gonna get very far with it.
4 Likes
Should Biden win, which has a currently favourable probability, what should be the top priorities to heal the rift in our poor, polarized country?
4 Likes
- deal with the rona – like a coordinated nationwide effort
- send out stimulus money
- cancel student loan debt
- whatever else elizabeth warren says to do
7 Likes
I mean, sure, satisfying, but those seem to push us further down the polarization track.
I’d say getting rid of most gerrymandering would be a huge win. And it’s actually (theoretically) possible, since the census was just completed. I think this could be a accomplished bipartisan.
3 Likes
eh, polarization is less concerning to me than mass death and widespread economic devastation
6 Likes
Is that something someone in the executive branch could make happen? Also wouldn’t the Democrats (as a machine, not the actual citizens) try to push for gerrymandering that just prefers them instead? For bipartisanship, what if the Republicans go with their tried and true “I’ll throw a tantrum and blame everything on the other team and refuse to cooperate” tactic that they’ve been seeming to favor?
If I could wave a magic wand I’d be all about getting rid of gerrymandering though.
3 Likes
also i would suggest that items 1 and 2 on my list are not at all partisan
4 Likes
They could, though I hope they won’t just keep the sea-saw in motion. A reset of voting precincts to square shapes would put the country back onto a road of majority rule.
3 Likes
Gerrymandering is largely controlled at the state level. That’s why down ballot state legislature elections are critical in census years.
The courts COULD rule that gerrymandering violates basic constitutional rights, but they haven’t. So this would have to be fixed via constitutional amendments (Federal and/or state).
8 Likes
This is a difficult question, especially when I don’t think that the president is the cause of the polarization, but a result. My best guesses:
- Major economic stimulus bills
- Healthcare and drug change
- Term limits
Economic Stimulus Bills
I took government and history in 2010, so please bare with me, I don’t remember all the limits and responsibilities of the presidential administration. I do remember, however, that government spending invested in infrastructure and creating jobs in those areas helped the country massive amounts.
Instead of sending more money to corporations, issue additional stimulus money to households and to farmers.
Create more jobs and repair roads, bridges, etc.
Healthcare and drug change
Of course I personally want Medicare for All and am appreciative of the Medicaid expansion. One thing that both Republicans and Democrats agree on, however, is that we need better healthcare and lower drug prices. If we can lower the cost for individuals to receive the care they need and not call it “Biden/Harris Care”, we would be removing a major argument and people would be healthier.
It still blow my mind the people who are on Medicaid who hate ObamaCare and have no idea what the Affordable Care Act is.
4 Likes
Yea, Obamacare was started by Repubs as an attack on it, and then obama quipped he’s “kind of come to like the name”
5 Likes
Good for him, and I mean, it was a good thing. Not a perfect thing, but a good thing. But people are embarrassed about being on government assistance and don’t like the idea of their money paying for someone else’s healthcare (but only if we’re talking about government funded healthcare).
My point being, let’s fix the problem and avoid the polarizing naming conventions while we’re at it.
4 Likes
I think polarization is more of a cultural thing than anything. People want to think in terms of us/them binaries and rarely want to do the hard work of understanding why people have different world views.
For another policy that might help, maybe ranked preference voting. I could see that being a way to making multiple parties viable, or at least give people more of a sense of consensus elections rather than winner take all ones.
9 Likes
I’m really dreading this upcoming week where every day we’ll have a new frontrunner and tons of speculation. After 2016 I am really worried about getting my hopes up and being crushed again. I would love to know what people are planning to do to take care of yourselves and get through this week.
7 Likes
Not paying attention to the news until states are actually “called” and even then not getting excited unless margin of victory in the state is significant
3 Likes
I’m worried about the landslides though. I think any state that is a landslide win for Biden will be used by Trump as “proof” that the election in that state was tampered with, since he doesn’t think there is any way Biden will win. I’m really worried that no matter what happens, we are in for a rough few weeks/months while this all gets settled in the courts.
6 Likes
Yeah, but look at historical recalls. Even when (some, minimal) fraud is found, swinging tallies more than a fraction of a point is HARD.
Depending on how bad Trump is a sore loser (if in fact he loses) I can see the R establishment ditching him since they have the prize they really wanted with Barrett being confirmed.
2 Likes
Trump still refusing to accept defeat is pretty much what we want right up until Jan. 20, because the alternative is Trump with nothing to lose.
4 Likes