• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

2020 US Presidential Election

Status
Not open for further replies.

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,027
Location
SE London
For claiming that the election is insecure or unfair when it isn't? Yes, obviously. Given how dangerous that is.
What evidence do you have for this statement?

I think there is some talking-at-cross-purposes going on here.

Clearly there is much that is unfair about the US election. The electoral college system tends to bias towards the Republicans, sometimes giving them the Presidency even when the Democrats get more votes than them. The the lack of population-proportionality in senate elections has the same effect, giving an in-built Republican bias, while also giving each voter in small states much more influence than voters in larger (by population) states. There are also real issues about the Republicans seeking - often successfully - to make it very difficult for people to vote in areas or demographics that tend to vote Democrat, effectively disenfranchising some Democrat voters. Add to that the lack of federal representation for people in Washington DC and Puerto Rico (coincidentally both strongly Democrat-leaning places - so unfair both to the residents of those places and to the Democrats). And finally the first-past-the-post electoral system leads to very similar problems of lack of proportionality that you see in the UK.

However, it looks to me like @Starmill was specifically referring to Trump's repeated comments about unfairness. Trump does not acknowledge the actual problems with the system (which almost entirely favour the Republicans), and instead makes up unsubstantiated claims of fraud and insecurity around postal voting, which he claims helps the Democrats, but which of course largely do not exist. To that extent, Starmill is correct: The election is not unfair in the way that Trump claims. But @GRALISTAIR is also correct that there are actual unfairnesses in the system.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,807
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
It is a little bit chicken and egg. Lets assume the Democrats win, they have to persuade the population and do something about making the electoral college fairer which it clearly is not (imho). The next step is the Supreme Court. You can even argue the house is not totally fair either but with the first two you could redistrict that. The Senate will be the hardest thing to change. If Puerto Rico became a state it could change things a little and of course Washington DC itself. We live in interesting times.
 

nlogax

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
5,352
Location
Mostly Glasgow-ish. Mostly.
It'll likely be a continuation of one of politics' longest running themes; election winning party decides there are 'more important things to work on' than election reform. True bipartisanship is required to fix the Electoral College problem.
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,807
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
It'll likely be a continuation of one of politics' longest running themes; election winning party decides there are 'more important things to work on' than election reform. True bipartisanship is required to fix the Electoral College problem.

Yep no doubt you are correct. Bipartisanship is very sorely lacking in the 2020 election/politics cycle.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
The Democrats never accepted the results of the 2016 election surely it should work both ways.
The Democrats did accept the 2016 result even though Clinton got more votes than Trump. Sometimes the rules are unfair but you still abide by them while, as you say, hoping to get them changed in future.

Trump is threatening not to accept the result in 2020.
Back to the electoral college. Britain periodically has constituency boundary changes. Something of a similar ilk needs to happen in the USA regardless of the outcome of 2020. Wyoming should get less electoral college votes and California with its population and Florida as examples deserve more.
As far as I'm aware that happens every 10 years based on the census results (and by the way Trump seems to have curtailed the census too). But while the number of House representatives is based on population, each State also has two Senators regardless of size, and its number of Electoral College votes is the total of those two figures. So the bias in favour of small rural states is built into the electoral college too, though not as pronounced as in the Senate. Wyoming has one representative in the House and three electoral college votes for 600,000 people, or one vote for every 200,000 people. California has 53 representatives and 55 votes for 40 million or one vote for about 720,000 people.

The practice in most states of giving all their Electoral College votes to the popular winner in that state regardless of margin of victory doesn't help either. And if the electoral college is tied, the House votes for the president, but by one vote per state not one vote per representative.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
Joe Biden is 77 he isn't 107, i doubt he is THAT infirm. I think this kind of stuff is rather overblown, as is the stuff about Trump trying to hang on if he loses. Unless we are into a hanging chad situation again i doubt it'll happen.
How many live to 107? As far as Trump is concerned, read his lips. The matter of how Trump would be removed has been discussed at the highest level, excepting the very highest level, if you believe (as I don't) that the President is the highest level, except in name.
 

birchesgreen

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
5,044
Location
Birmingham
How many live to 107? As far as Trump is concerned, read his lips. The matter of how Trump would be removed has been discussed at the highest level, excepting the very highest level, if you believe (as I don't) that the President is the highest level, except in name.

Well Biden won't be 107 even if he does two terms so don't worry about it.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,027
Location
SE London
An unusual bit of nicer-than-normal news: In Utah the Democrat and Republican candidates for State Governor have released a joint video in which they both appear, calling for respect and civility - and making it clear that they respect each other's commitment to democracy and the American people, even while disagreeing on policies. This is the Twitter link to the video: https://twitter.com/PetersonUtah/status/1318537452135550977
 

nlogax

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
5,352
Location
Mostly Glasgow-ish. Mostly.
The second and final debate is tonight. This time the star of the show will be a mute button which I fully expect will be heavily used. What's the betting Trump turns an interesting shade of puce as he yells from his podium while Biden is talking? Won't be staying up for this one but if I happen to have a sleepless night then I may have to tune in merely out of morbid curiosity more than anything else. This is where Trump may finally lose it - and if so, his chances of re-election.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
This is where Trump may finally lose it - and if so, his chances of re-election.
Apparently his team have told him to keep quiet and let Biden speak, in the hope that he'll make a serious gaffe. I don't think, at this point, a gaffe would be enough to swing opinion back in Trump's favour.
 

nlogax

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
5,352
Location
Mostly Glasgow-ish. Mostly.
Apparently his team have told him to keep quiet and let Biden speak, in the hope that he'll make a serious gaffe. I don't think, at this point, a gaffe would be enough to swing opinion back in Trump's favour.

Trump being told to keep quiet is advice I can't see him adhering to. He'll listen to Biden for a bit and then descend into impotent rage if he hears anything he disagrees with or that scratches away at his ego and paper thin skin. The past four years have taught us he just can't help himself. He's his own worst enemy when it comes to this stuff.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
The second and final debate is tonight. This time the star of the show will be a mute button which I fully expect will be heavily used. What's the betting Trump turns an interesting shade of puce as he yells from his podium while Biden is talking? Won't be staying up for this one but if I happen to have a sleepless night then I may have to tune in merely out of morbid curiosity more than anything else. This is where Trump may finally lose it - and if so, his chances of re-election.
I think I read the mute button was only used at the start of each topic, when each candidate has a chance to speak for 2min without interruption. The remaining 11min per topic is still a free-for-all.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
I think I read the mute button was only used at the start of each topic, when each candidate has a chance to speak for 2min without interruption. The remaining 11min per topic is still a free-for-all.
Even that will be an improvement - in the last debate it was something like 20 seconds before Trump started interrupting.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Even that will be an improvement - in the last debate it was something like 20 seconds before Trump started interrupting.
I will be employing my own mute button. If I happen to be awake at whatever time it is I certainly won't be watching.
 

Typhoon

Established Member
Joined
2 Nov 2017
Messages
3,488
Location
Kent
Meanwhile Thursday night sees the second and final live Trump v Biden debate. I'm not holding my breath on this being an improvement over the first one. Trump has already claimed that NBC's Kristen Welker will be 'extraordinarily unfair' as a moderator. Getting his excuses in early, I see..
It looks like they chose the right person.
US election 2020: Kristen Welker was 'clear winner' on social media
From the parts I say neither candidate excelled so maybe that was not difficult. I just hope they can unearth someone any good to contest the race in four years time

To give the President his due, he did compliment the moderator
"By the way, so far I respect very much the way you're handling this," he said.

All quotes from https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2020-54655482
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
To give the President his due, he did compliment the moderator
I think that maybe it's starting to get through to him that whining like a little baby about how mean the media is to him doesn't project strength in quite the way he thought that it did. It seems to me that he really believed that people would have seen the 60 Minutes footage as something other than him being an idiot.
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,688
Location
Devon
I listened to it on BBC Sounds this morning and I thought Biden came across pretty well compared to some of the times I’ve listened to him.
DT had his big bag of dead cats ready but didn’t land an awful lot on the table and clearly misunderstood the final question - What would you say to the American public the morning after you’d won?

Anyway it certainly wasn’t as embarrassing as the first one and the moderator was pretty impressive in the way she managed it.
 

Darandio

Established Member
Joined
24 Feb 2007
Messages
10,674
Location
Redcar

nlogax

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
5,352
Location
Mostly Glasgow-ish. Mostly.
I caught the last ten minutes (thanks insomnia) and noted the bit which probably lost Texas for Biden when he talked about moving away from oil, remembering his childhood in Delaware living close to the refinery complexes there. Trump jumped all over that..goodbye to 38 college votes for Biden.

Biden's points about fenceline communities living close to those complexes were absolutely valid. I used to occasionally drive via Marcus Hook as a shortcut to get home, and it was rank. The smell of chemicals and oil in the air, and the flaring towers burning off impurities from crude oil made the entire detour a windows-up affair. I can't imagine people living there - but they did.
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,688
Location
Devon
I caught the last ten minutes (thanks insomnia) and noted the bit which probably lost Texas for Biden when he talked about moving away from oil, remembering his childhood in Delaware living close to the refinery complexes there. Trump jumped all over that..goodbye to 38 college votes for Biden.

Biden's points about fenceline communities living close to those complexes were absolutely valid. I used to occasionally drive via Marcus Hook as a shortcut to get home, and it was rank. The smell of chemicals and oil in the air, and the flaring towers burning off impurities from crude oil made the entire detour a windows-up affair. I can't imagine people living there - but they did.
I agree, it felt in many ways that Trump landed a good one there, especially as it was near the end of the debate. Biden had to give that answer though.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
I caught the last ten minutes (thanks insomnia) and noted the bit which probably lost Texas for Biden when he talked about moving away from oil, remembering his childhood in Delaware living close to the refinery complexes there. Trump jumped all over that..goodbye to 38 college votes for Biden.
I'm not as sure that it necessarily lost the Texan vote. Even in Texas people are (just) starting to realise that the writing is on the wall for big oil as we know it. There's a little bit of a dawning realisation that maybe, just maybe the oil companies don't care about Texans as much as they do about money, and that perhaps the warnings about increased ocean temperatures leading to more frequent, more powerful storms may have something to do with the more frequent, more powerful storms hitting the Gulf Coast.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
Plus I expect the oil workers in texas weren't considering voting for Joe anyway. It's the cities that primarily vote democrat which barring the office workers (who would be relatively insulated as oil companies transition to "energy" companies) with their population advantage
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Plus I expect the oil workers in texas weren't considering voting for Joe anyway. It's the cities that primarily vote democrat which barring the office workers (who would be relatively insulated as oil companies transition to "energy" companies) with their population advantage
Just saw a piece on the BBC saying that Texas is still for Trump by about four points anyway. So it may be that Biden is cementing his base in other states rather than taking a gamble on losing those votes elsewhere.

Not sure exactly what Biden did say, but perhaps he could have said something about supporting local workers to transition away from oil (and coal in other states) to re-train in jobs that are more secure in a future where fossil fuels are likely to dwindle whatever happens. Oil industry skills are very transferable to things like building windfarms and carbon capture sites. Whereas Trump is just trying to stem a tide of economic as well as environmental pressure that will tip the balance towards renewables more and more as time goes on.
 
Last edited:

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,688
Location
Devon
Not sure exactly what Biden did say, but perhaps he could have said something about supporting local workers to transition away from oil (and coal in other states) to re-train in jobs that are more secure in a future where fossil fuels are likely to dwindles whatever happens. Oil industry skills are very transferable to things like building windfarms and carbon capture sites.
That’s pretty much what he did say really, although he looked a bit like a rabbit caught in the headlights doing it.
 

DelW

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2015
Messages
3,834
The petrochemical industry won't disappear even if the world stops burning oil, in fact that might even prolong its existence. Oil is used in the production of many materials that will still be needed, most obviously things like plastics and bitumen. Arguably a future world may criticise our era for "wasting" oil by burning it as fuel, rather than using it efficiently and retaining a resource for the future.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
Arguably a future world may criticise our era for "wasting" oil by burning it as fuel, rather than using it efficiently and retaining a resource for the future.

I've been thinking that for a while. Quite apart from the important environmental reasons we should stop burning so much of this stuff as fuel when we are either already or will soon be able to replace it with other more sustainable fuel sources when we may well need it for other uses for which we don't yet have alternatives!
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
Just saw a piece on the BBC saying that Texas is still for Trump by about four points anyway. So it may be that Biden is cementing his base in other states rather than taking a gamble on losing those votes elsewhere.

Not sure exactly what Biden did say, but perhaps he could have said something about supporting local workers to transition away from oil (and coal in other states) to re-train in jobs that are more secure in a future where fossil fuels are likely to dwindle whatever happens. Oil industry skills are very transferable to things like building windfarms and carbon capture sites. Whereas Trump is just trying to stem a tide of economic as well as environmental pressure that will tip the balance towards renewables more and more as time goes on.
Biden is spending quite a lot (even by gross American standards) in Texas, emphasising Trump's attacks on Obamacare which are having huge impacts both there and in Florida (the latter looking increasingly winnable for the Dems.) Also, don't discount the immense number of votes that are coming in early, particularly amongst women who, it seems, are much more ready now to see Trump for what he is. I feel the 'popular vote' could be many, many more millions for Dem than Rep, which won't stop Trump alleging voterigging and all sorts: noticeable how desperate the Russians and their pawns the Iranians are getting in their attempts to yet swing it for Trump.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
I've been thinking that for a while. Quite apart from the important environmental reasons we should stop burning so much of this stuff as fuel when we are either already or will soon be able to replace it with other more sustainable fuel sources when we may well need it for other uses for which we don't yet have alternatives!
But the profligate use of plastics is increasingly coming under fire as the microfibres of clothing and cheap wrapping materials is increasingly being found in food chains, of which we are a dependant species.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
But the profligate use of plastics is increasingly coming under fire as the microfibres of clothing and cheap wrapping materials is increasingly being found in food chains, of which we are a dependant species.

Oh for sure! I'd quite like us to move away from plastics as well particularly considering their disposal issues! But one step at a time ;)
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
But the profligate use of plastics is increasingly coming under fire as the microfibres of clothing and cheap wrapping materials is increasingly being found in food chains, of which we are a dependant species.
Petroleum is useful for a lot more than burning and making plastic bags/wrapping/bottles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top