Thursday, September 20, 2018

The System is Working

David Schultz writes on MinnPost The irony of Donald Trump: The system works

I usually enjoy reading or listening to David's perspectives.  And it seems he has nailed it again.

31 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well, no. In two recent elections we put a minority president in office. The system doesn't work. It no longer can repair itself.

--Hiram

John said...

Hiram,
I know you wish to live in a country with a different system, however you do not.

Our system is excellent in that a candidate has to have broad base of support across much of the country.

Hillary was only popular in urban centers and she called folks in much of the country irredeemable deplorables and ignored their voices...

So she lost... Maybe the DEMs learned something from the error, though it does not seem like it.

John said...

Hiram,
I know you wish to live in a country with a different system, however you do not.

Our system is excellent in that a candidate has to have a broad base of support across much of the country.

Hillary was only popular in urban centers and she called folks in much of the country irredeemable deplorables and ignored their voices...

So she lost... Maybe the DEMs learned something from the error, though it does not seem like it. The only thing that seems to helping them is Trump's lies... Suburban voters, especially women, are apparently very tired of him.

Sean said...

The system is just barely getting by at this point.

Anonymous said...

We threw out the votes of three million Americans. Systematically. I think the argument could be made that in doing that we weren't systematic, if they had been thrown out because of voter fraud, for example, the crisis wouldn't be constitutional.

==Hiram

John said...

Hiram,
You mostly see a crisis because you disagree with the results. I see a system that is functioning just as it was intended...

Here is an interesting piece

Sean said...

"Here is an interesting piece"

Ah yes, Erick Erickson, who once famously called David Souter "a goat-f***ing child molester".

John said...

It was an interesting piece.

and

Apparently the author has made some bad choices...

Your point?

Sean said...

"Your point?"

Erick Erickson is an idiot and not credible.

Anonymous said...

Another way our system has broken down is in it's ability to do things that have popular support generally, and majority support in Congress.

--Hiram

John said...

Hiram,
I do agree that the “2 tribes” model is flawed.

A pox on both their houses... :-)

Laurie said...

the system is not working as intended. Only the senate was intended to give smaller states more equal power. Here is the system as it works currently:

presidential elections - favor the minority - 2 recent pres candidates won even though they received fewer votes

senate favors the minority - people in Wyoming have 60 times more voting power than those living in California

house - favors the minority - the dems need to win by about 10% to take back the house

supreme court - favors the minority- as dems pres candidates have received more votes in 5 of last 7 elections yet most justices are conservative.

The way the system is currently working is highly undemocratic and I am quite sure not what the founders intended - there is no way they could anticipate how the country would grow and change, which is why they allowed for amending the constitution, which has been done many times, such as direct elections of senators.

John said...

I will never understand your wanting to have the East and West coast urban areas rule our huge diverse country with an iron fist. I just don't think that would end well. I think whole regions would rebel and chaos would ensue...

Though I assume the egotistical Liberals think they could get by just fine without those irredeemable deplorable fly over states.

The rules of the game were set ~240 years ago and the Democrats have been failing to respect them. Therefore they have lost... To win this game a party must have a platform that appeals to people from most regions of the country. They have chosen a platform that mostly appeals nearly exclusively to the urban centers of our country. SHAME ON THEM.

The Supreme Court issue is interesting. I am sure they did not imagine an 85 year old still on the court. Shouldn't they be dead or retired by now?

John said...

And yes the founders provided for >Constitutional amendments.

Good luck getting one through with Tribe Liberal and Tribe Conservative pretty well balanced in our country... :-)

Laurie said...

of all your strange views I think this one is the most bizarre- that the views of the minority should take precedence over the majority across all branches of govt. Why do you have so little regard for the views of people who live in cities and suburbs all across the country?

here is the definition of democracy for you to reflect on: control of an organization or group by the majority of its members

Anonymous said...

The founders provided a system where the winner of the popular vote could lose the election. I think they had their problems.

--Hiram

John said...

Please note that "CONTROL" has gone back and forth regularly over the centuries. Don't blame the system just because the Democrats are currently out of touch with large regions of our country...

Remember that the DEMs had "complete CONTROL" as recently as 2010...

And looking at the link, it looks like the GOP has usually been on the losing side of the system. Maybe their losing lately is a sign of how far left the DEMs went.

John said...

So you have a relatively excellent proven system where power is balanced and shifts back / forth as each side over reaches...

Why in the world would you want to change it?

Sean said...

John would be pounding the table and screaming incoherently if an urban minority were stifling a rural majority. He only likes the current system because it is producing the results he desires.

John said...

I was fine in 2009, and I am fine now...

Remember that mostly I like gridlock in government.

Since both tribes are becoming more extreme, doing nothing is often better. :-)

Anonymous said...

One problem with that is that the definition of “extreme” in the United States includes National Health Care. In the rest of the civilized world, it’s included in the definition of “mainstream”.

Moose

John said...

From your perspective, a lot of the world must be uncivilized then. Calling the majority humans savages is not very nice.

Anonymous said...

No. I'm saying it's uncivil to think that health care isn't a human right. Please, try growing a brain.

Moose

John said...

I just read what you wrote...

"National Health Care. In the rest of the civilized world, it’s included"

Which would imply that you think most of the world is "uncivilized"...

Anonymous said...

Do you think tribes cut off from 'civilization' don't care for their sick without question?

No. They of course recognize it as the human right that it is. So, even the remote tribes of the world are civilized in that regard.

Moose

John said...

How is this different than in the USA?

Everyone can go to the ER...

We spend more than a trillion dollars per year to care for our poor, young and/or elderly...

"•Medicare spending grew 3.6% to $672.1 billion in 2016, or 20 percent of total NHE.
•Medicaid spending grew 3.9% to $565.5 billion in 2016, or 17 percent of total NHE."

And yet the Far Left still sees this inadequate.

Anonymous said...

We could spend less if we did it as well as the more civilized nations. I never thought someone like you would think it wise to continue the wasteful spending in our health care system.

That we've monetized health care does not make us a more civil people.

Moose

John said...

Civilization
a : a relatively high level of cultural and technological development
specifically : the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained


b : the culture characteristic of a particular time or place
//the impact of European civilization on the lands they colonized

John said...

G2A Healthcare Cost Drivers

G2A Healthcare Discussions

Anonymous said...

Civilization
a : a relatively high level of cultural and technological development
specifically : the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained

That we've monetized health care does not make us a more civil people.

Thank you.

Moose

John said...

I think this topic deserves its own post. Maybe later today.