$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 97.76

6,237 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
39.3% of Goal | left

Support:

J.D. Hall
msg tools
Right now, I'm really missing zapf dingbats...

1. DEMOGRAPHICS: There is a lot of animus from the Left toward white people, particularly those who don't live on either of the coasts. That cost the Democrats dearly. While it is true that in three decades whites will not longer be the majority in the country, it's not true now. A lot of white voters, especially those who are struggling economically, think the Democrats worry about the blacks, the Latinos, the immigrants -- in short anybody who isn't white. Trump spoke to these people. You may not like what he said, but he recognized their pain.

2.THE SWAMP: Like most Americans, I am disgusted with the nearly total attention paid to politics and who's winning by the media and the politicians. At the end of the day, Americans want to see progress on solving issues -- education, jobs, infrastructure, health insurance. Basic stuff. But all you see out of pols is how the other side is evil, and the media laps that up. Clinton's problem was/is that she was way too deep into the morass to actually appear to want to take that problem on. Trump wasn't. Will he succeed? Since Congress benefits from this kind of nonsense and would be the entity to pass legislation on it -- nope. But he needs to hammer at them. If he does nothing else, his presidency will be considered a success if he shames Congress into actually earning its money.

3. THE ECONOMY: Most Americans are tentative about their economic future. The recovery from the recession has been tepid and slow -- typical for severe downturns, but that is no comfort to people struggling. Both candidates had plans, and I think Clinton's were better, but Trump sold his ideas more effectively.

4. SOCIAL ISSUES: Didn't matter this time around because the evangelicals stayed out of it and Trump didn't pander to them. Clinton used Trump's deplorable behavior toward women as a wedge to bring social issues into the discussion, but with little success.

5. SCANDALS: Teflon Don was able to deflect his. Clinton was dogged by hers. Neither really mattered in the end.

6. ELECTORAL COLLEGE: It's cute and quaint, but at the very least needs serious updating.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Fox
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
Question everything.
mbmbmbmbmb
The is virtually no possibility of makign significant changes to the EC or changing the way that each state gets two senators. It would require a constitutional amendment.

What is possible, however, is to split a state into multiple states. The only thing required to do that is approval from the state's legislature and 50% of congress.

Tim Draper actually went so far as to try to get a california proposition to do just that, splitting california into 6 states: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Californias

That is the only way to reform the process as there is no way to get enough states to agree to a constitutional amendment which would reduce their power in the Senate. But as it only requires 50% of congress to pass a law to split a state, that is very doable.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Binkowski
United States
Rochester
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
remorseless1 wrote:


5. SCANDALS: Teflon Don was able to deflect his. Clinton was dogged by hers. Neither really mattered in the end.


I wouldn't underestimate this one. The clintons have been festering in their scandals for decades. Wikileaks, emails, and many other allegations pushed her opposition even further from her.


And I'm not sure what the electoral college has to do with this one.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oh my God They Banned Kenny
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sfox wrote:
....What is possible, however, is to split a state into multiple states. The only thing required to do that is approval from the state's legislature and 50% of congress.

Tim Draper actually went so far as to try to get a california proposition to do just that, splitting california into 6 states: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Californias

That is the only way to reform the process as there is no way to get enough states to agree to a constitutional amendment which would reduce their power in the Senate. But as it only requires 50% of congress to pass a law to split a state, that is very doable.


I believe there are already a couple states that do something like this, however, they are smaller states. The practical problem will be the boundaries of the components get drawn and attempts at gerrymandering.

The practical impact in California might have been to allow Trump to win one or two of the sub-components, depending on boundaries.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bwian, just
United States
Longmont
Colorado
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sarxis wrote:
And I'm not sure what the electoral college has to do with this one.

Current standings, per AP:
Electoral College Popular Vote
Clinton 228 59814018
Trump 279 59611678


If you care about the popular vote (and we do for every other office), then the difference in lead for this race is relevant. I don't see a need to change, personally, but I can see why people talk about it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Fox
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
Question everything.
mbmbmbmbmb
Bwian wrote:
Sarxis wrote:
And I'm not sure what the electoral college has to do with this one.

Current standings, per AP:
Electoral College Popular Vote
Clinton 228 59814018
Trump 279 59611678


If you care about the popular vote (and we do for every other office), then the difference in lead for this race is relevant. I don't see a need to change, personally, but I can see why people talk about it.

The total is going to end up with Hillary winning by pretty close to a million votes. For some reason California can't get its shit together to count the votes within 24 hours of the election.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.