ender4 Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 53 minutes ago, ml1dch said: Would be hee-larious. What would actually happen if its a tie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 Serious question - is it likely that Democrats win the presidency, and control the Senate and Congress after this election? and if Democrats only win Presidency and 1 house, will the next 5 years just be complete gridlock of government with nothing getting through because either side will block each other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mozzavfc Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 6 minutes ago, ender4 said: What would actually happen if its a tie? Trump and Biden fight it out battle royale style 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 7 minutes ago, ender4 said: What would actually happen if its a tie? It's pretty unprecedented*, but broadly as per the post you quote. The House chooses the President, the Senate chooses the Vice-president. If both are tied and both vote along party lines then I think Speaker of the House takes it, but the Internet doesn't seem to know for sure. Gut feeling - if it did happen, you might find an anti-Trump Republican (Romney?) to vote the other way. *although not completely, see the election of 1800. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 17 minutes ago, Mozzavfc said: Trump and Biden fight it out battle royale style 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 20 minutes ago, ender4 said: Serious question - is it likely that Democrats win the presidency, and control the Senate and Congress after this election? If you are willing to believe polls and averages and so on, I believe 538 are currently giving something like a 70% chance of a Dem trifecta. The Senate is the least likely part to be won, as Democrats need to flip four seats just to get to a 50-50 tie (they are defending one lost-cause seat in Alabama). They appear to be on track to flip somewhere between 3 and 5, so there's not a lot of margin for error. The presidency is definitely not a sure thing, though more likely than not at this stage. The House is a certainty. 24 minutes ago, ender4 said: and if Democrats only win Presidency and 1 house, will the next 5 years just be complete gridlock of government with nothing getting through because either side will block each other? Yes. If Dems do not win the Senate, they will pass essentially nothing. Even if they do win the Senate, they will not achieve anything close to a filibuster-proof 60 seat caucus, so they will have to choose to either abandon the filibuster or pass almost nothing (they can pass one bill a year with 51 votes/50 + VP, but it has to be connected to the budget and is subject to a bunch of other restrictions). In general, gridlock and achieving absolutely nothing is a very safe bet in American politics. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 How will the Senate elections work? If it's in one of the relevant states will the ballot contain separate sections for presidential and senate elections? Could you effectively vote Republican for one house and Democrat for the other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 58 minutes ago, Mozzavfc said: Trump and Biden fight it out battle royale style 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 9 minutes ago, Wainy316 said: How will the Senate elections work? If it's in one of the relevant states will the ballot contain separate sections for presidential and senate elections? Could you effectively vote Republican for one house and Democrat for the other? Yes to both questions. In some states the ballots are absolutely huge. There are also state and local elections at the same time in many places, and California for example has about a dozen referendums (called 'propositions', but we would call them referendums). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 For example... 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said: If you are willing to believe polls and averages and so on, I believe 538 are currently giving something like a 70% chance of a Dem trifecta. The Senate is the least likely part to be won, as Democrats need to flip four seats just to get to a 50-50 tie (they are defending one lost-cause seat in Alabama). They appear to be on track to flip somewhere between 3 and 5, so there's not a lot of margin for error. The presidency is definitely not a sure thing, though more likely than not at this stage. The House is a certainty. Yes. If Dems do not win the Senate, they will pass essentially nothing. Even if they do win the Senate, they will not achieve anything close to a filibuster-proof 60 seat caucus, so they will have to choose to either abandon the filibuster or pass almost nothing (they can pass one bill a year with 51 votes/50 + VP, but it has to be connected to the budget and is subject to a bunch of other restrictions). In general, gridlock and achieving absolutely nothing is a very safe bet in American politics. I would hope the Dems are a little more circumspect than the time Reid got rid of the fillibuster on nominees in Obama's years. Though Reid has emerged from the wilderness to push for abolishing the fillibuster altogether in recent weeks. All decisions have consequences, some short term, some long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 22, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 22, 2020 2 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: alifornia for example has about a dozen referendums (called 'propositions', but we would call them referendums). I have my fingers crossed for a no vote on Prop 22 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
il_serpente Posted October 22, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 22, 2020 6 minutes ago, bickster said: I have my fingers crossed for a no vote on Prop 22 I'll hopefully be contributing to its defeat. Though I will say that a lot of the Uber and Lyft drivers were quite happy with being contractors until COVID hit and they found they couldn't collect unemployment when their gigs dried up. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 22, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 22, 2020 18 minutes ago, il_serpente said: I'll hopefully be contributing to its defeat. Though I will say that a lot of the Uber and Lyft drivers were quite happy with being contractors until COVID hit and they found they couldn't collect unemployment when their gigs dried up. Certainly in a UK context they cannot be "Independent Contractors" (Courts have already ruled on that here but the cycle of appeals has yet to be exhausted, Uber having lost every stage so far) It's a complicated issue but essentially Uber exert to much control over the working conditions of the drivers for them to be truly independent (thats the UK position anyway) - but this is for a different opic. In my world I just want Uber to lose shit loads of money at every available opportunity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A'Villan Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 3 hours ago, sne said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, villakram said: I would hope the Dems are a little more circumspect than the time Reid got rid of the fillibuster on nominees in Obama's years. Though Reid has emerged from the wilderness to push for abolishing the fillibuster altogether in recent weeks. All decisions have consequences, some short term, some long term. I don't think it would be good if Democrats settled for passing nothing except two budget bills until the mid-terms, and that's all that is possible without filibuster reform. McConnell has really made the decision very clear. Of course, Democrats will bottle it, so I think you'll get your wish. Edited October 22, 2020 by HanoiVillan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don_Simon Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 Trump: "We're learnig to live with the Coronavirus". Biden: "No, we're learning to die from it". Biden much more alert and aware at the start of the this debate than the first one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancvillan Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 12 hours ago, villakram said: I would hope the Dems are a little more circumspect than the time Reid got rid of the fillibuster on nominees in Obama's years. Though Reid has emerged from the wilderness to push for abolishing the fillibuster altogether in recent weeks. All decisions have consequences, some short term, some long term. My understanding was that Reid pushed this through as Mcconnell was preventing appointments to the DC appeals court on the basis that it was underworked. I was never for SCOTUS nominations. Obviously once Reps controlled the WH, Mcconnell allowed votes on DC Appeals court nominees and applied the nuclear option to SCOTUS nominees too. It's easy to say "the Dems started it", but that implies that Mcconnell isn't driven by a cynical lust tor power - which is something I don't think even he would deny. If Dems win the house, senate and WH and stack the Supreme Court, I guarantee there will be zero National Review articles saying "well that's what you're allowed to do when you're in power", which has been their verbatim stance on McConnell's SCOTUS actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancvillan Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 11 hours ago, bickster said: In my world I just want Uber to lose shit loads of money at every available opportunity They seem to be doing a pretty good job of this without your help. It's amazing how they keep getting funding but lose billions every year without really building anything proprietary. I **** hate them too. I really don't need to live in a world where everything is a race to the bottom / cheapest version of something. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 Them that want to buy Newcastle invested a huge chunk in uber, $3.5bn, it was at the time the single biggest bank transaction ever made And that's for 5%... Softbank invested $9.3bn in them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts