General Politics Discussion VIII [ARCHIVED] • Page 568

From what we've heard? Optimistically, yes. And yes.

 

we could know today, technically.

 

Its kinda scary how high things are peaking right now, but no one is paying attention because we're all focused on the election.

And then in the aftermath... Trump isn't gonna want to do anything

The country really needs to shut down again for the next two weeks. We know even two weeks can put a big dent in the numbers. We could shut down for two weeks, still let people enjoy thanksgiving, then shut down for a couple of weeks in december and hopefully help prevent the very real possibility that is 10k deaths across the US on Christmas Day.

But we congresses help to do that. And while you could probably have worked up something where states were told "we'll bail you out Jan 20th, do something now" without the senate... we're fucked

 

the disdain with which Jake Tapper refers to the Trump kids as his "spawn" lol

 

so depressing

Just had the “what to do about the holidays” talk with my dad. We’re all on the same page thankfully

 

Not election related and probably will seem good in comparison to the rest of the country, but New York just had it's highest case (3000), death (24), and positivity day since May/June and Cuomo literally keeps on tweeting every day "We continue to take strong action." Like, the virus has been increasing rapidly and we're basically doing nothing in 98% of the state

 

This isn't abolishing, but one approach from The Atlantic:

"Allocate one seat to each state automatically to preserve federalism, but apportion the rest based on population.

Start with the total U.S. population, then divide by 100, since that’s the size of the current, more deliberative upper chamber. Next, allocate senators to each state according to their share of the total; 2/100 equals two senators, 3/100 equals three, etc. Update the apportionment every decade according to the official census.

Using 2017 census estimates as a proxy for the official one coming in 2020, the Rule of One Hundred yields the following outcome: 26 states get only one senator (having about 1/100 of the population or less), 12 states stay at two, eight states gain one or two, and the four biggest states gain more than two: California gets 12 total, Texas gets nine, and Florida and New York get six each. This apportionment shows how out of whack the current Senate has become.

In the new allocation, the total number of senators would be 110. The total is more than 100 because 10 of the smallest states have much less than 0.5/100 of the U.S. population but are still entitled to one senator each."

 

Doug Collins was my rep. Andrew Clyde is my rep now. His sign is literally a gun.

Soon it'll be Donald McEachin, or there's a chance it'll be Abigail Spanberger but I doubt it.

 

LFG/JFG

 

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMJuE2AN6/

 

With the way that things have gone this week, it basically means they'll be done on Sunday. :)

 

Not Gronk?

 

I .... like Joe's GA odds right now.

 

Indoor dining/bars are already closed across the entire state. Our governor alluded to more shutdowns today which i think would entail closing all non-essential retail, closing outdoor dining, etc. But after that i'm not sure what more could be done. It basically seems like every time you go out in public now it's a gamble.

 

All my government representatives are democrats and they legitimately all suck. I honestly think Gillibrand might be the best I've got. Cuomo, Schumer, Suozzi... yuck. Even my state assembly person is basically if Elon Musk were a politician.

 

what about when they beat the pats with a backup QB

 

Do it, come be my neighbor.

 

Massachusetts numbers are the worst since then too - 20+ deaths and running 1500-1600 new cases.... :/

 

yea i lost money on that game. not good!

 

lol I was watching that. Called them something else too but my brain is short circuiting

 

Thank god. Think this would prevent any House flips in Illinois. Oberweiss already claimed victory