I’m not particularly interested in a “let’s design a government from scratch” because it does away with all the interesting problems that the current rules reflect.
The only way to constrain it to anything fun to discuss is “make a system for America in particular” but then it has to work with the American system, as that is where the problems sit.
I think you can have both discussions simultaneous, as long as they’re separate. I find it interesting to discuss the current political system and make up of the US government.
At the same time, I’d also be interested in having a discussion about some perceived “perfect” system of government, which would turn out to be not-so-perfect, but would be a fun intellectual exercise to engage in regardless.
Especially with a bunch of people who play a lot of complex games and who have at least a reasonable understanding of game theory. What mechanisms could be designed to achieve the desired/expected outcomes and how to account for bad actors and/or unforeseen exploitation. This is essentially what the founding fathers were doing, bringing their understanding of how government could and should operate and then debating and negotiating with each other until the US Constitution emerged in all its imperfect but well-intentioned reality.
To Luke’s point, this discussion could include a variety of constraints that come with designing for the American circumstances - ranging from basically where we are today to an almost unrecognizable American political & governmental landscape.
I think that discussion, regardless of how close we hew to the current reality in the United States, would warrant its own thread so this thread can address the reality as it currently exists (and will exist, day by day) now that Trump has not won re-election.
I’m on board with starting the discussion, elsewhere of course, of what could come out of a new constitutional convention.
I’ve already pushed other political conversations with my friends into this direction.
It seemed to be more productive than just raging at our current system.
Since state legislatures are the ones that vote, and most states are rural red states, the most likely outcome of a constitutional convention is a conservative disaster. The 26 least populated states together contain less than 20% of the population, but could theoretically approve any amendment entirely on their own.
Almost every group that is agitating for a constitutional convention is extremely conservative.
I honestly don’t believe a constitutional convention is possible, nor do I believe that it could have any positive outcome, under our current political system. It would allow the minority of the American population to completely rewrite the constitution without any boundaries or constraints of any kind.
It’s entirely unreasonable for the hand we have to work with now and in the foreseeable future, I mean. I love me some intellectual exercises, but I am a pragmatist at heart and so if your idea is not reasonably achievable within the system we have right now then it’s only so interesting to me.
Unless we want to abandon this game and try another one, which I am also game for but which is an entirely different discussion that carries its own set of massive problems.
I was being a bit facetious while drawing attention to a historical fact I quite enjoy.
If we’re going to actually play the game, I do feel like at whatever constitutional amendment meeting/hearing/whatever. It may be made easier being able to pull from the writings of founding fathers showing them debating the idea of 2 or 3 coequal presidents and ultimately compromising on the idea of having 2 but 1 be lesser in some way.
I do still think it wouldn’t happen because of all the reasons it wouldn’t happen but if we ever were at a point where we’re trying to actually use the machinery for change contained in the founding documents, this idea of a temporary third president only for during transition and with a limited role has a better chance than something more pressing and that’d ultimately do more good like abolishing the senate, or making the house more equal in terms of proportional representation.
Does this mean that we shouldn’t dedicate any thought about what we’d like to have in a new constitution?
And to be clear, I do mean a new convention in the we’re-scrapping-everything-in-the-old-one-and-starting-100%-over. Not the “hey, let’s suggest an amendment or two” sort of thing.
You’re just trying to make the us rome arn’t you?
Wow, that articles sums up what I’ve been feeling for quite a while now, but especially since the election. It is the thing I have been telling family and friends and most of them don’t get it. Many think I’m just upset that “my team” didn’t do better or that I’m unreasonably concerned that “my candidate” may not become President on January 20th. Rather, it is the issues the author has raised - our system has been broken by assholes (politicians, rich donors, and voters) and how repairable or not is very much an open question but there is not much reason to hope or expect it can or will be repaired (which will take a good deal of time in even the best scenario, years and years).
This week my neighbor, a recently retired guy, knocked on my door to ask permission to use my driveway for the unloading of his new hot tub so it could be moved into his backyard. After watching the project unfold and chatting with him and some of the workers (I wore a mask and kept my distance, none of them did and the neighbor kept wanting to talk really close as I kept backing away from him) I went inside for a drink and when I came back out to clean up my garage I heard a bunch of them in the front yard talking about the election. Almost nothing I heard in the 5 minutes that mostly one hot tub worker guy was animatedly discussing what had happened and what future maneuvers Trump could and should do (vote counts changing throughout election night and after is suspicious, Trump shouldn’t concede because the Supreme Court will make him President again if he just doesn’t give in, Dems don’t believe Biden won that is why they are so vocal about saying he won, social media is biased against Conservatives and silences them, it is crazy that they put notes on Trumps tweets that the information is disputed, etc…). I stood in my garage completely dumbstruck about what I was hearing and the fervor with which it was believed. I wanted to do and say something but I literally couldn’t come up with any productive way to call these unpatriotic assholes out on their mountain of bullshit AND I was so shocked to be hearing such a barrage of right-wing talking points spewed out with such credulity that were so divorced from reality. In fucking suburban and well-off Utah, not some hillbilly backwater biased-idea that I clearly have of where such thinking would be found. I’m not surprised Utah voted Trump, but I have been continually surprised to be shown how deluded my fellow citizens are.
It makes me sad that we operate in completely different realities such that there is no way for healthy public discourse and exchange of ideas. It makes me seriously worry what the future holds when such people are supported and whipped up by a man and a political party to support wholly invented ideas of what is real and true and what those invented ideas lead to. Both in the near-term and the longer term I increasingly have a difficult time imagining a productive path forward that does not include violence from these committed believers for our country and governing system.
This entire article terrified me and makes me worried for the future of the United States:
““If President Trump comes out and says: ‘Guys, I have irrefutable proof of fraud, the courts won’t listen, and I’m now calling on Americans to take up arms,’ we would go,” said Fryar, wearing a button-down shirt, pressed slacks and a paisley tie during a recent interview at his office.”
"Asked whether Trump might be duping his followers, he said it’s hard to fathom.
“If I’m being manipulated by Trump … then he is the greatest con man that ever lived in America,” Caleb Fryar said. “I think he’s the greatest patriot that ever lived.”
Yep, same for me. This is the feeling that is building in me the more I hear Trump supporters talk about the election.
Like many Trump supporters interviewed by Reuters, Fontaine was deeply suspicious of computerized voting machines. Trump and his allies have alleged, without producing evidence, a grand conspiracy to manipulate votes through the software used in many battleground states.
It is the tiniest possible hope for a sliver of good, but maybe the only piece of legislation to pass a divided Congress (assuming Democrats don’t win control of the Senate) will be to pass funding and guidelines for states to acquire reliable voting machines that produce a paper trail for every vote cast, even if using a computer screen for input.
I want to believe that it’s in the entire country’s best interests to make voting as secure and transparent as possible, but I’m very worried that Republicans are seeing what Trump is doing now, and how popular it is with their base, and that this is going to become the new normal for elections.
And if that’s the case, then I fear for our democracy.
I’m sure the authorities regularly screen for bugs, but at this point it might be easier to just burn the White House down and start over. It must be loaded with better Russian Tech than a Soyuz capsule, now.
It’s happened before:
