2016 Elections

[rstrong]

Fwiw, the polls I've seen show Johnson drawing slightly more voters from Hillary, only reducing her large lead by 1% or so.

Green Party candidate Jill Stein has been taking a strong anti-science stand, courting the anti-vaxxers, anti-WiFi and anti-GMO crowds. The party platform specifically supports homeopathy. Maybe she'll draw some voters away from Trump.

[Vrede too]

I'm anti-GMO and am unsure about EM effects, but otherwise that's a shame. No matter, she's at around 3% and I'll bet that many of those voters won't stick with her if it's close in their states.

I don't think that she'll be on the NC ballot, so will stroke Johnson unless it's looking close here.

Jill Stein: Political positions

(I don't care enough to check out her website for updates and elaborations)

Economy -

Education -

Energy and environment -

Foreign policy - mostly

Healthcare -

Science
vaccines -
homeopathic medicine - When asked in 2012 about the Green Party's pro-homeopathic medicine platform, Stein said that the platform took "an admittedly simple position on a complex issue, and should be improved".
GMOs and pesticides - , though my concern re GMOs is more with environmental impact than personal health.
wireless internet (Wi-Fi) in schools -
"slightly decrease" spending on space exploration - , if it's the military component, fine with me. Removing that and increasing spending on space exploration would also be good.

Reparations for slavery -

In toto, I think Trump definitely and Hillary largely are worse, not that it matters.

[rstrong]

Economy - A mixed bag of very good and very bad.

Education - Mostly good but extremist. (I wouldn't cancel *all* student debt.)

Energy and environment - Mostly good but extremist. (I'd allow fracking but ban most chemical additives. And as discussed before, there are a few instances where nuclear makes sense.)

Foreign policy - A mix of good and TERRIBLY bad.

Healthcare - Mostly good but with a touch of wingnuttery.

Science
vaccines - Very bad

homeopathic medicine - TERRIBLY bad. It's still in the party platform. Her own neutral stance in the face of this, is even worse than the global warming deniers who claim to be neutral because "there's no scientific consensus."

GMOs - Wingnuttery. There is a scientific consensus that currently available food derived from GM crops poses is safe but that each GM food needs to be tested on a case-by-case basis before introduction. Like electrical power, the benefits are obvious but you want proper regulations. Her "moratorium on GMOs" is no less wingnutty than calling for a similar temporary prohibition of electrical use.

pesticides - Good.

wireless internet (Wi-Fi) in schools - Winguttery.

A Wi-Fi access will have a maximum output power of 1/10th of a watt. The typical leakage from a microwave oven is 1 watt. A GSM mobile phone can transmit two watts.

As you double the distance to a transmitter, the field strength drops fourfold. And so if being two metres from a Wi-Fi access point for six hours a day is supposed to be harmful, using a mobile phone pressed against your skull for a second a day is 10 times worse.

Even if "electromagnetic hypersensitivity" were a real thing (double-blind experiments show otherwise), anything coming from the Wi-Fi access point would be insignificant compared to the students' and teachers' cell phones surrounding the kid in class.

And when driving past a local radio station pumping out tens of thousands of watts, or near a cell tower or airport radar or weather radar, the kid would explode.

"slightly decrease" spending on space exploration - Bad. Granted there are examples of massive waste, but they tend to originate in Congress rather than NASA. (Like SLS, AKA the Senate Launch System.) MilSpace has its own budget, and generally isn't "exploration."

Reparations for slavery - Mostly Bad (There should be more done to prevent modern slavery.)

[rstrong]

The difference between Obama's and Trump's Reddit AMA answers:

(click to embiggen)

[Vrede too]

It's all theoretical and keep in mind that the "very bad", "extremist", "TERRIBLY bad" and "touch of wingnuttery" would be tempered by the realities of office and Congress.

Economy - A mixed bag of very good and very bad.

Education - Mostly good but extremist. (I wouldn't cancel *all* student debt.)

I'm more interested in making it affordable into the future. I'm for some debt relief, but am unsure if it's as massive a societal burden as is claimed.

Energy and environment - Mostly good but extremist. (I'd allow fracking but ban most chemical additives. And as discussed before, there are a few instances where nuclear makes sense.)

Foreign policy - A mix of good and TERRIBLY bad.

Ukraine is a complex mess, I'm not sure if anyone's Rx will be good.
I think Edward Snowden on her Cabinet is a joke. No Senate confirmation, anyhow.

Healthcare - Mostly good but with a touch of wingnuttery.

How so?

Science
vaccines - Very bad

homeopathic medicine - TERRIBLY bad. It's still in the party platform. Her own neutral stance in the face of this, is even worse than the global warming deniers who claim to be neutral because "there's no scientific consensus."

I'm not sure it's neutrality as much as not going out of her way to piss off other Greens. Not really in the POTUS realm, anyhow.

GMOs - Wingnuttery. There is a scientific consensus that currently available food derived from GM crops poses is safe but that each GM food needs to be tested on a case-by-case basis before introduction. Like electrical power, the benefits are obvious but you want proper regulations. Her "moratorium on GMOs" is no less wingnutty than calling for a similar temporary prohibition of electrical use.

There's been little testing before going all in on GMOs, and safe for people doesn't necessarily mean safe for the environment over the long term.

pesticides - Good.

wireless internet (Wi-Fi) in schools - Winguttery.

A Wi-Fi access will have a maximum output power of 1/10th of a watt. The typical leakage from a microwave oven is 1 watt. A GSM mobile phone can transmit two watts.

As you double the distance to a transmitter, the field strength drops fourfold. And so if being two metres from a Wi-Fi access point for six hours a day is supposed to be harmful, using a mobile phone pressed against your skull for a second a day is 10 times worse.

Even if "electromagnetic hypersensitivity" were a real thing (double-blind experiments show otherwise), anything coming from the Wi-Fi access point would be insignificant compared to the students' and teachers' cell phones surrounding the kid in class.

And when driving past a local radio station pumping out tens of thousands of watts, or near a cell tower or airport radar or weather radar, the kid would explode.

You're probably correct on this issue, but the jury's still out on cumulative EMR effects.

EMR effects on the human body by frequency

"slightly decrease" spending on space exploration - Bad. Granted there are examples of massive waste, but they tend to originate in Congress rather than NASA. (Like SLS, AKA the Senate Launch System.) MilSpace has its own budget, and generally isn't "exploration."

Not sure if she really meant "exploration" or whether she meant the budget. Some of NASA"s spending is on the military and purely corporate benefit. Anyhow, I'm fine with an increase for the right things.

Reparations for slavery - Mostly Bad (There should be more done to prevent modern slavery.)

Not to mention fixing our racial mess into the future. I think reparations are an unrealistic distraction.

[O Really]

Stein and Johnson are the Arena League players. Sure, you might see somebody from time to time that's pretty talented, but don't expect to see any of them in the NFL. Or maybe Johnson is in Arena League. Stein may be in XFL.

[Vrede too]

Johnson may affect the election and both give us an option without being labeled as apathetic. I'm not sure what the sports metaphors are for that - referee and lacrosse?

[O Really]

"May affect the election" in the same way not voting would. Vote for Big Johnson or don't vote and you're still taking a vote away from either Trump or Clinton, depending on who you might have voted for if you had voted. Or just decrease the pool of voters. Either way, Clinton or Trump is going to win. What I was going for in my lame metaphor is that whether we like it or not or prefer something different or not, the two major parties are the big leagues that are ultimately going to prevail or absorb the ABA's, the AFL's, the XFL's, etc. The third parties are not like baseball's minor leagues, training grounds for MLB. They're the places people go to run when they can't get into the majors. They're largely niche interest people without a wide enough appeal to win, even if they could manage to get Perot's 20%.

The good thing, however, is that the current dissembling of the Party Formerly Known As Republicans may well result in a division significant enough to break into two or more fairly strong factions. Personally, I'd like to see a more coalition-based system, with more parties, thus requiring some wheeling and dealing with each other to gain a majority. Sure would beat the hell out of just saying "no" as a major strategery.

[Vrede too]

McCrory is mumbling "appeal" but he's got a problem. Supreme Court is currently out of session, and won't resume until the first of October. They could agree to hear McCrory next session, but even if they did, it's unlikely they would fast track this one to get it done before November. I'm guessing they're not going to accept this one anyway. But if they do, McCrory may be out of office before it was heard and Cooper would drop the appeal. That decision was great news, and, IMNVHO too strong to get overruled. Unanimous. Intentional discrimination. Slam! ...

One step before SCOTUS:

... In North Carolina, the state could ask the full bench of the 4th Circuit to review the ruling. But attorneys and others speculate that even if the full court agreed to review the case, the 2013 election-law changes would not be restored before the November elections....

Otherwise, your scenario sounds correct, barring the slight (?) possibility of a full 4th Circuit injunction.

NC will defend voter ID without attorney general

... “The courts keep striking down these laws passed by the legislature and signed by the governor,” Cooper said. “When are they going to learn that you just can’t run roughshod over the Constitution? That you have to pass laws that are within the framework of the state and federal constitutions? We need to start doing that in North Carolina.” ...

Appeals court rejects NC's request to postpone voter ID decision
An appeals court has quickly decided it won't delay enforcement of its ruling striking down North Carolina's photo identification requirement and other election restrictions, including reducing early in-person voting by seven days.

I heard on TV that McCrory will now go to SCOTUS.

[Vrede too]

Unlikely scenario:

Gary Johnson meets the 15% polling threshold and qualifies for the debates, performs well, support grows.
Despite increasingly erratic behavior and further campaign chaos, Trump stays in the race past the early September date that's thought to be the latest that the GOP could name a replacement and get her/him on 50 ballots if Trump withdraws.
Trump has psychotic break, shoots someone on 5th Avenue, withdraws from the race, gets put in a luxury suite at Bellevue.
The GOP names a replacement, but admits s/he is just a figurehead for going through the motions and puts no effort into the campaign.
Hillary has a major stumble - huge gaffe, health issue, Bill charged with child rape on that rich friend's yacht (with strong evidence), new email or Clinton Foundation revelation, emails were hacked by the Chinese . . . who knows, it's happened before.
Large numbers of prominent Republicans endorse and campaign for Johnson.
Massive numbers of Hillary supporters lose their 'better than Trump' rationale.
POTUS Gary Johnson.

You heard it hear first.

[O Really]

Imagination working overtime, m'friend?
But hey, stranger things have happened. Trump is the Republican nominee, isn't he?

[Seth Milner]

Imagination working overtime, m'friend?
But hey, stranger things have happened. Trump is the Republican nominee, isn't he?

That's not all Trump "is".

[JTA]

Unlikely scenario:

Gary Johnson meets the 15% polling threshold and qualifies for the debates, performs well, support grows.
Despite increasingly erratic behavior and further campaign chaos, Trump stays in the race past the early September date that's thought to be the latest that the GOP could name a replacement and get her/him on 50 ballots if Trump withdraws.
Trump has psychotic break, shoots someone on 5th Avenue, withdraws from the race, gets put in a luxury suite at Bellevue.
The GOP names a replacement, but admits s/he is just a figurehead for going through the motions and puts no effort into the campaign.
Hillary has a major stumble - huge gaffe, health issue, Bill charged with child rape on that rich friend's yacht (with strong evidence), new email or Clinton Foundation revelation, emails were hacked by the Chinese . . . who knows, it's happened before.
Large numbers of prominent Republicans endorse and campaign for Johnson.
Massive numbers of Hillary supporters lose their 'better than Trump' rationale.
POTUS Gary Johnson.

You heard it hear first.

I dont really agree with everything Johnson/Weld are about, but every town hall and interview I listen to with these guys, they seem pretty reasonable compared to the current two front runners.

[O Really]

Deeper details on recent WaPo poll - Looks like The Donald is in trouble on all fronts and issues.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/201 ... ?tid=a_inl

[Vrede too]

Imagination working overtime, m'friend?
But hey, stranger things have happened. Trump is the Republican nominee, isn't he?

Yep.

My activism and career are built around working for the unlikely and dealing with the unexpected.

I don't know much about Gary Johnson but had some positive memories of Libertarian VP candidate and former 2-term MA Gov. William Weld. It's not all good by any means, but:

William Weld: Ambassadorship nomination and resignation (actually withdrawal)

In July 1997, Weld was nominated to become United States Ambassador to Mexico by President Bill Clinton. His nomination stalled after Senate Foreign Relations committee Chairman Jesse Helms (NC) refused to hold a hearing on the nomination, effectively blocking it. Helms was also a Republican and their party held the majority in the chamber, but Helms objected to Weld's moderate stance on social issues such as his support for gay rights, abortion rights, and the legalization of medical marijuana. This refusal to hold hearings was also rumored to be at the request of former United States Attorney General and friend of Helms, Edwin Meese. Meese reportedly had a long-standing grudge against Weld stemming from Weld's investigation of Meese during the Iran-Contra affair. Weld publicly criticized Helms, which the White House discouraged him from doing, but Weld relished the opportunity, saying: "It feels like being in a campaign. I feel newly energized. I love to stir up the pot. I seem to click on more cylinders when the pot is stirred up." Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott said that Weld's chances of being confirmed weren't "very good, and that he hurt himself by attacking the chairman unfairly and with political rhetoric that was just uncalled for." ...

Any enemy of Jesse Helms, Edwin Meese and Trent Lott . . .

[Vrede too]

Deeper details on recent WaPo poll - Looks like The Donald is in trouble on all fronts and issues.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/201 ... ?tid=a_inl

Thanks. Trump is tanking, but some other interesting results to me:

A clear lead for Clinton after the conventions

Q: (IF NAMED CLINTON) Do you mainly support Clinton, or mainly oppose Trump?
Support Clinton 50%
Oppose Trump 46%

Q: (IF NAMED TRUMP) Do you mainly support Trump, or mainly oppose Clinton?
Support Trump 42%
Oppose Clinton 52%

People always bitch about it, but negative campaigning is a powerful motivator.

Johnson and Weld & Stein and Baraka turn Hillary's majority into a plurality but don't change her margin of 8%.

Q: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president?
Approve 55%
Disapprove 42%

Highest rating in quite awhile . . . after he swung left.

Q: How do you feel about a choice between (Clinton) and (Trump) as the major-party candidates for president - are you very satisfied with this choice, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied?
**NET Satisfied** 42%
Very satisfied 13%
Somewhat satisfied 28%
**NET Dissatisfied** 57%
Somewhat dissatisfied 26%
Very dissatisfied 31%

We can do better, at least I hope so.

[Vrede too]

... Trump has psychotic break, shoots someone on 5th Avenue, withdraws from the race, gets put in a luxury suite at Bellevue....

Or:

Trump: You people really believed me?

[Vrede too]

Interesting, some details I didn't know:

Counting the votes: How electors pick the president

I'm not sure if NC is one of the twenty-one states that don't require their electors to go along with the popular vote, and the others have mild penalties for faithlessness. Apparently, an election can be "rigged".

[O Really]

NC binds the electors, (NC Gen Stat §163-212).

But in any case, rigging an election by getting electors to vote against the popular vote in their state wouldn't likely work. Each party has electors, so only those in the party who won get to vote. Would be really easy to track the money and find the guilty. There could be some Republican electors who refuse to vote for Trump (I think there was already one, but he resigned), but there wouldn't be many. Surely not enough to change the results anywhere other than Maine or wherever else it is that divides their vote.

[Vrede too]

Thanks.

§ 163-212. Penalty for failure of presidential elector to attend and vote.

Any presidential elector having previously signified his consent to serve as such, who fails to attend and vote for the candidate of the political party which nominated such elector, for President and Vice-President of the United States at the time and place directed in G.S. 163-210 (except in case of sickness or other unavoidable accident) shall forfeit and pay to the State five hundred dollars ($500.00), to be recovered by the Attorney General in the Superior Court of Wake County. In addition to such forfeiture, refusal or failure to vote for the candidates of the political party which nominated such elector shall constitute a resignation from the office of elector, his vote shall not be recorded, and the remaining electors shall forthwith fill such vacancy as hereinbefore provided.

The clear proceeds of forfeitures provided for in this section shall be remitted to the Civil Penalty and Forfeiture Fund in accordance with G.S. 115C-457.2. (1901, c. 89, s. 83; Rev., s. 4375; C.S., s. 6013; 1933, c. 165, s. 11; 1967, c. 775, s. 1; 1969, c. 949, s. 3; 1998-215, s. 131.)

So, minimal penalty but a nullified and replaced vote. I'll bet it's the same in most of the other 29 states.

"hereinbefore"

Wouldn't take many in the other 21 states to flip an electorally close election, though, as few as just one theoretically.

I didn't mean "rigged" under the table, though that's possible. I meant Trump being denied openly by a patriotic elector or electors with a conscience despite winning on paper. Won't happen this time since Hillary's margin will be yuuuuge, but an interesting 'what if'.