Us election Biden V Trump

[reader]

9 hours ago, PeterRS said:

I am all for quite severe restrictions being placed on the new media. Yet the freedom of speechers instantly shout "foul". We know that leaders in other countries have latched on to Trumps playbook and are using the new media to consolidate their power and policies. I have no idea how or if it can be done. But the start of restoring faith in democracy is surely the need to increase the responsibilities that come with freedom of what people can say.

The problem is that it's not possible to pose severe restrictions on the media without also restricting the speech of everyone.  Once the internet replaced the mail, the telephone and radio as the way people learned about what was happening and communicated with one another, it marked a sea change from which there's no turning back.

The same internet that allows us to share information about our favorite bars,restaurants and massage shops is the same vehicle that makes it possible for disinformation to flourish. Some voluntarily policing by Facebook and Twitter has had some limited effect around the edges but technology will always allow for restrictions to be circumnavigated.

In the end it's the end user who'll decide what he or she chooses to believe. They are the ultimate censors. Attempts to deny them access to the both the good and bad is destined to failure.

There's no magic bullet but those governments that provide all citizens equal access to a liberal education will produce information consumers prepared to make informed decisions.

 

[KhorTose]

On 12/3/2020 at 6:22 AM, faranglaw said:

For those who want to dive deeper into this rabbit hole, I have two recommendations:

1. Google Heather Cox Richardson.

 

Second this recommendation.  She is very real and extremely intelligent and talks to her listeners on an almost one to one basis.

  Trump knows he has lost, but he says he is raising money to fight the election.  In truth the 207 million he has raised only 9 million has been spent on fighting the election results.  The rest will be to pay his back taxes and debtors, to keep him out of jail.  He is ripping off his own supporters, and you would think some of them might be smart enough to catch on.  America's democracy is failing because somehow our educational system is really lacking.  No longer "Ugly American", but dumb American.

[PeterRS]

2 hours ago, reader said:

The problem is that it's not possible to pose severe restrictions on the media without also restricting the speech of everyone. 

That is precisely what I was implying. Freedom comes with responsibility and that also goes for the freedom of speech. 

2 hours ago, reader said:

In the end it's the end user who'll decide what he or she chooses to believe. They are the ultimate censors. Attempts to deny them access to the both the good and bad is destined to failure.

I was not referring only to politics and politicians. I was talking of each individual. If your view is that anything goes and that censorship is a no go area, I reckon that means we face a pretty desperate future. Believing that each individual can decide everything for themselves in our crazy, excessively complicated, intertwined world no longer works, even if it ever did. Just look at the progress of the pandemic in the USA. Vast millions of individuals made decisions not to take the advice of scientists. "Im free to do as I please and I will not wear a mask" was a comment heard ad nauseam from interviewees on tv bulletins. "I have the freedom to infect you if I happen to be infected" was rarely if ever heard. 

Freedom in any society means there have to be rules and absolute freedoms cannot work. Self censorship of the type you suggest is now a thing of the past.

[vinapu]

49 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

 

Freedom in any society means there have to be rules and absolute freedoms cannot work. Self censorship of the type you suggest is now a thing of the past.

At least Americans have guns in their desks as a tool to enforce some censorship  of unwanted speech , pleasure most weak knee societies with gun ownership restrictions are denied to

[reader]

1 hour ago, PeterRS said:

Believing that each individual can decide everything for themselves in our crazy, excessively complicated, intertwined world no longer works, even if it ever did.

If you think self-censorship is excessively complicated, consider the alternative. Who would be the arbiter of another person's speech? You and I may not like what others say, but do we have to right to stifle them? That is truly crazy. Once you start down that road, the Thought Police and 1984 aren't far behind.

China dismissed elected officials in Hong Kong because they were deemed "disloyal" based on their speech. You don't have to look far to find other nations doing the same thing.

How could you possibly come up with a list of banned speech topics? Would hearing be held, votes taken to see what makes the cut?

Your wish to eliminate what you consider falsehoods and undesirable speech is surely well intentioned.  Creating a process, however, to produce the desired results is wholly unworkable in any democracy, anywhere.

[faranglaw]

2 hours ago, reader said:

If you think self-censorship is excessively complicated, consider the alternative. Who would be the arbiter of another person's speech? You and I may not like what others say, but do we have to right to stifle them? That is truly crazy. Once you start down that road, the Thought Police and 1984 aren't far behind.

China dismissed elected officials in Hong Kong because they were deemed "disloyal" based on their speech. You don't have to look far to find other nations doing the same thing.

How could you possibly come up with a list of banned speech topics? Would hearing be held, votes taken to see what makes the cut?

Your wish to eliminate what you consider falsehoods and undesirable speech is surely well intentioned.  Creating a process, however, to produce the desired results is wholly unworkable in any democracy, anywhere.

The US used to have 

[faranglaw]

This might be of interest. The US used to have a good process that mandated alternative points of view on controversial issues.  It died during the Reagan administration. A serious error in my view.   

 

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Fairness-Doctrine

 

 

[PeterRS]

8 hours ago, reader said:

If you think self-censorship is excessively complicated, consider the alternative.

I wish I had one. I don't. But I truly believe someone has to come up with some alternative that more or less works. 

I always find it strange that Americans, and no doubt those in other countries as well, speak so glowingly about their Constitution and how wise the framers were. Then there was the Bill of Rights which included the first 10 amendments passed around 1791 with Madison writing the wording of the first amendment.

But no one has ever persuaded me that anything other than a few very basic laws - e.g. murder - can be as true centuries after they were written. Madison had not the faintest inclination that 230 years after he penned that amendment there would be the internet and social media. Nor that these inventions would completely revolutionise our way of life. Times change. Society changes. The world changes. Yet some people hang on to beliefs that may have been appropriate centuries ago which frankly have been overtaken by progress and are no longer appropriate - in the same form.

[vinapu]

30 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

I always find it strange that Americans, and no doubt those in other countries as well, speak so glowingly about their Constitution and how wise the framers were...... 

But no one has ever persuaded me that anything other than a few very basic laws - e.g. murder - can be as true centuries after they were written. Madison had not the faintest inclination that 230 years after he penned that amendment there would be the internet and social media. 

well said 

He'd be shocked to learn that slavery will be abolished, women will have voting rights and other niceties we take now for granted like 8 hour working day and pensions  but at his time they were unimaginable. On another hand he would be pleased to learn that  death penalty is still applicable and publicly funded health care system is not

[anddy]

Reading @reader's and @PeterRS's posts I have to say you are both right, and I guess you both know that, too. Both paths - either control the internet where the distinction of what's acceptable and what's not is very difficult to make and will lead to a path towards fictional 1984 or very real China -OR- letting unmitigated wild west of the internet mushroom - are in their own way unacceptable. What is the solution? There isn't one, at least not an obvious and purely "good" one. It's like with Covid, there are no good solutions, only bad ones: fully kill the virus but kill the economy and livelihoods at the same time -OR- let the economy (and thus the virus) flourish and kill millions of people in the process. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You MUST accept some negative outcomes from both options, only (super hard) question is how much of each. The same will have to be true of social media, I suppose.

Yes free speech simply doesn't work as it used to. In the distant past, anyone with weird conspiracy theories (or whatever) was free to express those. But where? In the local bar, maybe, and that's about the extent of it. Couldn't get such views into the local newspaper because they just wouldn't print it, even as a paid ad. Then TV came around and just maybe one could air some in a talk show. But not too egregious, as channels wouldn't want to carry it. With social media, there is no limit. Counting on communications-savvy users doesn't work, that's evident. That social media excuse themselves saying they are "just" the platform was OK in the early, innocent days if the internet, but clearly isn't anymore. It's gotten way out of hand. They are already having policies against this and that (like hate speech) in place. How to expand that to all the crap that's posted and stay reasonable, non-stifling at the same time, I have no idea. The middle ground is elusive  

[anddy]

16 hours ago, PeterRS said:

"Im free to do as I please and I will not wear a mask" was a comment heard ad nauseam from interviewees on tv bulletins. "I have the freedom to infect you if I happen to be infected" was rarely if ever heard. 

exactly, baffles me as well. Those same people will stop at a red traffic light without even thinking about it. But that grossly infringes on their freedom! "I am free to do as I please so I will cross the intersection at will, entirely ignoring the traffic light". Right? They just might run over a pedestrian or crash into another car. So they don't. Go figure....

[reader]

Reading this thread, it’s easy to conclude that most posters find it difficult to accept that a nation of this wealth and history of achievement—over a relatively short span of time—could have possibly produced a megalomaniac like our out-bound president. He did it by persuading people that he and only he understood the reasons for whatever troubled them and he and only he could remedy them. Even Trump was surprised that it was so easy.

For four long years the country was put through a grinder of his, and his Senate cohorts’, efforts to remake government to fit their image. The more outrageous he became, the more it seemed to work. He continues to this day to push the envelope even in the face of abject defeat.

Trump isn’t the first person in the world to stumble on this formula for the acquisition of power. The Fuhrer pounced on it in Germany in the 1930’s and he, too, was a bit shocked how simple it was once you got the knack of it. Other leaders around the world today have followed a similar track to power.

And although there are still many in Trump world who hang on his every word, slowly but perceptively there are definite signs that people have had enough. It is  no where more evident than in the state of Georgia where Republican office holders and key GOP appointees feel increasingly free to speak out against him and his lies.

For those who aren’t following what’s happening in Georgia, there’s a runoff election next month to determine the winners of two critical seats in the Senate. Should Democrats win both (a long shot for sure), control of the upper chamber would shift away from Republican hands. Many believe (and I’m one of them) that the Senate is a more valuable prize than the presidency. Yes, the presidency has broad executive powers but the Senate can out maneuver the White House with its budgetary authority and its power of “advise and consent” to cabinet positions and other key appointments. None are more critical in the grand scheme of things than who sits on the Supreme Court.

Returning to the topic of freedom of expression, I look at it this way. When I ask myself what rights I personally hold dear as a US citizen I always come up back to two. First is the right to say what I think without fear from the government. Second, it’s freedom from illegal search and seizure: to be secure in my home. If someone has those than others freedoms flow from them.

Trump did, and is still doing, as much as possible to whittle away at those two concepts. I want to believe that more and more Americans will come to recognize this as time passes. Perhaps I’m optimistic but I have to hold on to that aspiration.

Many different posters have contributed to this thread and all have expressed their opinions in a respectful way. That also gives me hope.

[anddy]

2 hours ago, reader said:

Even Trump was surprised that it was so easy.
[...]

Trump isn’t the first person in the world to stumble on this formula for the acquisition of power. The Fuhrer pounced on it in Germany in the 1930’s and he, too, was a bit shocked how simple it was once you got the knack of it. Other leaders around the world today have followed a similar track to power.

Goes to show how gullible people have always been and still are, even in this day and age of information and internet. Or maybe even more so, because the world gets ever more complex, incomprehensible, intractable, worrying? Someone claiming to have it all under control with simple (even simplistic) formulas is appealing to many in such a world, even if utterly unrealistic. 

All the cultural and social achievements including a functioning democracy we in the West have come to take for granted are anything but. It takes a permanent effort by everyone to uphold and defend those achievements. The erosion of civilized political discourse does not bode well for that. Coming back to the thread topic, hopefully the simple decency promised by Biden (and I am 100% certain he will deliver on that promise, he already does) will be able to reverse some of the damage. Getting Republicans in their appalling state will be no easy task though. 

As for the Senate, you are right that it's probably the biggest prize. However, even if Democrats manage to get control through Georgia in January, it may well prove only temporary. There is just a kind of built-in advantage for Republicans to control that chamber given the make up of the countries. Too many rural states between the coasts.... I read an article about that somewhere just very recently, just can remember where lol, or else I'd post a link.

[vinapu]

7 hours ago, reader said:

Reading this thread, it’s easy to conclude that most posters find it difficult to accept that a nation of this wealth and history of achievement—over a relatively short span of time—could have possibly produced a megalomaniac like our out-bound president.

 

my underscore

yes , that's doubles value of America's achievements-  they came at cost of pain to many but in historical terms , pain was short and benefits lasting.

Perhaps country will be better serving but abandoning quest to 'be great again" and by realizing what it is for itself and for the world , great, relevant and important country , guiding light in may areas  but also lagging behind  poorer countries in others.

 

[reader]

That may be true but it's my home, my country.

I'm not going to disparage it because of one jackass who grew up to be president. Some will never let us forget.

More than a few pundits predicted that we'd re-elect him but I'm proud that we didn't.

[vinapu]

12 hours ago, reader said:

 

 

Many different posters have contributed to this thread and all have expressed their opinions in a respectful way. That also gives me hope.

 

you did not expect any less from us, did you ?

3 hours ago, reader said:

More than a few pundits predicted that we'd re-elect him but I'm proud that we didn't.

right but tell that to 70 000 000 who still voted for him knowing warts and all

 

[reader]

No, I'm telling it to you. You have a deep disdain for anything American.

We elect a loser and you decide that's carte blanche to rub in our face at every opportunity.

You predicted that we'd surely re-elect him. Now you're pissed off because we didn't and proved you wrong.

Get over it.

 

[vinapu]

40 minutes ago, reader said:

We elect a loser and you decide that's carte blanche to rub in our face at every opportunity.

 

take it easy on me .

Orange Overlord did much , much better job of rubbing it in your faces. 

I'm sorry you feel I have disdain for anything American, not true. Or to be exact,  not entirely true, I had disdain for that majority who elected him back in 2016 and have some for those millions who gave him second chance last month.

I'm very happy my predictions were wrong and it has nothing to do with USA, he was friend of another government I REALLY don't like.

Please forgive me if I sounded anti-American, again not true . It's just that for me 9/11 is not only anniversary of New York tragedy but also CIS backed Pinochet coup d'etat in Chile 28 years earlier to a day.

But still I think color of American money is great

[reader]

1 hour ago, vinapu said:

It's just that for me 9/11 is not only anniversary of New York tragedy but also CIS backed Pinochet coup d'etat in Chile 28 years earlier to a day.

I'm sure your taking the opportunity to resurrect yet another grudge will come as great comfort to the loved ones of those killed in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania on 9/11.

[PeterRS]

7 hours ago, reader said:

That may be true but it's my home, my country.

I'm not going to disparage it because of one jackass who grew up to be president. Some will never let us forget.

Nor should you. Trump is hardly the first idiot to reach high office. The world has a great deal for which to be thankful to America.  But like all countries - all - it has had its less good moments and its faults. I on the other hand will rail against Boris Johnson to any who might listen (seemingly not many!). Its hard to find words for his utter failure with the pandemic and the deaths of so many. Just saying other countries are as bad doesn't cut it with me. A dear friend of some decades died of covid 19 last week. I will never forgive Johnson for that.

But in my earlier posts referring to freedoms, I was not specifically referring to politics. I know it is not readers view and I respect his. But I absolutely believe that unfettered freedom of speech is no longer an option in these days and times. I go back to my earlier point that almost the entire world now lives in groups and societies. These only work within a framework of rules. Break the rules and there are penalties. Society cannot work without that. If we are in a pub and I call someone a pathetic moron, I would expect either his drink to be thrown at me or a punch in the face. Freedoms have consequences. Yet if I do that on the internet and social media, I get away with it scot free. Those contributing to this forum are mostly from an older pre-internet age.  Youngsters nowadays build their lives around social media. They can mostly say exactly what they like without consequence. If their correspondent calls them out, they can just block him. Social interaction between people has changed a great deal and there will no doubt be further changes. 

If anyone wants unrestricted freedoms, their only option to my mind is to isolate them in the depths of a thick forest where they are totally on their own. 

But I absolutely take on board that finding a workable and acceptable middle ground between near total freedom of speech and the curtailed freedoms of an increasing number of countries is close to impossible. I do think though we have to try. I could never give up my freedom to think what i wish. Even so I am happy in quite a number of cases and events to self-censor myself. But I know that there is an increasing number for which this form of self-censorship is just that - censorship and to them that is unacceptable.

 

 

 

 

 

[PeterRS]

Back to the main topic. I noticed two days ago that votes are still being counted in the US election. Still being counted? Yup! STILL. For an election that took place nearly 5 weeks ago, I find that absolutely unbelievable. It not only illustrates a desperately out of date electoral system, it actually aids the lying shenanigans of Trump and his miserable bunch of cohorts. Is is surprising that many in the USA don't believe that the counted votes are accurate? 

That Biden's lead over Trump is now more than 7 million votes is not the issue. 

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/04/politics/biden-popular-vote-margin-7-million/index.html

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

I noticed two days ago that votes are still being counted in the US election.

The fastest ever declaration in a UK constituency was 48 minutes after the polls closed, in Sunderland in 2015.   That's including transporting all the ballot boxes to the count and manually counting.  Most have declared by the time we wake up the following morning. 

Obviously things might take a little longer due to the size of the US, but surely even there, counting ought to be finished in 48 hours ?

[Keithambrose]

I recall the old times  in New York, when the  slogan among the Irish was, 'vote early, vote often'!

[firecat69]

3 hours ago, z909 said:

The fastest ever declaration in a UK constituency was 48 minutes after the polls closed, in Sunderland in 2015.   That's including transporting all the ballot boxes to the count and manually counting.  Most have declared by the time we wake up the following morning. 

Obviously things might take a little longer due to the size of the US, but surely even there, counting ought to be finished in 48 hours ?

Unfortunately the slow count is mostly because of California . Yes they have a population larger than many countries but that is no excuse for their antiquated systems especially since they are by far the richest state.

As I read all the posts in this thread , I am forced constantly to return to the real problem IMHO and that will continue to be sites like Face Book, Twitter etc.

Is it so long ago that Al Gore was denied the Presidency by the Supreme Court that many don't remember  how this outcome was accepted and we moved on . Now Florida reports election results faster than any other state.

It is a fact that Trump as useless a human being as he is could not have created this uproar about being cheated without Face Book, Twitter etc where millions can read ridiculous lies that are purported to be fact.

If the when the Democrats controlled all 3 branches of government had been smart enough  to bring Puerto Rico , District of Columbia etc into full fledged entities that could have Senators , this ridiculous system where 40% of the population controls 60% of the Senate would have been fixed.

[vinapu]

3 hours ago, firecat69 said:

Unfortunately the slow count is mostly because of California . Yes they have a population larger than many countries 

 

One would think that it should not be an issue as bigger population should mean more voting stations  but obviously it doesn't work that way there.

If counting would take that long in countries like , say Bolivia, Nigeria or Thailand , West were screaming suspected fraud I'm pretty sure so no wonder some have doubts  like PeterRS mentioned above.

You are right about social media impact, information and "information' there is churning too fast,  before we are able to assess it's accuracy there's something new coming.

I'm pretty sure if one of our longstanding contributors  posted  that Thailand is opening from next Monday on  many of us would start looking for ticket and packing before even thinking if that indeed makes sense.