The Politics Thread 2021

[Botman]

I cant see an impeachment working within 12 days.
Last time they tried to impeach him it took months and that was actually considered a speedy process
Unless it goes completely unopposed and has bipartisan support, any opposition it would take us well and truly to the end of his presidency

[gangrenous]

There is a possibility that a first term MP becomes prime minister, except it would never happen.

A first term MP could also become PM at other points in the first term just through the party calling a spill also.

Kevin Rudd is probably the closest we’ve had to Trump in terms of rising to lead the party without being a strong factional team member possibly? He didn’t really have factional support initially but his public popularity saw him chosen as leader as I understand it. Others who followed internal party politics back then may correct me on that. Still was in the parliament a long time first though.

[FuiFui BradBrad]

I cant see an impeachment working within 12 days.
Last time they tried to impeach him it took months and that was actually considered a speedy process
Unless it goes completely unopposed and has bipartisan support, any opposition it would take us well and truly to the end of his presidency

Yeah I was watching CNN last night and they said the same thing. The impeachment process would take longer than 2 weeks, so there was no point.

[Seiffert82]

Calls for impeachment or using the 25th amendment thingy are symbolic only. It's basically a chance for Republicans with a shred of moral fibre to signal to the electorate that they are no longer aligned with this sort of shambolic behaviour.

In saying that, the 375,000 COVID related deaths in the USA provided significantly more opportunity for these idiots to stand up and denounce this clown. It would be quite sad that the one thing that gets them to grow a spine is four people dying as a result of the President inciting a bunch of neo-Nazi vigilante style protesters to rush the Capitol Building to stroke his own ego.

[Sterlk]

Fair points. I guess that does weed out the ability to come straight in at the top with zero respect for the system.

Say what you want about Australian PMs being chosen by their party and not the public directly (we elect the party, who select their leader) - it stops loonies like Trump conning the public into leading the country.

If we ever break away from the Commonwealth and become a republic, I don't want us to vote directly for a president like the Americans do... or at the very least, you'd want stricter eligibility criteria, such as having held state or federal public office for at least 'x' total years.

[-TW-]

The only thing they can really do is censure him, everything else would take too long.

If they invoked the 25th on mental capacity, he'd have a right of reply and it would just drag on.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[BJ]

Biden and the Democrats should focus on what they are doing in the first 100 days of office.

Not try for a Hail Mary on the incompetent President who’s there for the next two weeks.

IMO, It will be best to encourage the sane republicans to deal with the loony republicans. Otherwise it might actually backfire on the Democrats, play into Trumps hands long term and may suddenly see a majority of Republicans circle the wagons around their Party and President.

In short it’s a no win situation on either path.

[Seiffert82]

Fair points. I guess that does weed out the ability to come straight in at the top with zero respect for the system.

Say what you want about Australian PMs being chosen by their party and not the public directly (we elect the party, who select their leader) - it stops loonies like Trump conning the public into leading the country.

If we ever break away from the Commonwealth and become a republic, I don't want us to vote directly for a president like the Americans do... or at the very least, you'd want stricter eligibility criteria, such as having held state or federal public office for at least 'x' total years.

Yeah, the Westminster system is obviously a bit different to the American system in that regard. As much as some people don't like having a separate head of state representing the British Monarchy like we do with the Governor General, it at least provides some independent oversight to the operation of the government of the day. It obviously takes a great deal of courage for that head of state to remove the Prime Minister elected by the governing party, but at least the power is there. Maybe that person should instead be popularly elected rather than appointed, but retain the same (limited) powers...

Recent history here shows there is a fine line in how the public treats our Prime Minister and the expectations of the relevant party in keeping that person in the job. Obviously both major parties have reviewed their leadership spill processes to make it a bit harder for leadership changes to occur, but at a processes is still there for bad leaders to get the boot (as the Simpsons would say).

I quite like our system. There are a few layers of protection against potential lunatics running the asylum.

[Coastalraider]

This plays well..

[-TW-]

I literally just watched that video on twitter

Fits perfectly

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[gangrenous]

Having the GG be publicly elected leaves the door open for the masses to support their incompetent leader with an incompetent GG.

[BJ]

Having the GG be publicly elected leaves the door open for the masses to support their incompetent leader with an incompetent GG.

This does concern me.

We’ll end up with Governor General Tony Locket or Hotdogs from Big Brother 07.

[Botman]

Always a pleasure to get a BB Hotdogs reference
His late night game show cured my insomnia

[BJ]

Always a pleasure to get a BB Hotdogs reference
His late night game show cured my insomnia

[Seiffert82]

Having the GG be publicly elected leaves the door open for the masses to support their incompetent leader with an incompetent GG.

Well, if the masses are stupid enough to double down and vote in a terrible government along with an incompetent Head of State, then let them eat cake.

[gangrenous]

I think that’s a bit like getting kids to sit two maths tests at once. Extra overhead and only changes things in rare occurrences, because chances are if you fail one test you fail both.

[Seiffert82]

I think that’s a bit like getting kids to sit two maths tests at once. Extra overhead and only changes things in rare occurrences, because chances are if you fail one test you fail both.

Yeah, I'm not sure if I see electing the GG and our parliamentary representatives as sitting the same exam twice. The Head of State in our system shouldn't represent a particular political party.

Don't get me wrong though - I'm personally not particularly fussed if our Head of State is elected or appointed, however there are a significant number of people who are quite passionate about the symbolic nature of voting that person in on behalf of the people. Most of the GG's functions are ceremonial.

My main point is that I do like the protection of having a position that has no power to run the Parliament or the courts, but is there to ensure that those who do have those powers use them strictly in accordance with the Constitution, the laws of the Commonwealth and with due regard to public interest.

[Sterlk]

Having the GG be publicly elected leaves the door open for the masses to support their incompetent leader with an incompetent GG.

Well, if the masses are stupid enough to double down and vote in a terrible government along with an incompetent Head of State, then let them eat cake.

See, you say that, but look at America. We'd be part of the masses - I don't want to have to eat cake if zombie Hitler rises from the dead, gains Australian citizenship, renounces his German citizenship, runs for office, and a giant swathe of idiots elects him.

Better that zombie Hitler simply doesn't get a run in the first place. You need controls in place like what we have now, which ensures that 'bad' off-the-street candidates never get exposed to the public vote for leadership positions (and I mean 'bad' in a much worse sense than anybody could reasonably say about most of our current pollies).

If the Americans followed that advice, and ditched their whole 'anybody can be President' fascination in favour of proffering their candidates from within, the Trump era would never have happened.

[Dr Zaius]

Fair points. I guess that does weed out the ability to come straight in at the top with zero respect for the system.

Say what you want about Australian PMs being chosen by their party and not the public directly (we elect the party, who select their leader) - it stops loonies like Trump conning the public into leading the country.

If we ever break away from the Commonwealth and become a republic, I don't want us to vote directly for a president like the Americans do... or at the very least, you'd want stricter eligibility criteria, such as having held state or federal public office for at least 'x' total years.

Wasn't that the sticking point on the Republic Referendum?

The model on offer was that the President is nominated by Government and elected by a two thirds majority of both houses.

The public rejected it, wanting to directly elect the president themselves.

[Sterlk]

Fair points. I guess that does weed out the ability to come straight in at the top with zero respect for the system.

Say what you want about Australian PMs being chosen by their party and not the public directly (we elect the party, who select their leader) - it stops loonies like Trump conning the public into leading the country.

If we ever break away from the Commonwealth and become a republic, I don't want us to vote directly for a president like the Americans do... or at the very least, you'd want stricter eligibility criteria, such as having held state or federal public office for at least 'x' total years.

Wasn't that the sticking point on the Republic Referendum?

The model on offer was that the President is nominated by Government and elected by a two thirds majority of both houses.

The public rejected it, wanting to directly elect the president themselves.

Perhaps. That's 22 years ago now, can't say I voted in that one nor knew too much about it; I would have been running around in a schoolyard somewhere not caring one whit about independence.

Popular or not (and things have certainly changed since then), I think the layer of abstraction is wise. There are different ways to achieve direct voting with similar outcomes, though - the American 'issue' is that a random nut-job can put their hand up and say "I want to be President" and have that enabled by their primaries process, securing a major party nomination. You only need a handful of eligibility criteria to put a stop to that nonsense, then the parties can each put someone who meets the requirements to the public vote.

I'm not really an advocate for forming a republic in any case, but I'm not a strident monarchist either. We're functionally independent as-is, and what we have works pretty well (all things considered). I do not recommend invasive surgery on the healthy patient for the sake of symbology.

[Dr Zaius]

Fair points. I guess that does weed out the ability to come straight in at the top with zero respect for the system.

Say what you want about Australian PMs being chosen by their party and not the public directly (we elect the party, who select their leader) - it stops loonies like Trump conning the public into leading the country.

If we ever break away from the Commonwealth and become a republic, I don't want us to vote directly for a president like the Americans do... or at the very least, you'd want stricter eligibility criteria, such as having held state or federal public office for at least 'x' total years.

Wasn't that the sticking point on the Republic Referendum?

The model on offer was that the President is nominated by Government and elected by a two thirds majority of both houses.

The public rejected it, wanting to directly elect the president themselves.

Perhaps. That's 22 years ago now, can't say I voted in that one nor knew too much about it; I would have been running around in a schoolyard somewhere not caring one whit about independence.

Popular or not (and things have certainly changed since then), I think the layer of abstraction is wise. There are different ways to achieve direct voting with similar outcomes, though - the American 'issue' is that a random nut-job can put their hand up and say "I want to be President" and have that enabled by their primaries process, securing a major party nomination. You only need a handful of eligibility criteria to put a stop to that nonsense, then the parties can each put someone who meets the requirements to the public vote.

I'm not really an advocate for forming a republic in any case, but I'm not a strident monarchist either. We're functionally independent as-is, and what we have works pretty well (all things considered). I do not recommend invasive surgery on the healthy patient for the sake of symbology.

Not up from some breast implants?

[Dr Zaius]

So with all the selfies, footage pasted on social media and the main stream media, the FBI are going about picking off these ****ers one by one.

[The Nickman]

So with all the selfies, footage pasted on social media and the main stream media, the FBI are going about picking off these ****ers one by one.

Hahahaha that’s absolutely **** fantastic

[greeneyed]

They’re also getting fired, based on their social media posts, bragging about their exploits.

#TraitorsGettingFired: https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at ... 29d6438a26

[-TW-]

https://www.axios.com/dominion-sues-sid ... ntent=1100

Dominion Voting Systems suing Sydney Powell for defamation, wanting 1.2 billion damages

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[greeneyed]

[Manbush]

QAnon being QAnon they’ve come up with two new conspiracies based on Trumps “concession” speech, 1) its all part of the plan and since he didn’t mention Biden the new administration he mentioned will be his own second term 2) the video was a deep fake.

Gotta love these guys.

[Manbush]

https://www.axios.com/dominion-sues-sid ... ntent=1100

Dominion Voting Systems suing Sydney Powell for defamation, wanting 1.2 billion damages

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

Good, she was warned along with Fox and Newsmax, the later two at least had the common sense to admit they had no evidence to try and avoid the lawsuit, Powell just doubled down, Trump and Rudy should be next.

[Manbush]

Article of impeachment “incitement of insurrection” could be introduced as soon as Monday and voted on as early as Wednesday.

[Seiffert82]

https://www.axios.com/dominion-sues-sid ... ntent=1100

Dominion Voting Systems suing Sydney Powell for defamation, wanting 1.2 billion damages

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

That's awesome.

As always, Trump is going to leave a lot of collateral damage behind him.

[Coastalraider]

This is far from the end. He is not the type of personality to head off and play golf from February.

As it stands, he still had 73 million people vote for him, that’s 47% of the country. While that may have dropped with the events of the last week, it’s still hugely significant. He currently still believes he won the election, as does a percentage of his rabid following. He still currently has the ability to run again in 4 years. If rumours of his desired media channel materialise, he also has a new, totally controlled platform to dictate his message to the people. The next 4 years are going to be one of the toughest terms any new president has had to sit in history... with a country divided and a plague killing roughly 1/1000 citizens so far. Regardless of how good a job Biden does, there will be PLENTY of opportunity for a trump backed agenda to tear the Democrats apart To their republican base and promote the fact Trump ‘would have done it better’. It’s the ultimate environment for a ‘disrupter’ to flourish.

As much as it kills me, I don’t think we are anywhere near the end of this.

[-TW-]

He won't if he ends up getting charged for the riots, as reports are suggesting he will

Edit: recent reports suggest the DoJ won't bother charging him

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[Sterlk]

Ahem:

A person who meets the above qualifications would, however, still be disqualified from holding the office of president under any of the following conditions:

- Under Article I, Section 3, Clause 7, upon conviction in impeachment cases, the Senate has the option to order, by a simple majority, that an individual be forever disqualified from holding federal office, which includes that of president.[2]
- Under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, no person who swore an oath to support the Constitution, and later rebelled against the United States, is eligible to become president. However, this disqualification can be lifted by a two-thirds vote of each house of Congress.[3]

Both of those seem quite plausible, the latter due to the whole 'incitement of insurrection' thing. It's worth impeaching him again even at this late hour just to keep him out of office forever.

The Senate can't be recalled to hold a trial prior to Trump's departure without unanimous agreement - which simply won't happen due to the handful of Trump loyalists in the Senate. Impeach now in the house, convict in the newly democratic-controlled senate (which will only work if sufficient Republicans get on board to make it 2/3rds), then the Democrat majority can rule he can never come back.

[Manbush]

Yep means he can’t run again, no $200k pension, no annual million dollar travel allowance and no secret service protecting him for life, definitely worth doing even if it runs over into the Biden presidency. Regardless of whether he’s impeached or not though I can’t see the Democrats continuing the tradition of former presidents retaining security clearance and receiving briefings.

[Sterlk]

So, there's a far-right 'free speech' app with limited/no moderation called Parler that all these people are flocking to. Google already booted it from Android, now here's a letter to them from Apple:

To the developers of the Parler app,

Thank you for your response regarding dangerous and harmful content on Parler. We have determined that the measures you describe are inadequate to address the proliferation of dangerous and objectionable content on your app.

Parler has not upheld its commitment to moderate and remove harmful or dangerous content encouraging violence and illegal activity, and is not in compliance with the App Store Review Guidelines.

In your response, you referenced that Parler has been taking this content “very seriously for weeks.” However, the processes Parler has put in place to moderate or prevent the spread of dangerous and illegal content have proved insufficient. Specifically, we have continued to find direct threats of violence and calls to incite lawless action in violation of Guideline 1.1 – Safety – Objectionable Content.

Your response also references a moderation plan “for the time being,” which does not meet the ongoing requirements in Guideline 1.2 – Safety – User Generated content. While there is no perfect system to prevent all dangerous or hateful user content, apps are required to have robust content moderation plans in place to proactively and effectively address these issues. A temporary “task force” is not a sufficient response given the widespread proliferation of harmful content.

For these reasons, your app will be removed from the App Store until we receive an update that is compliant with the App Store Review Guidelines and you have demonstrated your ability to effectively moderate and filter the dangerous and harmful content on your service.

Regards,
App Review Board

Far too often, people get away with paying lip service to authority while largely ignoring them in practice. It's nice to see somebody called on it and booted out into the cold, particularly since this app was set up with the express intent of allowing toxicity to run wild.