News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

Northern Light said:
As per this: https://www.thecentersquare.com/flo...cle_f054001a-207a-11eb-a116-b7b568f82c76.html

The Republican Governor of Florida is publicly calling for the Republican controlled legislatures of Pennsylvania and Michigan to send 'Faithless Electors' to the Electoral College.(meaning in this context to have their reps to the Electoral College vote against the popular will of their State)

I'm unclear on what power they have to do this under existing State laws, both states are governed by Democrats, as such any swift move to change the law is unlikely.

I imagine this to be an unlikely outcome.

But I am flummoxed at a sitting Governor saying that openly.
Click to expand...

He can say what he wants but the reality is that the cat is out of the bag. At this point leaders from around the world have signaled that they accept the election results and recognize Biden as the president elect. Even George W. Bush is acknowledging it.

You cannot change what is already done and no matter what the GOP tries to pull it will only make them look stupid.
 
Russia and China silence speaks volumes as leaders congratulate Biden

From link.

Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping stay silent while Iran waits to see how US will compensate for Trump sanctions

Most world leaders rushed to congratulate Joe Biden on his election, but Russia and China, two likely losers from the defeat of Donald Trump, remained silent, perhaps waiting for the outgoing president to concede defeat.

The president of the Maldives, Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, is thought to be the first to have congratulated Biden, tweeting his welcome within 24 minutes of the US networks declaring Biden victorious. By contrast, Vladimir Putin, accused of collusion in Trump’s 2016 victory, and Xi Jinping kept their counsel.

Iran, suffering from Trump-inspired sanctions and now recording nearly 500 Covid-related deaths daily, celebrated Trump’s demise and said the US should now compensate Iran for its mistakes.
Click to expand...

Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, due to leave office next summer, said he will wait to see what Biden does before deciding if there is any difference between Trump and his successor.

Rouhani said: “Trump’s damaging policy has been opposed by the American people. The next US administration should use the opportunity to make up for past mistakes.”

Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, said Washington’s deeds not words will matter most. On Saturday the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, mocked the US elections, saying it was “an example of the ugly face of liberal democracy”, which has shown the “definite political, civil, and moral decline of the US regime”.

Tensions also spilled out from Turkey, with figures close to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan warning Biden not to support Syrian Kurds or challenge Turkey’s wider ambitions in the Middle East.

The Turkish vice-president, Fuat Oktay, said Trump’s defeat would not change relations between the old allies. “The channels of communication will work as before, but of course there will be a transition period,” he said, adding Ankara would closely monitor Biden’s foreign policy approach.
Click to expand...

Biden and Turkey are likely to clash over US support for the Syrian Kurdish YPG – seen as a cornerstone in the fight against Islamic State by the Democrats, but by the Turks as a branch of the PKK Turkish Kurd terrorist group. Trump’s haphazard diplomacy has seen US influence across the Middle East decline with Russia and Turkey ever more willing to fill the vacuum.

No immediate statement came from the Saudi royal court, which is heavily dependent on US defence hardware to protect itself. The left in the Democratic party wants “an end to forever wars”, especially a withdrawal of US support for the Saudi war in Yemen. The Saudis also want to end the disastrous intervention so long as it does not leave Yemen under complete control of Houthi rebels.

Israel’s leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, a close ally of Trump, sent Biden formal congratulations without naming him president-elect, but Israel will want reassurances about the US maintaining pressure on Iran and its continued support for the normalisation of relations between Israel and Arab states.

In Asia, most countries are looking for a continued tough line on China and also more detail on the balance between cooperation and confrontation with the world’s rising super power.

Angela Merkel said the “transatlantic friendship is irreplaceable if we are to meet the great challenges of this time”, while Macron said Europe and the US “have a lot to do to overcome today’s challenges. Let’s work together!”

The European council president, Charles Michel, listed “Covid-19, multilateralism, climate change and international trade” as areas of future cooperation, while the EU’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, spoke of a “great day for US and Europe”, and of the need to “rebuild our partnership”.

Biden’s key foreign policy priorities, apart from making appointments to the state department subject to congressional approval, are likely to be an offer to cooperate in the fight against coronavirus, an immediate commitment to rejoin the UN Paris climate agreement and, more broadly, to promise a change in tone toward traditional US allies. An early visit to Brussels either to meet EU or Nato leaders would symbolise this approach.

Despite Biden’s adviser Tony Blinken talking last month of ending the “artificial trade war” with the EU, the EU’s special foreign policy adviser, Nathalie Tocci, said she anticipated that protectionism is here to stay. “Election results show that Trumpism is alive and kicking and it is something that he [Biden] cannot ignore,” she said.

The Biden team will also have to decide whether it is worth promising to rejoin the Iran nuclear deal that Trump deserted in 2016. Many Iran specialists are urging Biden to go for a quick win and lift sanctions in return for an Iranian commitment to abide by its commitments in the accord. Debate within Iran is shaped by presidential elections in June, with some saying an olive branch from Biden will help the cause of reformists in its elections.
Click to expand...

Iran’s leaders have so far ruled out any wider talks aimed at curbing Tehran’s nuclear activity, halting its ballistic missile programme, and limiting the Islamic Republic’s regional influence.

Biden will also need to balance the time he devotes to foreign policy with the domestic demand to lower the Covid-19 infection rate, and keep the economy afloat. His degree of foreign policy manoeuvre will depend on whether in January the Democrats can wrest control of the Senate in two runoffs in Georgia.
Click to expand...
 
Northern Light said:
As per this: https://www.thecentersquare.com/flo...cle_f054001a-207a-11eb-a116-b7b568f82c76.html

The Republican Governor of Florida is publicly calling for the Republican controlled legislatures of Pennsylvania and Michigan to send 'Faithless Electors' to the Electoral College.(meaning in this context to have their reps to the Electoral College vote against the popular will of their State)

I'm unclear on what power they have to do this under existing State laws, both states are governed by Democrats, as such any swift move to change the law is unlikely.

I imagine this to be an unlikely outcome.

But I am flummoxed at a sitting Governor saying that openly.
Click to expand...

Why bother with having an election for president if the intent is to allow the state legislature to send faithless electors to the EC in the first place? Nuts. And to do it after, and only after the popular vote doesn't turn out in the state ruling party's favour? That's one hell of a way to delegitimize the system. For a governor of one state to consel the legislature of another such practices is just ludricious. That's precisely the kind of BS @kEiThZ is referring to coming from GOP reps.

AoD
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Why bother with having an election for president if the intent is to allow the state legislature to send faithless electors to the EC in the first place? Nuts.

AoD
Click to expand...

Agree completely.

One more reason to do away their entire antiquarian process.

(ours should be reformed too, but that's a different discussion)
 
Northern Light said:
Agree completely.

One more reason to do away their entire antiquarian process.

(ours should be reformed too, but that's a different discussion)
Click to expand...

That's another question entirely, and one that is not amenable to immediate resolution - at issue is undermining the current electoral system through novel interpretations and norm-breaking. Changing rules as basic as how the EC operates AFTER the end of an election with the end goal of shaping outcome is just about as damning as it gets. Banana republic level sh*t.

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
And speaking of banana republic:


AoD
Click to expand...

Again, 2-fold issue here.

The first, is the immediate one of a senior government official not cooperating with the transition between administrations.

But the related one is that the entire senior executive in the U.S. is partisan political.

A new President swaps out something like 1,200 people at the top. That's completely apart from judicial and other appointments; and the hiring/firing power of the appointees themselves.

That's nuts.

The bureaucracy should be non-partisan.

In Canada the partisan role, outside of the party structure, is largely limited to the PMO and to a few of the appointments in some minister's offices.

But with rare exception, we don't change the Clerk of the Privy Council, when we change the PM. Nor do we generally shuffle out agency heads or bureaucratic cabinet (Deputy Ministers)

The odd change does happen within a few months of a changeover both normal reasons (people retire, or someone's term is up); but also as new personalities collide.

But we just don't do this wholesale upending of the entire senior bureaucracy.

Its really a bizarre systems they've got.
 
Jasmine18 said:
Didn't we spent 2-3 years talking about how Trump won due to Russian Hackers rather than Hillary ran a shitty campaign?
Click to expand...

Yes. And the subsequent investigation filed dozens of indictments, got several convictions and netted so many asset seizures that it garnered a net profit for the US Government. I can provide sources for all this if you like.

Now fuck off with the gish gallop and moving goalposts. I want an answer from you. When did a sitting elected Democratic official suggest switching electors in 2016 as Ron DeSantis, the Governor of Florida just did?

@Aod, can he be banned for pushing misinformation if he doesn't respond truthfully? I'm tired of this shit.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
And speaking of banana republic:


AoD
Click to expand...

This is about to get hilarious. Mark Zaid put out a call on Twitter yesterday, that his firm was willing to sue her pro bono, as long as any journalist is willing to pay the filing fee. He got a response in 20 mins.

Look up who Mark Zaid is. Ms. Murphy is about to get ripped a new one.
 
Northern Light said:
A new President swaps out something like 1,200 people at the top. That's completely apart from judicial and other appointments; and the hiring/firing power of the appointees themselves.

That's nuts.
Click to expand...

They kept the patronage system we used to have.

And having worked with Americans and seeing the reach and expansiveness of their government, I'm not entirely certain it's a bad thing for them. It just sucks when you have a malign actor like Donald Trump who appoints people that are unqualified, or actively out to destroy the system.
 
kEiThZ said:
They kept the patronage system we used to have.

And having worked with Americans and seeing the reach and expansiveness of their government, I'm not entirely certain it's a bad thing for them. It just sucks when you have a malign actor like Donald Trump who appoints people that are unqualified, or actively out to destroy the system.
Click to expand...

I can't fathom why a fully, overtly, partisan churn at that scale is ever wise.

Perhaps you can make the case for such a scheme.

I take no issue with the right of a given administration to remove a person here or there on the basis of competence or lack thereof; or even simply because they're unable to work with them.

But that's a far different thing from blinding dumping out the head of the EPA, the CIA, the NIH etc etc.every 4 years.

You end up losing a lot of competent people, and creating turmoil and inaction as people are caught up to speed over weeks and months that simply isn't necessary.

You also invariably do some suspect hiring, when you hire over 1,000 people all at once in a rush (clearly the President doesn't literally do all the hiring even though its done under their authority); and where that hiring
values one's partisan affiliation over and above any qualifications for a given job.
 
Jasmine18 said:
I think in Canada we sort of change the officers of the ship but never really change the crew?
Click to expand...

A workable analogy.

The machine that actually makes government move (and/or obstructs same) largely doesn't change when an election occurs, regardless of the result.

That's not to say a new Premier or PM can't make changes.

They can, and from time to time they do.

But they rarely happen at the moment of turnover, and they are never wholesale.

They tend to happen as someone's term is up as CEO of VIA Rail or Chair of the CBC.

Terms vary depending on office, but typically range from 4-7 years.

PMs/Premiers will sometimes just make routine, bureaucratic appointments (or reappointments); but often do take the time to put someone in a given position that they prefer.

Deputy Ministers are periodically shuffled, by the Clerk of the Privy Council. It wouldn't be unfair to suggest that those changes are often made in consultation with the PMO.

But there just isn't any wholesale changeover.

Further most positions in the core civil service require that you not be a political partisan.

Even those that don't; (JPs, Immigration Tribunal members etc) are expected to keep the partisan stuff out of any official job activities and keep anything else quiet.
 
Northern Light said:
A workable analogy.

The machine that actually makes government move (and/or obstructs same) largely doesn't change when an election occurs, regardless of the result.

That's not to say a new Premier or PM can't make changes.

They can, and from time to time they do.

But they rarely happen at the moment of turnover, and they are never wholesale.

They tend to happen as someone's term is up as CEO of VIA Rail or Chair of the CBC.

Terms vary depending on office, but typically range from 4-7 years.

PMs/Premiers will sometimes just make routine, bureaucratic appointments (or reappointments); but often do take the time to put someone in a given position that they prefer.

Deputy Ministers are periodically shuffled, by the Clerk of the Privy Council. It wouldn't be unfair to suggest that those changes are often made in consultation with the PMO.

But there just isn't any wholesale changeover.

Further most positions in the core civil service require that you not be a political partisan.

Even those that don't; (JPs, Immigration Tribunal members etc) are expected to keep the partisan stuff out of any official job activities and keep anything else quiet.
Click to expand...

Don't be too smug about the supposed superiority of our system - our "obstruction" and board stuffing happens before the election:


Not to mention other examples (Munir Sheikh @ Statscan, Linda Keen @ CNSC, etc). Also for good or ill - our parliamentary system at say the provincial level offers a lot less potential for checks and balances when compared to the US.

AoD
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top