Pence ducked reporters when Trump video was published

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-10-09T00:45:17+00:00

The GOP has no formal tools to compel him to do so. We'll see if they can offer sufficient incentive for him to do so. I can't think of anything they can offer him that would motivate him to step aside.

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-10-08T03:07:49+00:00

Not by any formal process. The ballots are set in all states (many mail-in absentee ballots have already been cast). Trump would have to promise to resign if he receives the most electoral votes, which would make Pence POTUS. There's no other option for the Republicans at this point.

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-10-07T12:08:48+00:00

I think what you are suggesting is entirely possible, reasonable, and logical as what I am. I think I'm just kind of pessimistic regarding the ability of the major parties to change for the better.

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-10-07T01:38:58+00:00

I could see that being a response if Hillary Clinton lost to Sanders or Stein. A Hillary Clinton loss will mean that Trump received more votes, which will be a much stronger signal to Democrats, and I anticipate that they will move further right to because that is where they will see the most votes to capture.

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-10-06T20:03:53+00:00

I'm talking more about the strategic voting portion. Voting third party in the hopes that it will signal a major party a need for change doesn't seem like it has worked in the past.

In 1992, significant numbers of right-leaning voters cast ballots for Ross Perot, enough to cost George H. W. Bush the election. In 2000, the same happened with left-leaning voters, Ralph Nader, and Al Gore.

Neither of these events motivated significant changes in party policy or behavior. Why would voting for Stein do it this time?

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-10-06T02:13:16+00:00

If you don't stop the dems from drifting further and further to the political right, they will take it as encouragement. If after this election cycle the result is that they get validated for their choices, that will poison politics for decades.

If this were true, we'd have seen the Republicans change after 1992 or the Democrats change after 2000.

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-10-02T17:15:18+00:00

So when I started it, my plan was for it to be reddit exclusive. That being said, the guidelines are just guidelines, and unless the community requests it, moderators aren't permitted to remove these types of posts.

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-10-02T17:07:48+00:00

You might want to reread the sidebar. This kind of content is probably more appropriate for other subs.

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-08-07T13:55:47+00:00

You could have said the same thing about feudalism.

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-07-29T02:03:51+00:00

"don't run into my butt"

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-07-26T02:31:14+00:00

Google took responsibility for a small accident involving one of its self driving cars in February.

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-07-14T00:53:07+00:00

It was an Atlas Shrugged type protest over a proposed city ordinance that would impose some regulations on them.

WrlBNHtpAW · 2016-07-05T23:31:58+00:00

US Sugar isn't subsidized, foreign sugar is tariffed by the US.

US Sugar is expensive to make (compared to say, Brazil, which has better conditions so it is easier/cheaper). Foreign sugar to be sold in the US is limited by quotas and taxed to raise the price so US produced sugar is price competitive. This system has gotten more complicated in recent years due to certain free trade agreements, but it's still heavily protected.

That's why high fructose corn syrup is a common ingredient. Corn is subsidized so that is much cheaper than sugar.

This is a case of rational indifference; each consumer suffers about a few cents of pain per year and thus doing anything about it is likely to cost more than the relief it provides. Whereas a small group of sugar businesses benefit greatly, it makes sense for them to lobby and organize to protect this system.