Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 454: King Nothing

(+) Yeah! (+)

maybe somebody made a topic I can't see, I dunno

If Biden claimed he was King of America, the secret service would have had to get involved.

Hes like the King from Robin Hood, but even that King is more masculine and less pathetic

I dont know if I'm allowed to say what we should do to Kings here.

Totally normal and not at all crazy dictator behavior:

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/a/a4108114.jpg

I know this was quoted at the end of the last topic, but it bears repeating and the fake TIME magazine cover really adds something extra.

Great title

Also an approval rating of above 40% is good enough to continue doing whatever they want with no meaningful repercussions.

The American people like this shit.

red13n posted...

Also an approval rating of above 40% is good enough to continue doing whatever they want with no meaningful repercussions.

The American people like this shit.

They need deep economic sorrow before they change their tune. And the red states that approve of him are the ones that will get hit hardest and fastest.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/1/1adfbd3c.jpg

Speaking of approval, Congressional Dems have completely collapsed.

Nobody is going to save us.

Trump called Zelensky a dictator, but if anyone has the head of a dictator, it's the former.

What is with those numbers for the Dems??

I mean, I would generally assume that what's happening there is a large portion of left/liberal people disapprove of Congressional Dems on top of the 40% they're automatically gonna get from Republicans. Basically both sides agreeing that Dems suck. The right will always say that and the left... will often say that.

tl;dr: assume both sides have a base value of like 40-40 on approve/disapprove from their own "side." What you're seeing with the Dems is that even "their" 40 is pissed at them and is splitting like 20-20, causing it become 20-60. But the reason they disapprove is likely very different from the reason right-wing respondents disapprove.

Hell, I'd pick disapprove if you gave me that poll. They are, with a few exceptions like AOC, completely missing the moment.

redrocket posted...

What is with those numbers for the Dems??

Dem voters always disapprove of Republican politicians. GOP voters always approve of them.

Dem voters only sometimes approve of Democrat politicians (this is not one of those times). GOP voters always disapprove of them.

I am legitimately curious what kind of person looks at the Democrats in Congress right now and thinks "Yeah, they're doing good". Like, are ~20% of people just diehard Dem voters who also literally pay no attention to the news?

Xeybozn posted...

Like, are ~20% of people just diehard Dem voters who also literally pay no attention to the news?

Yes except possibly the voter part.

Republican voters often disapprove of Congressional Republicans. Overall approval of Congress is at the highest level it's been in many many years due to a huge surge in Republican approval of Congress in the last month.

Leafeon13N posted...

I dont know if I'm allowed to say what we should do to Kings here.

Not pay taxes to them that's for sure

red_sox_777 posted...

Republican voters often disapprove of Congressional Republicans. Overall approval of Congress is at the highest level it's been in many many years due to a huge surge in Republican approval of Congress in the last month.

I mean, basically they've done nothing, right? Just sat back and let President Elon, DOGE, and Trump do whatever. Or really just suck all the attention away from them. So they're not bickering and they look "competent".

Dems can't do anything. But they're bickering and they look "incompetent".

Forceful_Dragon posted...

I know this was quoted at the end of the last topic, but it bears repeating and the fake TIME magazine cover really adds something extra.

AI image, right, because he looks uglier.

Once again, I think it's a real possibility this is the end of the democratic party as we know it

I'm okay with that provided it's replaced by a party with strong progressive morals.

Or MULTIPLE progressive parties, but for a multi party system we would need more widespread embracing of Ranked Choice Voting

Forceful_Dragon posted...

but for a multi party system we would need more widespread embracing of Ranked Choice Voting

Doesnt a thing need to be embraced to any degree before it can be widely embraced?

AuraChannelerCh posted...

AI image, right, because he looks uglier.

Making Trump look even more hideous than usual? AI has surpassed itself, then.

Forceful_Dragon posted...

I'm okay with that provided it's replaced by a party with strong progressive morals.

Or MULTIPLE progressive parties, but for a multi party system we would need more widespread embracing of Ranked Choice Voting

It's more likely it gets replaced with whatever Mitt Romney and crew's got cooking up

Maybe we do get that "actual" progressive party that is able to win cities, but it's unlikely they're able to gain real power

redrocket posted...

Doesnt a thing need to be embraced to any degree before it can be widely embraced?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/results/2024/11/05/ranked-choice-voting-ballot-measures/

Alaska voted "no" which means they KEEP their RCV (it was fairly new and they were trying to repeal it)

Colorado failed to pass their RCV though :(

But Washington DC passed theirs

Idaho failed theirs.

Missouri failed but their measure was pretty fucked up, it was a vote to "Prohibit Ranked Choice Voting *AND* require all voters to be American Citizens." Everyone just focused on the second part and it won in a landslide.

Nevada failed theirs.

Oregon failed theirs.

.

Okay yeah, it did worse than I thought it was gonna do on the ballot last year. People are idiots. It's best version of success will be to start local and work it's way up, but that's pretty annoying that there were a handful of state level measures and they virtually all failed.

A multi-party/third-parties/coalition style government won't work - nationally, at least - without a massive amendment to the Constitution. We've discussed this a zillion times before so I don't want to do so too much again but... like, unless the miracle happen and you somehow get the Electoral College abolished to make it so it's not political strategic suicide ... I suppose the best way would be to try to get as many individual states to adopt it as possible to demonstrate how it works and hope the momentum grows so that such an amendment is more feasible.

...but we're talking decades of grassroots work there, minimum, I feel.

The reality is our system of government has simply broken at this point. The GOP kept pushing it closer and closer to the breaking point from about 1990ish (Gingrich) on and then finally in 2016 they were rewarded for it wholesale. Maybe in the "Kamala Wins" timeline we could try to fix it but right now I feel like the only conclusion was that it was broken in 2016 and 2020 was its last gasp of trying to save itself which ended in failure.

It's possible it limps along for a while longer since I think it's an open question if the competing interests in Trump's Second Term Coalition get in their own way (see DOGE's bullshit) enough that it doesn't completely collapse by 2028 but I don't see how we come back from this long term.

The anti social media party is needed.

Metal_DK posted...

The anti social media party is needed.

The anti idiot party.

Other people want RCV because they want viable third parties

I want RCV so that third party voters have a chance at actually voting properly

We are not the same

I just think it's a better form of voting in terms of expressing the will of the people!

Thorn posted...

I just think it's a better form of voting in terms of expressing the will of the people!

The people are too fucking stupid for ranked choice voting. I've been over this before but we have it here for local elections in a very blue area and a sizable chunk of voters scream about how unfair it is because the person in 1st at the beginning doesn't always win in the end. Granted, those people tend to skew red but just imagine that shit nationwide and my head hurts.

congestion pricing in nyc sucks so that's a good move. it was unpopular before launch, it's still unpopular now. those in the outer boroughs absolutely loathe it and those within the area are split between being okay with it and being fucked over by it. good riddance.

Gonna be a real gut punch when Ranked Voting gets implemented and it somehow benefits Republican candidates

I have no evidence to support this, I just assume the worst these days and that usually works out well

We heard from multiple people that if they had to have Biden they would rather just have Trump(Because why have vanilla Trump when they are both the same)..

So yeah it wont stop people.

Congestion pricing was polled like two weeks ago and New Yorkers favored it two-to-one. 66% support.

Out of state people hated it.

And historically (in Europe) congestion pricing approval rises pretty dramatically once it is in place for a few months. Like London went from -30 to +30 after they had it for about half a year.

Thorn posted...

Congestion pricing was polled like two weeks ago and New Yorkers favored it two-to-one. 66% support.

Out of state people hated it.

Does "out of state" here mean New Jersey residents (and I guess maybe some people in CT/PA) actually affected by it, or just general national feelings on the subject?

Jersey.

Even now, Phil Murphy (Governor of NJ) did a "gotta hand it to him" for Trump doing this.

that is not what they said at all. i assume you're running off this one:

https://pfnyc.org/news/new-poll-ny-voters-say-congestion-pricing-has-led-to-faster-commutes-and-less-traffic/

your 2:1 thing is people agreeing its led to less traffic, not that they favor it. in fact the number favored is pretty explicit there:

"Support among NYC voters appears higher (37% support) than in the December Siena study (32% support)."

37% of people support it across NYC. that's the improved version off 32%. Manhattan is the highest at 57% because of course it is, everyone in the outer boroughs makes up that -20% difference.

Granted i've only spent a couple of weeks in NYC a couple of years ago, but I can't imagine driving a car into downtown and trying to park somewhere. The subway reaches nearly everything and the bus covers the rest. I only rented a car when it was time to *leave* NYC and drive to Boston/Philly/DC, but I would certainly not have considered it a good way to get around that city.

Wanglicious posted...

that is not what they said at all. i assume you're running off this one:

https://pfnyc.org/news/new-poll-ny-voters-say-congestion-pricing-has-led-to-faster-commutes-and-less-traffic/

your 2:1 thing is people agreeing its led to less traffic, not that they favor it. in fact the number favored is pretty explicit there:

"Support among NYC voters appears higher (37% support) than in the December Siena study (32% support)."

37% of people support it across NYC. that's the improved version off 32%. Manhattan is the highest at 57% because of course it is, everyone in the outer boroughs makes up that -20% difference.

I mean considering a quarter of those polled disagreed with the objective fact that it lowered traffic, I don't think the people polled should be taken very seriously lol.

Edit: Also somehow the poll for support is significantly less than "Trump should let it continue", even among Republicans.

Six in 10 Voters Say Trump Should Keep Congestion Pricing
Six in 10 (59%) of voters say President Trump should allow congestion pricing in New York City to continue.
Half of Republicans, a majority of voters outside NYC but in the metro area (54%), six in 10 NYC voters, and two in three Manhattan voters say Trump should allow congestion pricing to continue.
When asked whether President Trumps decision on congestion pricing would affect their view of the President, fully half said it would have no impact either way, two in 10 said they would have a more favorable view, one in six said they would have a less favorable view, and the rest were undecided.

All this to say, it's very much not Trump's call, and the people agree.

Thorn posted...

And historically (in Europe) congestion pricing approval rises pretty dramatically once it is in place for a few months. Like London went from -30 to +30 after they had it for about half a year.

curious, did the costs of the congestion get pushed to the people living there?
because it is here.

cabs, uber, lyft all have an extra surcharge for congestion prices within those regions and are exempt from it otherwise. so they lobbied like hell to get it passed because it'll be "cheaper" to take a cab and eat the $4 that way than it is to take your car and pay $9-27 more.

nevermind the impact on trucks, vans, etc for businesses because all those expenses got passed right on over to the rest of us. hence, why i say those of us in manhattan are split between being okay or being fucked over by it; those making 50k or less hate it, those making more are okay. by and large, that's your split.

Yes, it's the Morning Consult poll. No, it's not that one data point you picked out.

59% of voters said Trump should allow it to continue.
66-32 (2:1) support among "adults who drive into the central business district a few times per week or more"
57-36 support among Manhattan Residents

that's all in the link you linked to though so you must have saw that

I'll admit the poll result readout is a bit all over the place in terms of sample. Voters being a subsample of adults/residents, etc.which is where you get some weird seemingly contradictory results when it switches between them.

Adults/Residents obviously being the most broad group. Voters would presumably be self-reported (unless they actually do the work of checking the person against the rolls which... I dunno if that's standard practice? Probably is in election polling but dunno about this kind of thing)

i did, yes.
with the same conclusion at the end that only 37% of people in NYC approve it. you said New Yorkers favored it 2:1, that's just blatantly wrong. hell, that 66-32 is going to include the cab drivers who of course favor it more, they literally lobbied the government for this to the tune of millions of dollars. this is a cash cow for them. those aren't "New Yorkers favor it 2:1," that's a very, very select group doing so. the end result of those numbers are right there, you're just flatly wrong on that rebuttal.

it is amusing that despite being incredibly unpopular - once again, 37% approval - 59% still say Trump shouldn't be the one to do this. ....but they ain't gonna particularly mind. 20% find him more favorable if he does, 16% find him less favorable if he does, rest don't care or want to say; net win for him.

If people making 50k or less per year are against it, then it should be removed. Of course richer people are going to be willing to pay more money to get a less congested experience but poorer people can't afford that.

This is yet another case where Trump has run to the left of the Democrats and resoundingly beaten them.

It's the most supported tax ever, except maybe social security, and the support will keep rising until at some point in the near future, you'll be laughed out of the room for suggesting it wasn't a good idea. Then everyone will pretend they were always for it all along.

The essence of Trumpism is resisting that last step, so we'll see how that goes. But the fact is it will reach that step, since no force can stop natural economics.

Fine, when I was restating from memory that the polling was positive I was wrong to use "New Yorkers" rather than "Manhattan Residents" that is genuinely on me.

That wasn't out of malice, just that I remembered there was semi-recent polling and I remembered it being positive amongst those where it was happening.(Manhattan) and ended up turning that into "New Yorkers" when referring back to it here from memory and speaking about it in broad strokes and not to a NYC-centered audience.

The point I was trying to make was that it's popular where it is implemented and that when you broaden the scope outwards that's where it starts becoming very unpopular. This, of course, also includes basically most of the rest of New York so that was a poor word choice on my part regardless.

It's classic Wang to be against it lol.

I saw a stat awhile back that showed during non-peak hours it cut commute times from NJ down by an hour or more.

Which do you value more, $9, or an hour of your time? I'd pay $9 to save 30 minutes, let alone a whole fucking hour, and anyone with some sense would feel the same.

When I lived south of Seattle and commuted to Redmond, my commute was 3 hours. I would have killed someone for a congestion charge to save me some time lol.

red_sox_777 posted...

If people making 50k or less per year are against it, then it should be removed

They aren't, but it doesn't matter. They find poor people subhuman and don't give a second thought about what they do or don't support.

In this case Trumpers need to be able to control cities remotely, whether it's from the suburbs or from the white house. It's required to enact the cultural authoritarianism of project 2025. This is a great opportunity for them to prove they can do that. They've already done it with rural America and they believe they can do it with cities too.