Gaybuttonthai becomes Gaybutton U.S. Election

[Guest Prakanong]

The US Presidential election has everything to do with Thailand.  What do you think will happen to gay rights in the USA if Trump is elected?  If you think the way gay rights are handled in the USA have no influence over gay rights and attitudes toward gays in other countries, including Thailand, I suggest thinking again.

 

Never mind thinking again, did you think at all when making the above post?  The US political system is built with checks-and-balances and it won't be so easy to reverse policies within four years (that's how long I predict Trump or Clinton will last if elected with both being such weak candidates) and certainly not against the general pro-stance towards LGBTQ rights and equality in the wider developed world.

 

Secondly, most countries, particularly those in East and Southeast Asia, do not take their cue on sexuality, gender and identity issues from the US, which has been far behind our own societies and even Europe when it comes to these matters.  If we did, you'd see far more LGBTQ Thais flocking to the US rather than the other way around as we see now.  In case one hasn't noticed, attempts to introduce American- style gay parades and pride events have not been successful in Thailand, and have been strictly confined to Pattaya or Silom for the benefit of elderly western customers who either missed or seek to re-live the the gay liberation movements of their youth.  These events see nearly ZERO participation from ordinary gay Thais, and are mainly staffed by bar-boys, many of whom are straight and paid by their establishments to participate.

[Guest ryanasia]

GB owns the forum he can do what he wants to. I take exception that we have to hear that forum's losers complain about it here. If I want to hear about what is on the front page of GB forum I would go there. 

[Guest Steve1903]

The last time politics was this badly broken we got WW2.

[Alexx]

The last time politics was this badly broken we got WW2.

There's hope, after all.

[firecat69]

GB owns the forum he can do what he wants to. I take exception that we have to hear that forum's losers complain about it here. If I want to hear about what is on the front page of GB forum I would go there. 

Stop Complaining.  Don't click on the thread if it does not interest you. Is that so hard????????

[Guest ryanasia]

lol Please try to stay relevant.

[Dalewood]

It is all about the Supreme Court. Neither party will have 60 votes in the senate, so nothing major is going to take place. It is going to be very interesting if we lose any more  Justices. The GOP will not confirm anyone Hillary nominates. The present nominee is as conservative as they are going to get and they made up the "final year" bullshit to not take action on this guy.

[TotallyOz]

I have never understood the need to complain about another board on this site. It just does not make sense to me.

 

That said, anyone who votes for Trump is a moron.  Yes, a complete and utter idiot.  He will destroy the economy and for those living in Thailand he will destroy the currency.

 

Clinton is a good person and a hard worker. But, most importantly, she is sane.  She was my Senator for years and did a fantastic job. I am happy to say I'm with her.

[forky123]

It is all about the Supreme Court. Neither party will have 60 votes in the senate, so nothing major is going to take place. It is going to be very interesting if we lose any more  Justices. The GOP will not confirm anyone Hillary nominates. The present nominee is as conservative as they are going to get and they made up the "final year" bullshit to not take action on this guy.

The problem is that two of the current justices are in their 80's and another is 78 or so. If the GOP refuse to confirm anyone Hillary nominates it is going to make a mockery of both the US form of government and of the legal system. The System only works if the president, congress and senate are of one party or if they are at least willing to work together. I would say that as an outsider it may be amusing to watch, unfortunately a lack of cooperation in the US government has implications for the rest of the world.

[firecat69]

The big thing when Hilary wins if she can at least pull +4 Senators over the line. Then it will be 50-50 and VP is the deciding vote.

 

And if the idiot Republicans force them to go Nuclear they will and appoint probably 3 justices in her first 2 years and there will be nothing the Republicans can do about it.

[Alexx]

The big thing when Hilary wins if she can at least pull +3 Senators over the line. Then it will be 50-50 and VP is the deciding vote.

With a little bit of luck, she won't even have to pull senators over the line, if the line is moving enough in the right (okay, left) direction at the same time. We'll see.

[Dalewood]

I really hope that Hillary can get her justices approved without the nuclear option. You have to remember that the GOP refused to act on Bill Clinton's nominees for lower courts, thus the Dems used the nuclear options. At the time, they stated that they did not want to do this for the Supreme Court...we shall see.

[KhorTose]

I really hope that Hillary can get her justices approved without the nuclear option.

The nuclear option is not on the table unless the Dems capture the Senate.  The GOP haws stopped that option by never allowing the senate to be in recess.

[Up2u]

Info from Wikipedia, the nuclear option: "In most proposed variations of the nuclear option, the presiding officer would rule that a simple majority vote is sufficient to end debate. If the ruling is challenged, a majority would be required to overturn it. If the ruling is upheld, it becomes a precedent. This would end what had effectively become a 60-vote requirement for confirmation of an executive or judicial nominee, or the passage of legislation."

 

After Mr Comey's comments weeks ago the chances of a Democratic Senate were reduced to 50%.

[forky123]

What happens if Hillary, or Trump for that matter, wins enough states to get past the 270 mark but then the Electoral College Electors decide to cast their vote for the other person to circumvent the will of the people? Due to the electoral college there are 538 people who could, in theory, ignore the popular vote and cast their electoral college votes for who,they like. There are several in Washington State threatening not to vote for Hillary even if she wins. Apparently it's perfectly allowed though they will face a $1000 fine.

 

In theory then, the popular vote could go for Clinton, the states could go for Clinton and then a handful of people could change the entire result. How exactly is that Democracy?

[ct2005]

I don't like the Democratic party or the Republican party. I just like parties.

[firecat69]

What happens if Hillary, or Trump for that matter, wins enough states to get past the 270 mark but then the Electoral College Electors decide to cast their vote for the other person to circumvent the will of the people? Due to the electoral college there are 538 people who could, in theory, ignore the popular vote and cast their electoral college votes for who,they like. There are several in Washington State threatening not to vote for Hillary even if she wins. Apparently it's perfectly allowed though they will face a $1000 fine.

 

In theory then, the popular vote could go for Clinton, the states could go for Clinton and then a handful of people could change the entire result. How exactly is that Democracy?

Complete waste of time worrying about something that has not happened in more then 200 years and won't this year.

[forky123]

There are electors threatening to do just that and the candidates are two of the most vilified people I've ever seen in election. Just because it hasn't happened in a while doesn't change the fact it is entirely legal to do it. Elsewhere, and already, lawsuits have started complaining about election irregularities. If someone put this in a film script they would be told it was too far fetched.

[Gaybutton]

Complete waste of time worrying about something that has not happened in more then 200 years and won't this year.

 

 

I'm not worried about it, but I'm interested.  According to the news, two electors from Washington state said if Hillary Clinton wins, they are not going to cast their vote for her.  The did not say who they intend to vote for instead or whether they will cast a vote at all.

 

I'm curious to see if they really do that.

 

It has happened, and has happened many times.  See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector

[Guest]

The Wiki link is interesting:

 

"During the 1836 election, Virginia's entire 23-man electoral delegation faithlessly voted against victorious Democratic Party Vice Presidential Candidate Richard Mentor Johnson^[1] due to Johnson's openly admitted, publicized, long-term interracial relationship with his slave, Julia Chinn".

 

Difficult to see that happening in 2016.

[Guest DThump]

Gaybuttonthai has now become 99.9% Gaybutton U.S. Election.

Some of it is interesting provided you breeze past Gaybutton's comments which are little more than cut and paste.

[baobao]

Gaybuttonthai has now become 99.9% Gaybutton U.S. Election.

Some of it is interesting provided you breeze past Gaybutton's comments which are little more than cut and paste.

 

The "Everything Else" section does have a lot of election threads, although as of right now the top six (and most active) threads were started by members other than Gaybutton... but thanks for keeping an eye on it for us.