Input | Output |
---|---|
Link | YouTube |
Published | 2020/10/24 |
Theme | |
Status | article incomplete |
Beau says:
Predicted high voter turnout in the US draws historical parallels to past elections, raising concerns about suppression efforts and the importance of upholding democratic values.
American voters
The full transcript provides a detailed analysis of historical voter turnout, the significance of mail-in voting, and the dangers of voter suppression tactics.
#VoterTurnout #HistoricalParallels #VoterSuppression #Democracy #MailInVoting
Well howdy there internet people, it's Beau again.
So today we are going to talk about the predicted voter turnout, what we can learn from that,
and some historical parallels that, well, I find entertaining.
Okay so if you don't know, they are predicting incredibly high turnout.
They're predicting 150 million people vote.
That's about 65%.
That's about 65% turnout for those overseas.
That's really high here.
It's probably not in your country, but that's incredibly high in the US.
The last time we had turnout like that was in 1908.
And the situation really wasn't that different on some levels.
There were some differences such as the incumbent party and the Republicans hadn't gone after
the racist vote yet.
They hadn't executed the southern strategy.
That didn't happen for another half century or so.
But one candidate, he had a couple of failed presidential bids before, like Trump in 2000.
But in 1908 he used a different strategy.
He didn't try to get the establishment of the party behind him.
He went after local people and he campaigned against the elite.
And he did it in a unique way.
He embraced the technology of the time.
They didn't have Twitter, but there were new modes of travel.
And he started stumping.
He changed the way politicians politic by doing this.
And along the way he became very concerned about his crowd sizes.
Opposing him, you had kind of a boring guy who was picked by the establishment of the
party.
Teddy Roosevelt was incredibly popular.
He probably could have won a third term if he wanted.
But he didn't.
He went to Taft and was like, hey, we want you to run.
I think you'd be the good candidate at the convention.
Of course, Taft wins.
You know, their guy had blessed him, so to speak.
Taft picked up a couple of Teddy's progressive policies and ran on those.
Incredibly high voter turnout.
Taft got 321 electoral votes.
That's good for today.
Back then you only needed 242 to win.
He got 51% of the popular vote, whereas Bryan, the other guy, got 43.
The remaining percentages were made up of third parties, like the Socialist Party and
I want to say the Prohibition Party.
Could be wrong on that.
Might want to look that one up.
Not really that different.
And because of this example, a lot of experts today are suggesting that we're going to
see a landslide because of this.
And that may be true.
People are enthusiastic about their candidate or enthusiastic about the other guy leaving,
so they're getting out and voting.
That may be true.
That may be an element of this.
But I would also suggest that because of mail-in voting, it's easier.
If it's accessible, maybe people will engage in that civic activity.
I would also point out that in a representative democracy like we have in the U.S., people
should want high voter turnout.
Those who believe in the ideas that America is supposed to embody, the idea that the people
are the leader, they should want high voter turnout.
To oppose high voter turnout, to attempt to suppress the vote, is to undermine the very
ideas this country was founded on.
It might be worth looking into who's trying to suppress the vote now.
Who doesn't want people voting?
Who's filing lawsuits?
Who's trying to limit mail-in voting?
Because those people, not only do they know they don't have support of the people, they're
actively undermining the ideas in the Constitution, the ideas of America for their own gain.
I don't know that people like that should be in office.
Because at the end of the day, that's what they're doing.
There is a systemic effort by one party to suppress the vote.
It's something we should pay attention to.
Because if they're willing to sell out a pillar of what's supposed to make up America, well
they will certainly sell out you.
Anyway, it's just a thought.
Y'all have a good day.
{{Shirt}}
{{EasterEgg}}