Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
belongs to the hurricane
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Basically. They're just looking for something to justify their own hatred. Religion is just an easy one.
I'd argue that you're conflating cause and effect to a certain extent, but that's not a permissible topic on the forums, unfortunately.
Ordinarily, I'd holler that for being a Could Say It, But..., but it's a response to someone else saying the opposite.
Therefore, let's find a different topic than this particular line of analysis.
I despise hypocrisy, unless of course it is my own.
Yankee Doodle Dandy
But we already knew that...
Not even Fighteer tried to contest that the DNC is horrendously corrupt, so I don't think there's going to be much dissent.
![[nja]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/user_ninja_2074.png "[nja]"){kind=small}
edited 6th May '16 4:34:22 PM by CaptainCapsase
Question: what do you guys think would happen if both Trump and Clinton were implicated in the Panama Papers? Frankly I don't think it's that unlikely a scenario
edited 6th May '16 4:35:58 PM by Xopher001
Trump would be a "water is wet" revelation, and he'll simply reiterate that he takes advantage of the broken system like the good businessman he is. Clinton...Well, unless it leads to an actual non-political theater criminal investigation, the convention won't budge.
edited 6th May '16 4:37:51 PM by CaptainCapsase
A procrastination in of itself
With Trump the biggest outrage would be folks mad at him for hiding his money in a foreign tax haven instead of using an American one. Clinton, meh short of her being charged with a crime over it shit ain't gonna change, many people are voting against the Republicans instead of for her, and some tax dodging isn't going to change that calculation.
edited 6th May '16 4:39:00 PM by Silasw
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
So you don't think either of them will be forced to drop out of the race, similar to how all those world leaders are being impeached?
This is America, serving the interests of capitalism and brutalizing people living on top of oil deposits since 1945!
edited 6th May '16 4:52:25 PM by CaptainCapsase
Lost in Space
Clinton's argument would be that she had to play the game to join the club, and you can only effect meaningful change from the inside. Whether that's true or not is a matter of one's personal belief system, not empirical fact. FDR was a quintessential insider; he channeled the anger of the people to get progressive legislation enacted because if he hadn't, it would have been Torches and Pitchforks for real.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
What kind of meaningful change?
And if she proves her liberal critics wrong, I'll be happy to admit as much.
Would that it were so simple.
The DNC as run by DWS is absolutely a shit show, and she needs to get her ass primaried, or simply replaced by someone less slimy and prone to idiotic gaffes. DWS is basically an embodiment of all of Hillary Clinton's worst aspects with none of her positives.
The role of the DNC absolutely should remain. Being able to squash overly-democratic impulses and put on a brake on the passions of the electorate is essential after the carnage of 1972's election. And, as Samantha Bee has said, "Republicans would give their left nut for superdelegates right now."
edited 6th May '16 5:32:15 PM by CrimsonZephyr
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."
"Overly democratic impulses" just really does not rub me the wrong way. Sure, it's a "private" party, but when you only have two to choose between, things like closed primaries and the like are so very undemocratic.
Would that it were so simple.
Closed primaries are there to prevent Republican subversion of the nominating process. Besides, it's a party nomination; why the hell would you want to nominate a candidate of a faction if you're not a team player and align yourself with that faction?
Because the two party system (and the first past the post voting system that makes it a mathematical inevitability) and the various other archaic aspects of American democracy can be directly attributed to much of the current issues with how things are running in the country?
Moreover, do you seriously not see the problem with Libertarians and Evangelicals having to share a party, or, on the democratic side, actual communists and socialists having to share a party with neoliberals if they want to have any impact whatsoever on policy?
edited 6th May '16 5:56:59 PM by CaptainCapsase
Lost in Space
It is a problem, but we've seen from the European example how parliamentary and/or proportional systems don't necessarily adequately reflect the will of the voters, either. For example, if we had such a system, the requirement to form a governing coalition would put Libertarians in with Neocons or Neolibs in with progressives anyway.
Governing is about compromise. As soon as you refuse to compromise, you either stop up the system or lose your voice.
Edit: Speaking of our soon-to-be Orange Overlord (which we weren't), Trump recently made remarks on Fox News about his foreign policy experience. He claimed to "know Russia well" due to holding a Miss Universe pageant there, proving President Obama's joke during the WHCD correct. Trump also refused to discuss the nature of his past contact, if any, with Vladimir Putin. [1]
edited 6th May '16 6:11:58 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
They don't always reflect the will of their voters, and there are some rare cases where that might arguably be for the greater good, even if it flies in the face of the principles upon which democracy is based (self-determination), but you could hardly pick a worse system than what the United States have and still have a stable form of governance.
Lost in Space
Well, Europe is shitting itself with unforced errors like austerity and neo-fascism, and the U.S. has recovered from the 2008 crash better than most other First World nations, so I wouldn't be so quick to judge.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
The United States hasn't had to bear the brunt of the Syrian refugee crisis, nor is violence from the middle east nearly as likely to spill over into the US in the form of terrorist attacks as it is into Europe, simply because of its geographic proximity and the larger population of middle eastern immigrants for potential attackers to hide among.
Lost in Space
Yeah, but those issues post-date the economic disaster by quite a few years. Anyway, we have our home-grown terrorists: you know, the people who shoot up schools and workplaces because of their Christian values.
The point is that an objective look at Europe reveals a union barely holding onto its basic civil rights and having already pissed in its own soup with respect to economic matters, with a rising wave of nationalist anti-establishment sentiment that's driven by neofascism in the north and economic disenfranchisement in the south. Hungary has already cast off any semblance of democracy and the EU just let it pass. Britain is seriously considering withdrawing. It's coming apart at the seams.
edited 6th May '16 6:36:30 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
True, but the school shooters and other forms of domestic terrorism don't provide a readily visible external threat for demagogues to rally people against.
Once again, I acknowledge your point, but I would argue that the economic issues that gave rise to the current problems in Europe aren't an inherent result of their form of governance versus ours, and furthermore, that the United States would have already totally collapsed (or at the very least, a dictator would have seized power) if it was faced with crises of a similar magnitude.
edited 6th May '16 6:44:32 PM by CaptainCapsase
I don't think their views really stem from their religion, to be honest... I think bigotry comes first, and then they cherry-pick some obscure religious justifications for it after the fact.