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
Tell Me, Have You Seen the Yellow Sign?
Even it was Steve Jobs, business and gov't require very dissimilar types. They've superficial organizational similarities because of history, but entirely different ethos to each.
Look with century eyes... With our backs to the arch And the wreck of our kind We will stare straight ahead For the rest of our lives
Oh, bother.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Jobs also had some pretty weird ideas about nutrition and how to deal with cancer. He probably would have picked a Health Secretary with views as nutty as the one Trump picked.
I don't know who these mobs are that everyone is talking about, but organized protest action isn't going to stop anytime soon. The objective is to put pressure on politicians who enable the Trump agenda, and support those who resist it, regardless of party affiliation (though, obviously, most of the enablers are Republicans, and most of the resisters are Democrats, but there are exceptions on both sides). The progressive agenda is to decentralize concentrations of wealth and power so that ordinary people can pursue their interests and protect themselves from exploitation. New institutions and policies are needed to protect the Earth, promote genuine democracy, redistribute income, and respect a diversity of culture and lifeways. Unearned privileges based on socio-economic status, race, place of origin or religion will be actively resisted wherever they appear.
And there are no excuses, we are not doomed, the fight isn't futile, they aren't going to kill us all, all governance is not irredeemingly corrupt, and the vast mass of human beings are not too stupid, lazy or greedy to do the right thing. We will take this fight to every policy making body in America, from the White House to the local school board.
The conservative movement wanted to take us back to the previous century. Well... have you heard about the Progressive Era of the early 20th century? This is it, it's happening again. We aren't going to stop with just protecting what was won before. We are taking reform even farther this time. Be careful what you wish for, conservatives.
It's only been a month. You haven't seen anything yet.
edited 26th Feb '17 8:14:19 PM by DeMarquis
Asgore Adopts Noelle
If this is true, then it won't survive in the House: Not because of Democrats, but because of Tea Partiers who are literally begging at this point to just kill off all Entitlement programs. Keep in mind, this is a rumor, but many of the rumors that come out of the White House have tended to be true lately...
A procrastination in of itself
They're currently hypothetical mobs, but the possibility of a violent uprising if things get any worse is something that has in the past prompted the elites to throw their support behind reform and progress. Right now there are no angry mobs out in the streets ready to burn the rich in rage against the unfairness of the system, we're not even yet at the point where a desicion has to be made to prevent us getting to a situation where angry mobs are in the streets and violent revolution is inevitable. But we could easily end up at the tipping point.
If Trump is able to destroy the US's economy and start another depression the US could quickly end up at such a tipping point (especially if Trump starts a costly war with Iran), where Trump would need to be replaced before he allowed to US to descend into chaos and madness.
Come 2020 if the US is in a depression Big Money will have to make a choice about if it thinks Trump can hold the US together for another 4 years or if 4 more years of him would likely result in a violent revolution where they are dragged into the streets. I suspect that such a decision will have to be made in 2020 and that Big Money will end up being willing to back even the likes of Sanders against Trump, because the risk of a violent revolution under Trump is to great for them, no tax cut is worth it when the mob comes to drag you out into the street.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Professional Forum Ninja
So, going a little retro here, but I remember hearing W. wanting to make Social Security reform his main goal for his administration before 9/11 made fighting terrorism a big thing. Can anyone give me a run down or an article on what he wanted to do?
"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
Anyone watch the Oscars tonight? It was FULL of Trump jabs, both direct and allusions. Jimmy Kimmel even live tweeted to Trump on the show, asking if he was awake. I loved it.
edited 26th Feb '17 8:55:43 PM by speedyboris
Puffery, but perhaps hopeful puffery.
"Coffee! Coffeecoffeecoffee! Coffee! Not as strong as Meth-amphetamine, but it lets you keep your teeth!"
I kept up with awards (Woo, Zootopia won Best Animated Feature!) but like I said earlier a lot of Trump supporters "boycotted" it because they didn't like the media and actors saying bad things about the President, somehow thinking that just because these actors and actresses are famous and rich that they don't have the right to complain.
I also saw an article earlier today that had comments about people saying that the White Hats documentary was a propaganda film for...some reason?
Also, keep in mind Trump is in his 70's, has poor health, and being a president ages you quicker. He could literally drop dead any day now, and many other celebrities younger and healthier than him have been dropping dead over the last 2 years. If he manages to make it to 2020 without getting the boot or the Grim Reaper's scythe, he will be 74, and I doubt he will be able to survive the next 4 years or want to be president for another 4 years if he does somehow get reelected.
edited 26th Feb '17 9:32:06 PM by Bat178
My Hair Provides Affordable Healthcare
The director of The White Hats also has been prevented from attending due to the travel ban.
Destroyer of Worlds
NYT article: Move Left, Democrats
The far more important — and largely untold — story of the election is that more Obama voters defected to third- and fourth-party candidates than the number who supported Mr. Trump. That is the white flight that should most concern the next D.N.C. chairman, because those voters make up a more promising way to reclaim the White House. The way to win them back is by being more progressive, not less.
To be clear, all white voters matter. But Democrats must make tough, data-driven decisions about how to prioritize their work. Right now, too many are using bad math and faulty logic to push the party to chase the wrong segment of white voters. For example, Guy Cecil, who spent nearly $200 million as head of the progressive “super PAC” Priorities USA, urged the party to rebuild trust with the “millions of white voters who voted for President Obama and Donald Trump.”
The math underlying that conclusion is incorrect (Mr. Trump picked up not “millions,” but only 784,000 white votes in the 10 battleground states he won by single digits). And it misses the bigger — and more fixable — problem of white Democratic defections to third- and fourth-party candidates.
Hillary Clinton lost the decisive states of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan by 77,744 votes; the number of Democratic votes dropped significantly from 2012 levels, and the Republican total increased by about 440,000 votes. The third- and fourth-party surge, however, was larger than the Republican growth, with 503,000 more people choosing the Libertarian or the Green candidate than had done so in 2012. When you look at the white vote in those states, the picture is even more stark.
In Wisconsin, according to the exit poll data, Mrs. Clinton received 193,000 fewer white votes than Mr. Obama received in 2012, but Mr. Trump’s white total increased over Mitt Romney’s by just 9,000 votes. So where did the other 184,000 Wisconsin whites go? A majority went to third and fourth parties, which, together, received 100,000 more white votes than they did in 2012.
In Michigan, where 75 percent of the voters were white, Mrs. Clinton received about 295,000 fewer votes than Mr. Obama did, but the Republican total increased by just 164,000 votes. The ranks of those voting third and fourth party leapt to more than 250,000 last year from about 51,000 in 2012, and Mrs. Clinton fell short by just 10,704 votes.
In Pennsylvania, the Democrats’ problem was not with white voters, but with African-Americans. Mrs. Clinton actually improved on the Democratic 2012 results with whites, but over 130,000 unenthused black voters stayed home, and she lost by about 44,000 votes.
If Democrats had stemmed the defections of white voters to the Libertarian or Green Parties, they would have won Michigan and Wisconsin, and had they also inspired African-Americans in Pennsylvania, Mrs. Clinton would be president.
If progressive whites are defecting because they are uninspired by Democrats, moving further to the right will only deepen their disillusionment. But if the next D.N.C. chairman can win them back, the country’s demographic trends will tilt the field in Democrats’ favor. As Mrs. Clinton’s popular vote margin showed, there is still a new American majority made up of a meaningful minority of whites and an overwhelming majority of minorities. Not only is there little evidence that Democrats can do significantly better with those white working-class voters who are susceptible to messages laced with racism and sexism, but that sector of the electorate will continue to shrink in the coming years. Nearly half of all Democratic votes (46 percent) were not white in 2016, and over the next four years, 10 million more people of color will be added to the population, as compared with just 1.5 million whites.
Keith Ellison, a D.N.C. chairman candidate, has a proven record of engaging core Democratic voters rather than chasing the elusive conservative whites, and the party would be in good hands under his stewardship. (Thomas E. Perez, the former labor secretary, has less electoral history, but his reliance on political superstars such as the strategist Emmy Ruiz, who delivered victories for Democrats in Nevada and Colorado, is encouraging.)
Whoever prevails as chairman must resist the pressure to follow an uninformed and ill-fated quest for winning over conservative white working-class voters in the Midwest. The solution for Democrats is not to chase Trump defectors. The path to victory involves reinspiring those whites who drifted to third-party candidates and then focusing on the ample opportunities in the Southwest and the South.
Mrs. Clinton came closer to winning Texas than she did Iowa. She fared better in Arizona, Georgia and Florida than she did in the traditional battleground state of Ohio. The electoral action for Democrats may have once been in the Rust Belt, but it’s now moving west and south.
Tldr; Hillary lost Wisconsin and Michigan because of white voters defecting to third party candidates. She lost more white Obama voters to third parties than she did to Trump.
She also actually improved on Obama's white voters numbers in Pennsylvania but she lost that because of unethusiastic African American voters who preferred to stay home and not vote.
Also Democrats should move left not stay put or move right to try to court Trump voters. Rather they should bring the defected white voters and African Americans back. And Democrats should move to concentrating on the Sun Belt as well. (Texas, Arizona, Georgia and Florida.)
"You can't change the world without getting your hands dirty."
I've heard Texas is actually an interesting situation. It's been reliably republican for a long time but from what I understand it's becoming more purple? What's the sitch down there?
A procrastination in of itself
More and more Hispanics combined with Hispanics being driven away from the Republican Party and the standard factor of younger people leaning more towards the Dems and older people dying off.
Basically Demograpics are meaning there are more and more people in Texas who are likely to vote for the Dems.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
My Hair Provides Affordable Healthcare
Texas also has an economy that it closely intertwined with Mexico, which leads to the awkward situation where conservative business people come to actually oppose harsher immigration policies due to their reliable source of cheap labor being threatened.
Destroyer of Worlds
Texas is actually the only majority-minority state that votes Republican.
The difference between Texas and others is that Texas' white population is heavily Republican. Obama lost white Texan voters to Romney 80-20.
So in 2012
Romney- 57.2 % - 4,555,799
Obama- 41.4% - 3,294,440
Johnson: 1.1 % - 88,110
Stein: 0.3% - 24,450
2016:
Trump: 52.2 % - 4,685, 047
Hillary: 43.2 % - 3,877, 868
Johnson: 3.2 % - 283,492
Jill Stein: 0.8 %- 71,558
So 2012 to 2016, Democrats picked up over half a million voters. Republicans picked up only 100 k voters and 3rd party candidates picked up over double that at over 200 K voters.
But Texas probably won't go blue until 2028.
The problem is that much of Texas' Hispanic population aren't citizens. That's probably why Republicans aren't in favor of amnesty. They're afraid Texas would go the way of California.
edited 26th Feb '17 11:02:03 PM by MadSkillz
"You can't change the world without getting your hands dirty."
A procrastination in of itself
What do you mean? Texas isn't majority minority (it's 70% white) I don't think any state is. Edit: Wait a second, Texas demographics don't make any sense... I see a total of 133%... dammit guys, statistics don't work this way, you can't count Hispanics as also being white, a white hispanic goes in the two or more races category...Texas may well be majority minority, but I can't tell because there's no actual number for the percentage of white people because Hispanics people have been included in the white people number...
But yeah Clinton came closer to winning Texas than she did Iowa.
edited 26th Feb '17 10:35:42 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
Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018
I'm fairly certain a 50 state strategy involves running candidates and platforms that appeal to the demographics of the different states, so for example in a Rust Belt state you'd run an economic populist like some folks here want so badly, while in the Deep South you'd run *gasp* a centrist or a Blue Dog. Winning is the key here, as you certainly can't introduce legislation in the opposition.
In other words, please at least try to understand things before you start poisoning wells over not getting your way. Someone other than the Greens and Libertarians was pushing the "both sides are the same" angle during the last cycle.
With regards to Kansas: If Sanders is so popular there, why is the state legislature's disastrous tax plan still a thing?
edited 26th Feb '17 10:52:58 PM by Krieger22
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiot
We actually doing this conspiracy theory nonsense about "corporate masters"? I've said it before, I'll say it again—got any evidence?
A procrastination in of itself
I'm not actually certain that the Dems should run centrists or Blue Dogs in the Deep South, I'm thinking they should run minority candidates, use that demographic shift and get wins that way. There's a reason I'm hoping that one of the Castro brothers takes the Texas senate seat in 2018.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
By the way, for all the complaining from some about the Blue Dogs and the Democrats tacking right...you know why that happens? It happens because the hard left is not a reliable voting bloc. You can't reliably get elected by appealing to hard left because most of the time they simply don't vote or can be relied on to bail the moment you take a single position with which they disagree.
You wanna take over the Democratic Party? Try voting in and for it. Consistently.
But yeah Clinton came closer to winning Texas than she did Iowa.
Destroyer of Worlds
Most Hispanics are officially listed as whites at birth in the US unless they look obviously non-white or they self-identify as multi-racial or Native American.
94.35% of Hispanics are classified as white in Texas with the rest spread out between African-American, American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander and two or more races.
And Texas' Hispanic population is projected to pass it's white population by 2020.
It's currently standing at:
Non Hispanic white: 11, 821,951
Hispanics: 10, 654,692
http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/texas-population/
Texas became a majorty-minority state back in 2005.
Nevada is currently the next state projected to be majority-minority and then Maryland.
Arizona, Florida, Georgia and New Jersey are going to pass this milestone in the 2020's.
"You can't change the world without getting your hands dirty."
The Wanderer
Hawaii's got more Asians than white people.
Eating a Vanilluxe will give you frostbite.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]")
Yeah, it's almost like putting someone with no gov't experience (and tbh a pretty spotty business record) in charge of the gov't was a bad idea.
Disgusted, but not surprised