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
I heard that they were considering staying through next week just so they could force it through.
Which is why this is happening, I presume. One should never take it for granted that the bill will fail, fellas.
A wandering user
The support is steadily dropping, it can be guaranteed that it will not completely pass. Otherwise, they might risk pissing off an entire nation that not even the police might handle it.
edited 26th Jun '17 7:50:06 AM by Luigisan98
The only good fanboy, is a redeemed fanboy.
CNN just broke that the Supreme Court is allowing part of the travel ban to go into effect. Details still coming in, and the case will be heard in full soon.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
A wandering user
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Hope is not one of the worst parts.
The refugee ban is allowed in part, and its just a matter a time before they allow it to go into full effect I bet.
Those who are studying, working or related to someone in the US are fine for now.
Full hearing this fall.
edited 26th Jun '17 7:59:31 AM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
The court made an important exception: it said the ban “may not be enforced against foreign nationals who have a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.”
The court also said in the ruling that it would consider whether the case will be moot by the time it hears it; the ban is supposed to be a temporary one while the government reviews its vetting procedures.
A wandering user
Refugees are people, and none of them killed any person in a kind of attack. Why can't some people try and go meet them instead of fearing them?
edited 26th Jun '17 8:02:24 AM by Luigisan98
The only good fanboy, is a redeemed fanboy.
Why do I suspect that the Court is deliberately handing Trump's WH rope to see which fixture they choose to hang themselves from?
edited 26th Jun '17 8:03:38 AM by Euodiachloris
Oh, bother.
Because they aren't the right color, religion, or income bracket.
edited 26th Jun '17 8:03:50 AM by M84
Disgusted, but not surprised
You are looking at this from the perspective of a moral individual with a conscience, not a nativist fanatic.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
A wandering user
And what if they try to see they're more than they think about?
Does this mean the ban is now in effect?
Just another day in the life of Jimmy Nutrin
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
They won't
edited 26th Jun '17 8:08:48 AM by LeGarcon
Oh really when?
Oh, bother.
For some people, too many people, yes.
A wandering user
Why not?
Because they are evil. Simple as that. The people that proposed and wrote up the ban are not good, decent or reasonable. Appealing to their better nature is impossible, because they don't have one.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Oh, bother.
Yeah, nativist bigotry doesn't exactly come from a rational place.
Disgusted, but not surprised
I think the problem is that "national security" legislation gives the president far too much authority.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
These people are acting out of malice, not ignorance. They know exactly what they're doing and why.
Oh really when?
A wandering user
But what if they see that the people they're designating are not as bad as they see when they meet or they don't care at all?
The only good fanboy, is a redeemed fanboy.
You answered your own question: if the people who authored this ban do not have an emotional investment in doing this, then they do not care-full stop.
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
They have a very strong emotional investment in keeping these people out. They act deliberately and go to great lengths to do so.
Again, this is malice and not ignorance.
Oh really when?
Oh, bother.
You are giving them too much credit. The people who would support a ban like this in the first place would be more inclined to abuse any refugees they meet without even giving them a chance. On the very low chance that they do change their mind about a refugee, they'll just think that said refugee is one of the "good" ones. And if the few refugees they meet do end up being troublemakers, they'll latch on to that to validate their prejudices towards all refugees.
edited 26th Jun '17 8:24:35 AM by M84
Disgusted, but not surprised
Swiftest failed, soonest shoved under the rug.