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
Furthermore, their power projection (outside of failed states and their immediate neighbors) is largely based on corruption, propaganda and subversion.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
The only power they can gain is relative to the other countries around it, which is why they are so intent on destabilizing the surrounding countries. The reason they are reverting to a Soviet style Active Measures campaign (disinformation, subversion of political parties and advocacy groups, Coercion, etc) is because it's a relatively low cost way of accomplishing that goal.
Edited by megaeliz on Dec 6th 2018 at 11:43:44 AM
I think more important that that is the strong irredentist narrative in Russian politics. They’re working to get those countries “back”, not simply destabilize them.
So it looks like Elizabeth Warren is having manufactroversy issues.
The fact they have bullied, corrupted, and intimidated other countries into being annexed by them pretty much says, "Only able to do X through Y" is still pretty damn terrifying.
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
It goes all the way back to 2000, and really gives the most complete picture of mounting Russian Aggression I've seen.
Edited by megaeliz on Dec 6th 2018 at 11:47:03 AM
Asymetric influence operations isnt that hard to counter, but first a country has to take it seriously enough to try.
Let’s be realistic here though, their influence is heavily limited. Their “intervention” in Syria is a shadow of what the Soviets were able to do. The political weight they can throw around is more or less limited to their immediate neighbors. Sure, they’re a threat, but it’s not a massive or immediate threat.
Edited by archonspeaks on Dec 6th 2018 at 8:59:38 AM
They should have sent a poet.
They very probably won the election for Trump so "limited" is a nonstatement. Basically, every attempt to downplay or understate Russia's threat is wrong IMHO. They need to be talked UP not down.
Also, the Soviet Union had many many nations willing to stand against them while the Russian Federation has invaded multiple nations with barely a whimper from the international community.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Dec 6th 2018 at 9:01:34 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Or we could simply be realistic about the threat posed, which is present but not critical.
And the whole “the Russians handed Trump the election” thing is absurdly reductive. Yes, they likely contributed to his victory, but domestic factors were much more significant. They didn’t single-handedly steal the election.
I’ll also point out that the “invasions” they’ve done have all been through deniable local proxies and political warfare with minimal participation from actual Russian units. They’re not exactly the classical definition of an invasion like you seem to be trying to imply.
They should have sent a poet.
I find that when we argue over the definitions of things like "invasions" and "censorship" no points can actually be made.
Again, not hard to counter, but we would need an administration that wanted to first. The only reason that the Russians are so dangerous now is because we ignored them so long.
True, but there’s a obvious distinction between a hard power military invasion and a soft power proxy invasion. The above poster is making it seem like Russia is capable of the former, when it’s actially the latter.
So once we have someone not in the pocket of oligarchs and authoritians in the White House, what is the next step do you think?
Edited by megaeliz on Dec 6th 2018 at 12:51:05 PM
Quietly taking Putin into a back room somewhere and asking him how robust he thinks the Moscow metropolitan digital infrastructure is.
So on the State level, Arizona Rep. David Stringer made some... decidedly questionable remarks regarding race and immigration.
Stringer is heard on the audio saying “diversity in our country is relatively new.”
ASU sophomore Stephen Chmura responded by citing immigration from Ireland and Italy.
"They were all European," Stringer said. "So after their second or third generation, everybody looks the same. Everybody talks the same. That's not the case with African-Americans and other racial groups because they don't melt in. They don't blend in. They always look different."
"Why does looking different matter?" Chmura asked.
"I don't know. Maybe it doesn't. Maybe it doesn't to a lot of people,” Stringer said. “It seems to matter to a lot of people who move out of Detroit, who move out of Baltimore. You know we have white flight in this country."
Chmura pointed out that his Polish great grandfather wanted a better life for himself, just like Venezuelans fleeing from a “socialist regime.”
"The difference between the Polish-American immigrant and the immigrant from Somalia is the second-generation Polish immigrant looks like the Irish kid and the German kid and every other kid,” Stringer said. “But the immigrant from Somalia does not."
Stringer, throughout the conversation, continues to refer to immigrants and non-native English speakers as a “burden.”
"It costs a lot of more to educate a child who doesn't speak English as a native language," Stringer said. "So that's a burden on the taxpayers. It's a pretty significant burden."
Stringer has previously said that “immigration today represents an existential threat to the United States."
He was recorded earlier this year lamenting about how there “aren’t enough white kids to go around” because 60 percent of children in Arizona schools were minorities.
The Arizona Republican Party called on him to resign over the remarks but he refused. He won his reelection in Prescott earlier this month.
Stringer later apologized to “anyone he offended” during an interview with the Arizona Capitol Times.
“I maybe touched a third rail of politics but what I said is accurate,” Stringer said in June. “Anybody that talks about this in this way is shut down and called a racist. I’m speaking the truth. Diversity may be a great thing, there might be a lot of advantages, I’m not arguing against diversity at all, but no country can be demographically transformed without any political or social consequences.”
Arizona state Rep. César Chávez (D), an immigrant himself, tore into Stringer on Twitter Friday.
“The Arizona Legislature has no room for individuals such as David Stringer,” he wrote. “Arizona is enriched by it’s diversity and cultures. We must look to move forward from this divisiveness, and I believe in order to do so he must resign or the #AZ Leg should take actions for expulsion.”
“Representative Stringer’s comments are vile and won’t be tolerated,” Bowers wrote. “His remarks don’t reflect the sentiments of the Arizona Legislature, the constituents we represent, and the policies we enact."
Bowers added that Stringer's remarks made him "incapable of performing his duties" as chairman of the Sentencing and Recidivism Reform Committee, prompting him to ask for Stringer's resignation from the position.
"I gave Representative Stringer a critical assignment as chair of the Sentencing and Recidivism Reform Committee. These comments render him incapable of performing his duties as chair. I asked Representative Stringer to resign as chair of the committee, and he has agreed to do so.”
So at least that last bit is good news - but good God is it saying something about his constituents when even the GOP in Arizona tell the guy to quit running for reelection... and not only does he not listen, but he wins anyway.
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"
Servant of the Omnissiah
These were the same people who figured Joe Arpaio was okay. So no surprise.
![[down]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_down.png "[down]"){kind=icon}
Or they have a very selective reading of it. They're ignoring that for a long time, Irish and Central and Eastern Europeans were considered racially inferior by the mostly English-descended Americans. Now since that sounds silly, they're saying "all white people" which makes them look not only ignorant, but also stupid.
Heck, even H.P. Lovecraft wrote his Shadow over Innsmouth after he found out his Grandmom was Welsh.
Edited by TechPriest90 on Dec 6th 2018 at 5:20:04 AM
I hold the secrets of the machine.
Figure of Hourai
Also, "relatively new"? Er... I see someone fails a basic grasp of history.
Avatar Source
Party of White Supremacy has White supremacist, news at '11.
I am thoroughly unsurprised by this, still, it's nice to have a minor refresher about how awful the Republicans are. Gotta keep that animosity burning.
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
I mean, I guess you could say the celebration of diversity is relatively new from a historical standpoint, but...
Always expect Republicans to twist history into whatever's convenient for them to believe at the time.
Edited by PhysicalStamina on Dec 6th 2018 at 6:07:19 AM
I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out.
As someone from Arizona: FUCK this guy!
Okay, so, this is not exactly current politics, but I thought you guys would appreciate a little "where are they now" story: Milo Yiannopolous was kicked of Patreon after only a single day, and still for millions of dollars in debt.
I know it's wrong to feel happy about another person's misfortune, but I really can't help it.
I would say it's fine in this case. Yiannopolous is a garbage heap of a person.
Disasturbator
> and for $750 per month, “Milo will fly to you and take you and a friend out for dinner once a year.”
When did Milo grow wings,and why would someone want to be his dinner
New theme music also a box
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]")
Their biggest advantage is their legacy in general. As they are now they aren’t able to afford a modern military or government, but luckily enough they retained enough of both from the Soviets to make it work. They’re still coasting on Soviet infrastructure and military spending.
They should have sent a poet.