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
My opinion? Hillary Clinton made very bad statements that did defend TERF individuals with "be nice to people who are uncomfortable with sharing spaces with trans women" (which is, let's be frank, a terrible view in both layers) She could and should be called out over that. By the same token, she supported LGBT rights above and beyond what she 'had' to do as Secretary of State. She was later to support gay marriage than other Democrats but she was highly supportive of LGBT rights in other capacities as New York Senator and fought against Bush's attempt to ban it via constitutional amendment.
The harm doesn't erase the good and the good doesn't erase the harm.
Edited by Lightysnake on Aug 8th 2020 at 11:54:21 AM
I'm not sure AOC has broad enough appeal to go national, barring a shift in the electorate's opinions. New York Senator or Governor, perhaps.
Warren is excellent as a Senator, but as we've seen she just can't maintain momentum in a larger race.
Perhaps not now, but nothing is permanent. Shifting the Overton window where AOC does have appeal shouldn't be inconceivable.
On Warren, we saw that happen once. That doesn't mean it's some kind of intrinsic trait of her candidacy. In four years we could easily see her trying again and with a better strategy (less focusing on a wonkish persona more on blood and teeth Warren) things could go differently.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Aug 8th 2020 at 12:01:28 PM
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
AOC would have no real shot at unseating Schumer. She may have a better shot at unseating Gillibrand but it's far from certain.
She doesn't in the foreseeable future I agree, but beyond that? Who knows.
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
Well, Schumer, I'd wager, is unlikely to be senator beyond another 2 terms.
The issue is as much as people online hate him, Schumer is a master of retail politics. If you've been to a college graduation in NY, you've seen Chuck Schumer. He's masterful at how he he heads about NY.
Foreign Troper
Disclaimer before I post:
No I am not putting her on the same Level as the ones I am mentioning, I just want to make a point:
So if it was Gabbard, Bloomberg or Williamsion we are talking about here, would there also be an argument about us having to stand together and not waste time criticizing these people?
Nobody ever doubted that Trump is by far the worst. But that should not mean that we are not allowed to discuss legitimate issues of Democrats.
And while there certainly is some vitriolic, irrational hatred towards Hillary, I don't think I've ever seen that around here, so that is a Strawman.
Edited by Forenperser on Aug 8th 2020 at 9:09:26 PM
Certified: 48.0% West Asian, 6.5% South Asian, 15.8% North/West European, 15.7% English, 7.4% Balkan, 6.6% Scandinavian
I'm going to ask that we give the HRC talk a break for a little bit. Everyone needs to take a breath from that one.
Edited by nombretomado on Aug 8th 2020 at 12:08:09 PM
Well, Schumer, I'd wager, is unlikely to be senator beyond another 2 terms.
The issue is as much as people online hate him, Schumer is a master of retail politics. If you've been to a college graduation in NY, you've seen Chuck Schumer. He's masterful at how he he heads about NY.
Oooh, good point. Yeah in that case AOC won't unseat him.
You win this round Schumer <shakes fist>
Yeah, the recent NY shakeups...AOC is actually a very good politician, but Establishment Dems in NY in many cases? Have gotten quite complacent. AOC and her former chief of staff were the board members of the justice Democrats, put all those resources into that race and Joe Crowley...slept on it big time. He barely campaigned, sent a surrogate to debate her and did a pretty poor job all in all.
Engel was even worse. The guy was horribly out of sync with his district, made no real efforts to connect for years and didn't keep up with any shifts, plus his 'hot mic' moment. I don't know if he meant it how it sounded in context, but it was really not how you ever want a primary to go. Schumer doesn't have those weaknesses. He's an institution unto himself in New York who goes everywhere. Someone with ambition would be wiser to just let him run down his clock on his own and retire when he's ready before going for the seat.
Edited by Lightysnake on Aug 8th 2020 at 12:19:28 PM
All reservations aside, I'm interested in how AOC will perform on committees as she gains experience.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Perhaps Gillibrand is more vulnerable?
Or just hold on until Schumer retires.
Edited by Rationalinsanity on Aug 8th 2020 at 4:20:57 PM
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Gillibrand is more vulnerable, but I don't think she'd be easy to primary. The backlash against her for Al Franken just stings of pure sexism.
AOC is at least a capable and good politician herself. The only one of the Squad I've grown to genuinely dislike of late is Rashida Tlaib, but her primary challenger was awful and a Farrakhan booster. Tlaib could be in trouble in the future, but this wasn't the time.
Edited by Lightysnake on Aug 8th 2020 at 12:23:20 PM
This is all hypothetical though, as AOC legally can't run for Senate yet.
In another few cycles, who knows what the situation will look like.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Are we sure the spoiled-child vendetta backlash to Gillibrand is still alive?
Google has lots on AOC's committee work but annoyingly not some kind of overarching analysis.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
I dunno, I heard Gillibrand's favorability ratings aren't too great in NY.
Also, AOC is thirty, isn't she? That's the age for a Senator.
Edited by Lightysnake on Aug 8th 2020 at 12:27:47 PM
I'd like AOC as a Senator but I also like Gilibrand, so I think I'd prefer if the former primaried whoever replaces Schumer :V
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
A procrastination in of itself
Gillibrand could end up with a cabinet position, what with New York being a safe seat.
AOC has lots of possible paths, she could stay in the house, she could move to something more local like NYC mayor (though I thinks she’s ruled out running at the next election) or NY Governor, she could try for the senate, she could end up in a minor cabinet position, who knows.
Edited by Silasw on Aug 8th 2020 at 7:39:32 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Huh, I thought the minimum age for Senator was the same as POTUS (35).
That's not to say that people can't work their way up the House and stay there. If she wants to dedicate her life to shifting the House Dems to the left, why not?
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
It's not hard to see AOC follow a trajectory like Hubert Humphrey and those close to him: the leftist firebrands pushing the Democrats, who were headaches among headaches for Sam Rayburn and Lyndon Johnson but tried to keep the caucuses flying right
Professor Allan Lichtman, who has predicted the result of every Presidential Election since 1984 (other than 2000, but that was a fucky one) is ready to make his 2020 call: He predicts Biden will win in November.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/07/us/allan-lichtman-trump-biden-2020-trnd/index.html
Figure of Hourai
Link to his site and how the prediction is made. Well, not his site specifically, but it uses the same thing.
Though they disagree and think Trump is charismatic.
Edited by RainehDaze on Aug 8th 2020 at 9:42:39 AM
Avatar Source
I also disagree on Key #10, Trump has had a slew of moderate-major(ish) foreign policy failures. Its just that none of them particularly stand out from one another.
And Key #7 (incumbent party has effected major policy change) doesn't account for said policy changes being good/popular.
Edited by Rationalinsanity on Aug 8th 2020 at 5:55:58 AM
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
A procrastination in of itself
I’m not sure I’d rate Biden as non-charismatic.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Figure of Hourai
Yeah, but whether it's popular or not doesn't seem to be important to the outcome. Just having made a major change seems to be enough.
Weird.
shrugs
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Aug 8th 2020 at 2:41:23 PM
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -Fighteer