Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

nrjxll Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Not war
#335701: Oct 27th 2020 at 3:36:44 PM

Maybe this will be reassuring to some.

Basically, Democrats are so much more likely to send in mail-in-ballots early or just drop them off directly, it's not actually a given that Democrats are most at risk at having their ballots discarded than Republicans are.

I get what he's saying, but like essentially every other attempt to reassure people I've seen, this fails because of the unstated assumption that there are any Republican officials who can be trusted to act based on election law instead of looking for any excuse to invalidate Democratic ballots as illegal. From what I can tell, once Trump starts yelling about fraud - as he certainly will - there's no reason to assume that won't be all it takes.

Again, what I'd to know, as far as reassurances go, is what and how many mechanisms there are from stopping legal challenges to the results from getting to the Supreme Court - preferably mechanisms that do not require putting any faith in Republicans to do the right thing.

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#335702: Oct 27th 2020 at 3:41:57 PM

I mean, if that's how you're looking at this, I'm not really sure what could reassure you. I have to be honest, it kind of sounds like just looking into these things at all isn't doing you any good.

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#335703: Oct 27th 2020 at 3:42:32 PM

I think violence is pretty likely yeah.

The only question now is what kind of violence and how much. Protests and counterprotests and the associated clashes and crimes are pretty much a given, but outside of that it’s a big question mark. Credible terrorist threats haven’t been established yet, but they haven’t been ruled out either. Personally I doubt we’ll see any serious domestic terrorism, but that remains to be seen.

That said, between Halloween and Election Day every law enforcement agency in the country is going to be kicking into overdrive for the next few weeks.

Edited by archonspeaks on Oct 27th 2020 at 3:44:54 AM

They should have sent a poet.
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from a handcart heading to Hell Since: Mar, 2011 Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#335704: Oct 27th 2020 at 3:47:50 PM

this fails because of the unstated assumption that there are any Republican officials who can be trusted to act based on election law instead of looking for any excuse to invalidate Democratic ballots as illegal.

What Republican election officials? The people in charge of the administration of the election in key states are generally Democrats (due to Dem wins in the 2018 midterms).

Once you get beyond election administrators you’re talking about judges, well the Supreme Court, I don’t think they’re going to act based on election law (and I’ve explained this to you multiple times), they’re going to act based on the fact that staging an open coup (which is what’s required to overturn the local election officials) while resident in a city that voted 90% for the guy you’re trying to overthrow is a very good way to start a riot and put your personal safety at risk.

"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
DeMarquis Who Am I? from Hell, USA Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Buried in snow, waiting for spring
Who Am I?
#335705: Oct 27th 2020 at 3:53:03 PM

Not to mention undermine the power and authority of the very institution you work for. Conservative judges have historically been very consistently in favor of making the Supreme Court more influential (as have liberal judges, and moderate judges, and every other kind of judge). The judiciary generally speaking is not staffed by the kind of extremist who would throw their own influence away just for ideological reasons.

"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#335706: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:05:39 PM

The only question now is what kind of violence and how much. Protests and counterprotests and the associated clashes and crimes are pretty much a given, but outside of that it’s a big question mark. Credible terrorist threats haven’t been established yet, but they haven’t been ruled out either. Personally I doubt we’ll see any serious domestic terrorism, but that remains to be seen.

That said, between Halloween and Election Day every law enforcement agency in the country is going to be kicking into overdrive for the next few weeks.

Certainly. I think domestic terrorism is pretty likely, the sheer rage and horror Republicans will feel if Biden wins will be a sight to behold.

Couple strong emotions with a conspiratorial mindset and you're just asking for lone wolves.

Which sucks but isn't strategically devastating.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Oct 27th 2020 at 4:07:48 AM

"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
DeMarquis Who Am I? from Hell, USA Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Buried in snow, waiting for spring
Who Am I?
#335707: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:09:51 PM

Yeah, I hate to say it, but we are at a high risk for a mass shooting at a protest rally.

"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#335708: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:26:36 PM

[up] If you consider Kenosha-style armed protest clashes to be mass shootings, then yes. Straight-up terror attacks don’t fit the narrative.

They should have sent a poet.
DeMarquis Who Am I? from Hell, USA Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Buried in snow, waiting for spring
Who Am I?
#335709: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:30:21 PM

A mass shooting is any incident in which multiple people are shot merely for being present in a location. So yes, and can totally be terrorism.

"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#335710: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:33:09 PM

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/political-violence-inequality-us-election?bftwnews&utm_term=4ldqpgc#4ldqpgc

Here's an estimation of the likelihood of political violence.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
nrjxll Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Not war
#335711: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:35:41 PM

I mean, if that's how you're looking at this, I'm not really sure what could reassure you.

I mean, I've said as much myself, but I don't think it makes the point less valid: if the only plan for stopping a coup is assuming that the people attempting it will obey the rule of law, that's a pretty bad plan. (And saying that the prospect of an angry mob coming after them is supposed to be some kind of deterrent on the Supreme Court seems like an even worse one.)

The judiciary generally speaking is not staffed by the kind of extremist who would throw their own influence away just for ideological reasons.

Is it actually throwing away their influence if it keeps their party in power, though?

tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#335713: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:38:11 PM

I think at this point the burden of proof is on you. Yes, we're all aware that Republicans try and cheat the rules and keep people from voting, but if you're arguing they're going to actively stage a coup, the onus is on you to back that up, instead of taking it for a given and then expecting everyone else to calm you down.

Edited by LSBK on Oct 27th 2020 at 6:38:40 AM

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#335714: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:39:42 PM

[up]x5 That’s a definition for mass shooting. It’s not a strictly defined term.

The FBI, for example, might categorize the shootings in Kenosha as a mass shooting simply because it was the same perpetrator shooting multiple people in quick succession. Their definition doesn’t consider location or motive, only proximity. Academic definitions typically draw distinctions between indiscriminate violence and targeted violence, for example a spree shooter versus a gang killing.

Indiscriminate spree shootings are unlikely. Of course, as we’ve seen, that doesn’t really matter. Armed protestors clashing will inevitably lead to violence, even if it’s not indiscriminate.

[up]x3 How exactly are you thinking this coup is going to happen? Is there a specific thing you’re worried about, or just general panic, because it seems like the latter.

Edited by archonspeaks on Oct 27th 2020 at 4:45:14 AM

They should have sent a poet.
Kaiseror Since: Jul, 2016
#335715: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:40:13 PM

[up][up][up] Tampering or just a glitch?

Edited by Kaiseror on Oct 27th 2020 at 6:40:29 AM

DeMarquis Who Am I? from Hell, USA Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Buried in snow, waiting for spring
Who Am I?
#335716: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:45:27 PM

"Here's an estimation of the likelihood of political violence."

From the linked article: "The most dangerous element in the mix, argue Turchin and George Mason University sociologist Jack Goldstone, is the corrosive effect of inequality on society. They believe they have a model that explains how inequality escalates and leads to political instability: Worsened by elites who monopolize economic gains, narrow the path to social mobility, and resist taxation, inequality ends up undermining state institutions while fomenting distrust and resentment.

Building on Goldstone’s work showing that revolutions tend to follow periods of population growth and urbanization, Turchin has developed a statistic called the political stress indicator, or PSI. It incorporates measures of wage stagnation, national debt, competition between elites, distrust in government, urbanization, and the age structure of the population."

Sounds plausible to me. Of course what no algorithm can do is tell us what form the violence will take, or will commit it.

"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."
nrjxll Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Not war
#335717: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:46:06 PM

[up][up][up]I mean... the proof is literally what they've been saying?

When I say "coup", I'm not, like, expecting Trump to roll in with tanks and start having Democratic congressmen rounded up and jailed. I'm expecting him to make baseless accusations of fraud like he's being doing forever, and for Republican judges to uphold those accusations to throw out votes. And in cases where they don't get a favorable decision, for Republicans to appeal them to a higher court until they get one willing to support them. This has literally already been the process for election lawsuits that we've seen.

I'm not trying to suggest the situation is hopeless. I'd just really like to know some concrete details on what countermeasures Democrats have for this sort of thing. Because, again, if those countermeasures rely on openly partisan Republican-appointed judges not siding with their party no matter what... that seems like a really bad idea.

Edited by nrjxll on Oct 27th 2020 at 6:47:47 AM

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#335718: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:49:33 PM

[up]But you just keep assuming they can do that, even though it's been pointed out to you (apparently multiple times) that a lot of the key people in the states we're talking about are Democrats. Obviously Republicans aren't above making it a stink, but you're taking it for granted that they'll just get momentum in these things to begin with, and expecting people to argue odds from that. Instead of factoring in how likely the scenarios you're talking about even are. It's very frustrating at this point.

Anyway, Senate odds for Democrats seem to be staying pretty good.

Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#335719: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:50:23 PM

When I say "coup", I'm not, like, expecting Trump to roll in with tanks and start having Democratic congressmen rounded up and jailed. I'm expecting him to make baseless accusations of fraud like he's being doing forever, and for Republican judges to uphold those accusations to throw out votes.

Doesn't this depend mostly on the individual states? I would not be surprised if Florida was stolen for example, but the midwestern states like Michigan, Pensylvania and Wisconsin have a good amount of democrats in office who would make this much more difficult, especially considering in those states the margin of victory that Biden is projected to have is much larger. And if Biden wins those states, he practically has it wrapped up.

[nja]

Edited by Draghinazzo on Oct 27th 2020 at 8:51:12 AM

Galadriel Since: Feb, 2015
#335720: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:51:48 PM

They don’t need violence to steal the election. They just need things like what tclittle linked above. The original ballots couldn’t be scanned, so now individuals - including Republicans - will be filling out new ballots that are supposed to precisely duplicate the submitted ones, and scanning those. Will they do it honestly? Who knows? Relying on the good faith of Republicans hasn’t brought anyone anything but grief for decades.

Edited by Galadriel on Oct 27th 2020 at 7:52:15 AM

nrjxll Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Not war
#335721: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:56:20 PM

I think I mentioned in the past that hearing that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was 5/7 Democrats was good news to learn. That's the sort of thing I'm talking about when I say I'd like to know what the pieces in play are to prevent Trump from stealing the election through the courts. I just don't think that relying on Republican judges should ever be counted on.

Edited by nrjxll on Oct 27th 2020 at 6:57:13 AM

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#335722: Oct 27th 2020 at 4:57:05 PM

[up]x5 Your questions have been answered dozens of times and you’re still asking them. What are you looking for here, other than an excuse to panic even more?

That’s not how the court system works, for starters. The blanket assertion that every Republican official will work in concert to steal votes at the expense of their own political power is silly, and Democrats also have wide control over state politics which would render a lot of this moot to begin with. Read the replies you’ve already gotten.

Edited by archonspeaks on Oct 27th 2020 at 4:59:10 AM

They should have sent a poet.
DeMarquis Who Am I? from Hell, USA Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Buried in snow, waiting for spring
Who Am I?
#335723: Oct 27th 2020 at 5:00:21 PM

@Galadriel: No, what you are doing is stereotyping. You are conflating Republican party officials and public statements with the attitudes and behavior of relatively ordinary people who happen to be Republicans. I know dozens of Republicans, some of whom are quite conservative, and none of them would deliberately falsify a ballot.

Besides, the real danger has never been a "coup", however you define it. The danger has always been that someone might convince a majority of people to vote for a lie. That's perfectly legal, and has happened before.

Edited by DeMarquis on Oct 27th 2020 at 8:00:37 AM

"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."
Galadriel Since: Feb, 2015
#335724: Oct 27th 2020 at 5:08:35 PM

I’m stereotyping because I’m suggesting ‘ordinary’ people who vote for a white supremacist who brags about sexually assaulting women - and who has shown time and time again that his only concern in responding to a nationwide disaster is his own ego - might be dishonest?

Republicans aren’t acting like normal people. They’re acting some combination of deranged and evil. And a fair number of them are now outright cultists who think the Democrats are running a pedophile ring.

I don’t want to think 45% of Americans are that messed up. But the last 4 years and Trump’s steady approval rating throughout it have given me very little reason to think otherwise.

Edited by Galadriel on Oct 27th 2020 at 8:12:10 AM

nrjxll Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Not war
#335725: Oct 27th 2020 at 5:13:12 PM

The danger has always been that someone might convince a majority of people to vote for a lie. That's perfectly legal, and has happened before.

Yeah, but that is almost certainly not going to happen at this point, unless the polls are much more inaccurate then they were in 2016 or something happens to upend the race (which I can't imagine at this point.)


Total posts: 417,856
Top