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
"Lame duck" simply means that he's guaranteed not to be in the Presidency after the next election. So any policies he enacts during his final term will be at the mercy of his successor. Assuming he stays in office in 2012, his legacy will largely be in the hands of whichever party has control of Congress.
Something struck me a few minutes ago — part of the divide between the right and the left in America is that the left does not share the same abiding, almost religious hatred for everything opposing it. For the die-hard conservative, "liberal" is a deadly epithet. They won't consider a Democratic candidate for the simple reason that DEMOCRATZ R EVULZ. You can't argue with that; you can't persuade that.
At least liberals (in my experience, anyway) approach the matter from the perspective of the issues at hand. We don't hate conservatives, but we do hate some of the policies that they stand for. We have an abiding distrust of rich corporate interests, but with good reason. But even when Bush was the target du jour, we didn't hate him personally. That's not the case with Obama versus the right, and it upsets me deeply.
edited 14th Dec '11 2:34:54 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Which Democrats? Blue dogs and Lieberman types are just as responsible for getting us into this mess.
OWS needs to hit the primaries of both parties something fierce.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.As for a lame duck presidency you forget. All of the Tea party BS'ers elected in 2010, they have to a man been unbelievable dissappointments, and in more than a few cases, Evil Overlords. There is strong voter backlash against Republicans on that level too.
^^^^ Democrats are intellectual, Republicans are emotional. You can see that in a lot of policy decisions and stances.
Gay marriage - Democrats understand that a persons orientation doesn't change their humanity, and that if two mature humans love each other, they have every right to celebrate this. Republicans feel that gays are icky.
Democrats start with the facts, and find the position. Republicans start with the position and find the "facts".
Hey, am I wrong? What in their behaviour disproves this?
edited 14th Dec '11 2:43:40 PM by TheatricalAndProud
Obama could tear Gingrich to shreds without mentioning his former wives at all.
- Bringing us to the brink of a new debt crisis almost exactly like today's Tea Party did earlier this year.
- Impeaching the President of the United States of America over stupid shit that should never have seen the light of day in a courtroom.
- The Defense of Marriage Act and some of the other stupider things Gingrich got passed back in the '90s (but DOMA can really help solidify the Democrat base).
Interesting thing I found out today: 2010 was the first year in American history that support and opposition for gay marriage was split about 50/50. It's actually a real issue now, and about time, too.
I am now known as Flyboy.Jon Stewart discussed this on his show last week, with an interview that you can find online. The gist of his point was that, the federal government clearly can provide high quality, efficient, inexpensive healthcare through a single payer system. It's called the Veteran's Administration.
Apparently, however, to the right, the idea of government doing something more efficiently than the private sector is anathema. So they have to come up with ideological, rather than fiscal, reasons to oppose it. They can that ideology and sell it by the bucketload, and all the rational people can do is sit back and shake their heads as people lap it up, despite the fact that the direct outcome is to make their lives worse.
edited 14th Dec '11 2:49:50 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I heard the VA was doing kind of poorly recently. Did it change, or was it because of more "lol defunding government and then claiming it can't do things properly!" bullshit?
I am now known as Flyboy.Before the complaints come in, let's clarify: you can find people who hate Republicans that viscerally. But you won't see the Democratic leadership trying to court their votes.
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.I have this
is on repeat because of SOPA, what do you think it'll do to the elections?
edited 14th Dec '11 3:15:22 PM by Lanceleoghauni
"Coffee! Coffeecoffeecoffee! Coffee! Not as strong as Meth-amphetamine, but it lets you keep your teeth!"George Sanyana said that American ignorance, combined with intense emotional response, is at the root of its idealism.
That sums it up. Republicans are dumb-downed by Fox et. at. and easily-stirred by demagogues. Like Gingrich, who in his blind ambition and zealotry created this partisan madness int he first place.
I'm a skeptical squirrel
At this rate, to be truly make our votes mean shit in that regard, we'd have to do a whole lot more than just beat Ging GRINCH!
And there is a lot to fucking do: but it mostly begins with taking down Congress a ton of pegs and getting any form of money (including hourly pay IMHO - because that will teach these scumbags WHO'S THE FUCKING BOSS(ES)) out of government in general.
That, and more people have to start voting. A ton fucking more.
This is where I, the Vampire Mistress, proudly reside: http://liberal.nationstates.net/nation=nova_nacioIt's absolutely ridiculous to think that Congress' wages are the problem.
Indeed, if Congressmen aren't paid, then the only people who can run are people independently wealthy enough that they don't need to hold a job. Not that it isn't like that already.
edited 14th Dec '11 3:38:13 PM by TheyCallMeTomu
The financial benefits of being a Congressman go far beyond their meager salary.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Lost Anarchist - Y'know, I often wonder why these guys feel such a need to enflame and outrage the public against Democrats. People are disconnected from Washington as it is. If the GOP wanted to stomp all over our wages and civil liberties, what would do about it? Not much. There's no need to raise a rabid army of people who are just as likely to eat Newt Gingrich too.
edited 14th Dec '11 3:40:05 PM by johnnyfog
I'm a skeptical squirrel

That is why Democrats need to win big in the legislative elections.
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.