TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

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

Wryte Since: Jul, 2010
#148401: Nov 3rd 2016 at 7:42:37 PM

Because Republicans are more likely to dump money into law enforcement for neat toys like police tanks, hand wave police shootings, and give them carte blanche on whatever questionable investigation/interrogation techniques they want to use... as long as they don't poke their noses into the 1%'s business.

Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#148402: Nov 3rd 2016 at 7:43:20 PM

edit: nvm

edited 3rd Nov '16 7:43:39 PM by Draghinazzo

theLibrarian Since: Jul, 2009
#148403: Nov 3rd 2016 at 7:44:20 PM

Most likely. For all his hatemongering he's whipping it up over disliked political groups. Remember how the FBI didn't like the first civil rights movement, especially when Hoover was in charge? Not to mention the police unions like him because he's not being like other candidates and allowing them to be dragged through the muck.

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#148404: Nov 3rd 2016 at 7:45:30 PM

Trump is all about "law and order" to mean, "the cops are always right, even when they're not". Recall that bit about him saying those black teenagers or something were still guilty of rape or murder even when a shit ton of evidence said they weren't and it was implied they were coerced into admitting guilt?

Shippudentimes Since: Dec, 2012
#148405: Nov 3rd 2016 at 7:47:25 PM

@148381: ShippudenTimes reaches for uvula with sharp, rusty object

theLibrarian Since: Jul, 2009
#148406: Nov 3rd 2016 at 7:53:50 PM

All the more reason why the Republicans also can't be allowed to maintain a congressional majority. A Republican Congress with a Republican president allows Trump to do whatever he wants. A Democratic Congress with a Democrat president saves us from another eight years of deadlock on major bills like Obama had.

LinkToTheFuture A real bad hombre from somewhere completely different Since: Apr, 2015 Relationship Status: What's love got to do with it?
A real bad hombre
#148407: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:01:07 PM

What charges would they try to impeach her on?

"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work." -Thomas Edison
OrionAurora Constellation from Andromeda Galaxy Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: Abstaining
Constellation
#148408: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:01:57 PM

Again, back from lurking to drop some info.

With all the talk (and criticisms) about 538's statistics, I figured I show off New York Times polling forecast. If you scroll down to about half way, you will see a large chart of 9 different polling aggregate sites, 538 included. Looking at the tossup states, 538 doesn't even give one state leaning to Clinton while the other 8 give at least North Carolina, Florida, or Nevada leaning Clinton. Hell, New Hampshire, a state agreed to be safe enough for Clinton, is labeled as a tossup.

Amusingly, 538's stats for Trump are in general agreement with everyone else (Ie. all states up to Arizona are favoring Trump). So it's not like 538 has a Republican bias, but rather they are, for whatever reason, deflating Clinton's odds. So for those who say 538 has lost its touch this election cycle, I hope this was helpful info.

We are all made of star stuff. Very, very weird star stuff.
thatguythere47 Since: Jul, 2010
#148409: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:17:18 PM

they've mentioned before their model is slanted towards trump for a number of reasons; doesn't mean it's wrong just that it may be over cautious.

Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#148410: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:21:37 PM

I would think knowing that would calm people down, it's more favorable to him than most and still projects him losing fairly handedly.

storyyeller More like giant cherries from Appleloosa Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: RelationshipOutOfBoundsException: 1
More like giant cherries
#148411: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:26:07 PM

The scary part is that the polls are within the "brexit" margin of error. Any chance of Trump winning is too high.

edited 3rd Nov '16 8:26:18 PM by storyyeller

Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's Play
SantosLHalper Since: Aug, 2009
#148412: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:26:58 PM

IIRC, there were a lot of polls saying Brexit would win, it's just that nobody focused on them.

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#148413: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:28:58 PM

[up][up]There's always a chance. No point in bemoaning it.

Lennik (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#148414: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:39:18 PM

[up]Sure there is. People are worried about the future of the country and the people who are going to get hurt if Trump wins.

That's right, boys. Mondo cool.
Pseudopartition Screaming Into The Void from The Cretaeceous Since: Dec, 2013 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
Screaming Into The Void
#148415: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:40:47 PM

About 538 - I recall that they were very surprised that Trump got as far as he has; they originally didn't think he would even have a chance of even getting the nomination (heck, neither did I). They're probably just being cautious.

Also, leave Stella Liebeck alone. Her injuries were pretty horrifying, she sued to cover her medical bills, and to take Mc Donalds to task for a problem that had harmed hundreds of other people. Then she basically became a laughing stock for it. Besides the point of this thread really, I just needed to say that.

edited 3rd Nov '16 8:41:10 PM by Pseudopartition

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#148416: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:41:45 PM

[up][up]Yeah, but these things are never 100% either way, and there's no point in complaining about how he should have no chance to win. Just focus on how he most likely isn't, and try to make sure he doesn't however you can.

But, I mostly mean in general, and not this election specifically.

edited 3rd Nov '16 8:43:35 PM by LSBK

Lennik (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#148417: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:45:07 PM

I think you're mischaracterizing people's fears. Nobody here realistically expects a 100% chance of a Hillary victory, but a 30% chance of Trump winning when just last week it was half that, without any major event being responsible for the tightening, is some cause for concern. It raises fears that maybe the American people have short enough attention spans that they'll forgive any depravity if you give the guy a weekend of relative silence.

edited 3rd Nov '16 8:46:53 PM by Lennik

That's right, boys. Mondo cool.
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#148418: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:46:58 PM

I'll be concerned when it's 50/50 or close to it. I'm not saying it's in the bag but I'm not going to get worried about the race narrowing like it always does at this point.

edited 3rd Nov '16 8:49:01 PM by LSBK

Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#148419: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:56:45 PM

Safe states Clinton supporters can trade their votes with third party voters in swing states to help ensure Clinton's win.

storyyeller More like giant cherries from Appleloosa Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: RelationshipOutOfBoundsException: 1
More like giant cherries
#148420: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:59:13 PM

Would you play Russian Roulette? That has only a 16% chance of loss.

I recall that they were very surprised that Trump got as far as he has; they originally didn't think he would even have a chance of even getting the nomination

That was under the assumption that the party establishment would do everything they could to stop him. Instead, the never trump movement was too little, too late. Basically, he failed to predict the collapse of the Republican party as an institution.

Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's Play
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#148421: Nov 3rd 2016 at 8:59:35 PM

[up][up]Nice.

[up]Honestly, I'm having a hard time getting as worked up, because I know the reaction and worry would basically be the same if it was any of the other Republicans. It was like this in 2012 too. I'm not saying I don't get why it's a big deal, I'm just saying I'm not going to stress myself out over something I have no control over, and is most likely going to turn out the way I prefer.

edited 3rd Nov '16 9:03:27 PM by LSBK

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#148422: Nov 3rd 2016 at 9:27:51 PM

@Marq: You have a very idealized view of American democracy. We have our entrenched interests manipulating the system and even, albeit to a much smaller extent than Middle Eastern countries, our own deep state. (Our last successful Presidential assassination was possibly an inside job.) Our shit stinks the same as anyone else's, we're just willing and able to openly talk about the state of our sewers.

In the case of our police departments, part of the unofficial code of most of our police departments (I am lucky and privileged to live in a city where this is not usually the case) is that minorities are to be treated far worse than whites. Republicans are a-okay with keeping minorities in their place, giving the police military-surplus toys, and letting them loose to fight the war on drugs and fill our prisons with cheap slave labor. Democrats are more likely to make unhappy noises about that kind of thing.

edited 3rd Nov '16 9:31:25 PM by Ramidel

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#148424: Nov 3rd 2016 at 9:42:30 PM

@Parable: That just sounds really fucking stupid as a tactic.

KarkatTheDalek Not as angry as the name would suggest. from Somwhere in Time/Space Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: You're a beautiful woman, probably
Not as angry as the name would suggest.
#148425: Nov 3rd 2016 at 9:43:28 PM

[up] Why?

It's not like the number of Stein voters, much less the ones that would be willing to try this, would be enough to cost Clinton states like California.

edited 3rd Nov '16 9:44:38 PM by KarkatTheDalek

Oh God! Natural light!

Total posts: 417,856
Top