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
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.
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?
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.
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.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?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 PlayAbout 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
![]()
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
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.Safe states Clinton supporters
can trade their votes with third party voters in swing states to help ensure Clinton's win.
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![]()
Nice.
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
@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
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!

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.