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
Turns out that "Lock Her Up" was just a soundbite.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/10/politics/giuliani-christie-interviews-clinton-prosecutor/index.html
So at least Trump won't go full dictator right away.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.The problem with engaging with reasonable Trump voters online is that the reasonable ones are often not internety people. The ones who are online are commonly the hardcore racists and bigots, that's how they stay Ttump supporters while having access to all the information of the internet.
The middle aged union worker afraid for his way of life doesn't post on Internet forums, if he did he'd probably change his views.
As for the alt-left, they're around, including in this thread. We've seen multiple calls for violence from people here, violence against not just Trump but also the people who voted for him.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranI find really funny how in the US would be considered left wing but in my country I am considered a right wing. The left wing economic populism and government control over the economy doesn't sit well with me and the right religious conservatism and tendency to use trickle down economy as the solution for everything also pisses me off.
But then being socially liberal and pending towards free markets with a Keynesian view of the economy mixes things a bit.
edited 10th Nov '16 4:47:35 PM by AngelusNox
Inter arma enim silent leges@Lance: I regard myself as a leftist (libertarian socialist is probably the closet descriptor), but also a realist. While I one day hope that, through technological and social advancement, we will be able to completely eliminate inequality and employ a form of governance that uses little to no coercion, "abolish the state" and other radical libertarian positions are no more constructive a suggestion in the modern era than "build a wall". Even less so, since the latter is something that could actually be done, as idiotic an idea as it is. I don't expect to live to see anything coming close to the sort of society I want to live in, and I seriously doubt any children I may have will live to see that either. But small steps matter.
edited 10th Nov '16 4:47:38 PM by CaptainCapsase
![]()
![]()
![]()
The US is kinda weird like that. A lot of rightwing parties in other countries have economic views in line with the leftists, they just believe the recipients of the safety net should be limited along nationalist lines instead of class. And in Europe "liberal" frequently means both socially progressive and pro-free market and business. The US is one of the few exceptions, though if Trump gets any of his way we may see that change.
Socially I know for sure that I'm left-leaning yet simultaneously with a strong civil libertarian bent, and economically I believe in a vigorous safety net and higher taxes for the rich to sustain it but I also believe in free enterprise, private ownership, and the free market. That's the thing about labels, they're all very relative and often incomplete descriptors of political beliefs when it comes to independent thinkers who aren't just slaves to party lines.
edited 10th Nov '16 4:55:10 PM by AlleyOop
It does make sense that Germany would become the world's/Europe's Only Sane Man.
![]()
Pragmatism is a very useful thing, isn't it? Principals only get you so far.
edited 10th Nov '16 4:49:57 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.To make one of my most likely more controversial statements: My issue with building a wall is actually not that I think the desire to control immigration is unreasonable. It really isn't. I have an issue with it because history shows that it doesn't work. China built multiple times and more than one dynasty went bankrupt over trying to maintain them. When the Wall fell in 1989 Russia was bankrupt and its own population was close to starvation, partly because so much money was spend on controlling all of the states under its thumb. Germany spend the following years sending food over the border and helping out the suffering population (yes, that really happened). And the US has already spend Billions on attempts to close the border and yet the number of illegal immigrant is gigantic. So if a wall clearly doesn't work, it might be time to try another approach.
edited 10th Nov '16 4:55:42 PM by Swanpride
Also Hadrian's wall; it probably would've been cheaper for the Romans to simply walk in and conquer Scotland rather than maintain a border wall.
Now, that being said, there really isn't any reason to want to be controlling immigration in the US harshly. There's a net decline in illegal immigration right now.
edited 10th Nov '16 4:58:01 PM by CaptainCapsase
re: echo chamber: there is validity in having everyone agree on something, even if just for a moment. It means you can debate more complex thoughts and issues. If no one can agree on a baseline, you're not going to get very far. Some degree of consensus is a good thing. You don't need opposition to everything.
Read my stories!Inform me for a bit — what, exactly, would be the point of an actual, literal wall on the Mexican border? Isn't it heavily regulated already?
And discussing the finer points of a position here can only take place once the opposing positions have been completely excluded from the debate. See the issue?
edited 10th Nov '16 5:00:35 PM by Ninety
Dopants: He meant what he said and he said what he meant, a Ninety is faithful 100%.We invaded Iraq over non-existent WM Ds (and oil).
What happens when The Border is framed as crucial to American interests, and that those interests are being violated?
edited 10th Nov '16 5:01:44 PM by Eschaton
I managed to find an article by the BBC talking about the feasibility of building the wall in more depth
, for anyone who's curious or somehow hasn't read about it already.
Basically it would cost an enormous amount of money. The US already spends more than 7 billion dollars on the fencing around the border. A study by the Washington Post estimated around 25 billion.
Something that I haven't seen mentioned is the fact that it will also do damage to the ecosystem around the US-Mexico border and threaten the survivability of vulnerable species.
It's a stupid idea meant to appeal to xenophobic and racist anxieties. I highly doubt that it will be very effective in curbing the illegal drug trade or illegal immigration.
edited 10th Nov '16 5:03:40 PM by Draghinazzo
I hold myself up as an example of this, being a middle-aged union worker. I consider myself politically moderate, but I used to lean slightly more toward the Republicans than the Democrats. (Until I got sick and tired of their obstructionist, contrarian antics in Congress and elsewhere. And then they went off the deep end...)
I also used to be a card-carrying, lifetime member of the NRA, more or less believing their "the guvmint's gonna take away ur gunz!" propaganda. I've since abandoned that attitude, and when the NRA supported Trump, I told them to take back my Life membership and stuff it.
So, maybe there is hope for some of us, after all.
edited 10th Nov '16 6:13:03 PM by pwiegle
This Space Intentionally Left Blank.

This is a reasonable fear, especially because as I understand it you're german so your country has seen this before.
What most people are banking on though is the fact that Trump doesn't seem like the kind of person who would like to spend much time actually being president. It's an extremely taxing, emotionally draining job, and Trump seemed to be in it mostly for his own ego and the idea of being President more than anything else. He really doesn't have any idea what it's like to be a politician or the pressure that he will be put under.
Capsase has predicted that he will likely swing from being active to just being celebrity president depending on what he feels like doing at that particular month, which I think is a realistic assessment. It's not implausible that he will mostly do nothing and let Pence and the cabinet run things, but while not apocalyptic that would also be horrible.
Basically what I would have said except better written.
edited 10th Nov '16 4:42:04 PM by Draghinazzo