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
For what it's worth, people crazier than Trump have had nuclear launch codes before, and nothing bad has happened.
Leviticus 19:34Motherfucking god. Someone's already mentioned that not everyone is rich enough to go jaunting state to state whenever they want, but as a West Coast resident specifically:
DOES TRUMP KNOW HOW LONG IT CAN TAKE TO GET OUT OF THE BIGGER STATES???
California needs a damn PLANE TRIP to go from north to south conveniently, so you'd need to drive almost a literal DAY. You can pick whether a day means eight or twelve hours, because that'll depend on whether you're in California's hellish traffic or not. And THAT means whether you're driving at a reasonable hour, or if you're driving at 5AM for a head start.
And even going inland from the coast is going to take a good three to six hours, also depending on traffic. So if you can't afford a plane ticket in the bigger states, you'll need to be prepared for either a three/four-hour drive (long but doable) or set aside a week for going there, staying a couple of days to rest, and then heading back.
Goddamn billionaires.
Trump has really shocked me lately.
He said straight to the camera for his supporters to "cut it out with the hate speech" and that it "saddens him". Given the weight of their demagogue's words, could this have an effect...?
He's also said he has no plans to reverse Obergefell...
I have left wing social ideas, but quite ruthless foreign policy ideas. Perhaps I can scrap that trade plan in favor of something else.
That is absurd and out of touch - unless he's willing to foot the bill, it really says how out of touch he is with the common person. While there is a chance we might not end up with the apocalyptically bad President as is feared, there is definitely a tendency for an out of touch look that can be exploited during the midterm elections and during the next Presidential election.
edited 13th Nov '16 8:10:28 PM by NickTheSwing
Say whaaaaat.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.![]()
Does inaction count as action? Because if he doesn't actually go through with deporting immigrants, building the wall, etc., (all which looks likely,) then maybe that could be seen as him, in a way, taking action and following through. If that makes any sense.
edited 13th Nov '16 8:18:03 PM by kkhohoho
I'd disagree on that, both the Kims and Stalin understood that actions have consequences, Trump appears to not even understand that. The person I'd compare Trump to is Saddam, who never had nukes.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranMichael Dukakis calls for end to Electoral College.
@Nick: he can't reverse Obergefell, at all. No president has the authority to just overrule a Supreme Court decision. We're no longer in the era of Andrew Jackson. If Obergefell and the Roe vs Wade are to be officially struck down as laws, then someone's going to have to take those cases through all the lesser courts and back up to the Supreme Court. I already pointed that one, they're already doing what they can legally do to make abortion as difficult as possible without challenging the ruling directly, but that there's not government money involved in gay marriage in the same way so it's probably safe. I think it more likely that someone will end up suing the government or a government employee over them not issuing them a marriage license.
@Beary: Space is a fairly easy, neutral thing for a president to voice support for, comparatively speaking. I think what matters is whether or not he actually puts money towards it, or at the very least doesn't stop what Obama put forth for it.
edited 13th Nov '16 8:46:42 PM by AceofSpades

It was also less dependent on trade back then.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.