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
Mmm, in some of our counties in NC we saw under 20% of registered dems casting votes, vs >60-70% of republicans in a few smaller counties.
edit- to add, mostly just gained from chatter with local DNC employees, but there was a huge spectre of " we're already doomed to fail so why bother?" that plagued things here. Which if the governor's election was anything to go by was a huge misjudgment and probably cost the dems the state.
edited 14th Nov '16 8:49:13 AM by carbon-mantis
I won't deny your point at all, that is absolutely horrifying, but I think it's also important to keep in mind that many people during this election were DENIED voting because of the lack of voters' protectors rights enforcement this election. Many more people may have intended to vote for Clinton or at least someone who isn't the Don, but were turned away for whatever "reason."
I don't know if that should make us MORE or LESS optimistic about the situation.
"We're home, Chewie."Seeing as how Australia is not exactly a progressive paradise, I don't think compulsory voting is going to fix much. I don't think it's necessarily BAD, but it's an ez copypaste solution with questionable efficacy against the complex problem it's trying to solve. Besides, it's very much against the national character of individuality and feeds into the narrative built by the right that the left is all about forcing its view of what's best for the country on people, whether they like it or not.
If we want people to vote, we need to make them feel empowered by the act of doing so. That's up to the politicians they vote for to enact legislation with drastically visible positive impacts, as well as up to messaging to emphasize the usefulness of all those non-presidential offices that can't be electoral colleged or gerrymandered into one man's vote not mattering.
Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.Any form of financial penalty (or incentive) related to voting could be seen as a form of poll tax (reverse poll tax?) penalizing people who cannot vote for whatever reason.
edited 14th Nov '16 8:58:54 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Compulsory voting also wouldn't work too well under the EC, which I again feel compelled to mention.
I just hope that the EC starts being a bigger part of the conversation.
@Zarek; even voter intimidation can't fully explain the fact that around half of the voting public didn't vote, or frequently just chose to vote for everything but the president when at the polls. The rate of people who actively vote is pretty damn low in the US.
edited 14th Nov '16 9:13:25 AM by AceofSpades
Of course, I know that all too well, coming from a state which isn't at all competitive. I voted for Clinton anyway because why not, but it really wouldn't have mattered if I wrote in Harambe.
![]()
A positive incentive would obviously be better received, though this is more or less the polar opposite of a poll tax as they are typically conceived of in the US, which penalize voting.
On another subject: Obama's legacy. Is anyone getting the feeling that history might end up regarding his failure to dismantle the Bush era surveillance state and expanded executive power as a fatal mistake, because I am.
edited 14th Nov '16 9:25:38 AM by CaptainCapsase
Just had a chat with my disabled grandmother who would be dead now if it weren't for Medicare saving her ass with surgery.
"I hope they get rid of it. Lazy socialists are just leeching off of it. They should go out and get a job."
"My medicine is only expensive because Mexicans are stealing it for their drug cartels(???)."
"Obama made it expensive so we're forced to vote for him. Trump will have to use the military to remove him from office he won't give it up willingly! Trump won the election and he's still in the whitehouse!"
"Obama ruined it. Don't worry, if they repeal Obamacare it'll be much easier for you (and all of my preexisting conditions apparently) to get your medicine. It's only expensive because of him."
Whatever they're smoking, I almost want some. I swear the last few years have somehow sucked the souls out of most of my family and replaced them with these poorly designed constructs that spout Trump liners. These are the same people who at one point in their lives contributed to charities, sheltered orphans and abuse victims, and built community centers for impoverished minorities and were damn proud of all of it.
It's depressing that this was something someone actually said. Apparently she has no understanding of what a lame duck period is, nor any kind of understanding of who Obama is.
![]()
Media in general follows the money, and even in a society with free press that has a very noticeable effect
on how news outlets report on their government's actions, since they have a financial incentive to remain in the good graces of the state.
edited 14th Nov '16 9:59:15 AM by CaptainCapsase
Yeah, they were on the ballot. Jill Stein was a shill to the anti-vaxxers and the Libertarians are perennial third party losers in the presidential elections. It's been noted here before that both those parties would probably do better if they strategized towards local and state positions rather than going for the top of the ticket.

To be noted under Obama Biden also had some reasonable influence in the White House, though not to Chaney's extent. Biden himself described well in a interview: it all depends on your relationship with the President. Both Chaney and Biden seemed to have great relationships with the President, so they had a lot more room to maneuver and influence policies.
The key now is knowing the relationship between Trump and Pence.
"All you Fascists bound to lose."