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

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#160751: Dec 6th 2016 at 3:11:07 PM

I don't think that analogy is remotely similar. The argument about porn "I know it when I see it" was cited in freedom of speech and freedom of expression cases (except for the child porn) is not harmful so long as it is informed by the willing consent of participants and viewers.

Gun restrictions are about stopping weapons from proliferating into the hands of a large population, whose motivations, intentions and actions cannot be actively monitored without violating the constitution. In that context, stuff about the exact specifications about weapons and other stuff is mere pedantry meant to distract from the actual problems.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#160752: Dec 6th 2016 at 3:14:20 PM

This is quite a bit simpler than it's made out to be. Any labels gun control advocates attempt to apply to firearms in order to classify certain types that they would like to restrict will be pooh-poohed in a premeditated attempt to make them look ridiculous. It's part of the standard rhetorical scheme established by the NRA and its ilk to put up a massive Chewbacca Defense against regulation.

Sorry, but gun advocates don't get to whine about people trying to ban "scary guns" when they deliberately make guns to look as intimidating as possible while falling within the letter of the law. While rifle-style weapons capable of high-velocity, semi-automatic fire may be used in the more spectacular mass-shootings, the vast majority of violent crimes are committed with handguns. Thus, there is some logic to saying that banning "AR-15 style" guns is not going to stop violence. But the obvious conclusion of that logic chain is to ban handguns as well...

edited 6th Dec '16 3:17:22 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Balmung Since: Oct, 2011
#160753: Dec 6th 2016 at 3:16:54 PM

To nitpick here, automatic (fires more than once per trigger pull) firearms are already illegal and have been since the 1930s IIRC. Usually what people describe as "military grade" are the various semi-auto (fires exactly once when you pull the trigger) AR-15 and AR-18 derivatives on the market, especially if they are in black plastic and have a pistol grip that is not connected to the stock. However, these are cosmetic features and most people would not describe the Mini-14 as "military grade", despite being a semi-auto rifle fed from a detachable box magazine and in the same caliber as the AR-15, as it has wooden furniture, an older-style stock and isn't covered in rails. If you want to regulate these, this is actually important, because Stevie Immashootupamall can do it just as well with either of these items, so if you want to write a law on the subject, make sure it's on actually relevant features of the weapon. For example, outlawing synthetic stocks or tactical rails doesn't do much to stop anyone, while outlawing any weapon that does not need to be manually cycled to fire the next shot or outlawing the use of any detachable magazine would be examples of meaningful regulations that target aspects of firearms actually related to their lethality.

Furthermore, any pedantry over the "military grade-ness" of longarms basically misses the point. By and large, people do not commit crimes with rifles and shotguns at a significant rate. Criminals far amd away prefer handguns, as they are far more concealable, lighter, and serve all their lethality and intimidation needs just as well. If you really want to target guns used by criminals, go after these handguns as your main priority. And hey, if you want to do that, I'm actually all for that. Honestly, I don't even get why people are so attached to them - far moreso than longarms, handguns are ill-suited to most activities other than harming other humans, as they are far less suited to hunting than rifles or shotguns.

edited 6th Dec '16 3:34:50 PM by Balmung

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#160754: Dec 6th 2016 at 3:44:29 PM

But I swear they are for self-defence (wooooo-oooo!)

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#160755: Dec 6th 2016 at 3:47:39 PM

Thanks for the clarifications on handguns being dangerous...I think all guns should be banned from civilian purchase, except for those who genuinely feel a need for self-defense and need a permit. Like say a woman feeling threatened by a stalker and legally not having any means of proving it, would merit a desire for self-defense.

LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#160756: Dec 6th 2016 at 3:47:45 PM

[up][up][up] Pretty much that.

edited 6th Dec '16 3:47:56 PM by LeGarcon

Oh really when?
Wildcard Since: Jun, 2012
#160757: Dec 6th 2016 at 3:47:54 PM

Politics has decayed enough and some voters are so impressed by "bravado" that I wonder of the slogan "better dead than red" would get the electoral and popular vote for the Democrats in 2020. Not being sarcastic either. Lots of undecided voters picked Trump because they liked how terribly he conducted himself. Edit: Whoops, not a great page topper.

edited 6th Dec '16 3:48:44 PM by Wildcard

Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#160758: Dec 6th 2016 at 3:48:34 PM

Fighteer, the problem is that gun advocates aren't the ones who table bans aimed at cosmetic features and fail to account for handguns, that's purely something done by the gun control crowd.

When you try and ban cosmetic and safety features on a gun you're being dumb, there's no two ways about it, the gun control crowd need to ensure that they're not proposing dumb laws. It's why the fight needs to be focused on things like universal background checks, because that's a smart law that makes sense.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#160759: Dec 6th 2016 at 3:52:25 PM

This gun and this gun are chambered in the same caliber and both have the same capabilities in terms of fire rate and accuracy for the most part.

You can't just ban the second one because it looks scary. Not when there's nothing it can do that the first one can't just as well.

edited 6th Dec '16 3:52:53 PM by LeGarcon

Oh really when?
Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#160760: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:01:24 PM

[up][up][up] Depends on what you mean by "bravado". I know you're not necessarily advocating for it, but that specific slogan promotes the very kind of partisanship that I don't want to see in any political discourse.

BonsaiForest Since: Jan, 2001
#160761: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:03:35 PM

Donald Trump has already hurt multiple companies by complaining about them on Twitter. Most recently Boeing, whose stock shot down when he said that Boeing shouldn't charge $4 billion for a new Air Force One.

Politico has a story about it.

The concern among executives and free market conservatives is that Trump will tweet first and ask questions later if he hears about plans he doesn’t like, potentially hitting stock prices, turning public opinion against companies before they have a chance to explain themselves and chilling investment.

It’s a unique dilemma for corporate chiefs accustomed to more gentle treatment, especially from historically pro-business and pro-free trade Republican presidents.

Honestly, it's cracking me up.

“It’s the president of the United States, the man with the biggest microphone in the world, who just might suddenly one day single you out for abuse,” said David Boaz, executive vice president of the free-market Cato Institute. “This is like being Tylenol and discovering someone has poisoned your product. It’s a sudden shock that will cause companies to be more conservative, more cautious. It hurts the broader economy because these companies won’t be seeking to maximize their own profit and solvency.”

Isn't the Cato Institute libertarian? Not a fan of their thinking.

And I gotta love the idea that companies not trying to maximize their own profit is somehow a bad thing. It's attempting to maximize profit that leads to abuses in the first place!!

“What Trump is doing is giving the kind of rough treatment that is historically reserved for foreign leaders," he said. "These are publicly traded companies responsible to shareholders and under tremendous global pressure, and that’s what they are responding to.”

Yeah, they're responsible to shareholders. Boo hoo. I don't like shareholder culture.

Criticism aside, some analysts think Trump might be using Twitter as an effective weapon to take on the military-industrial complex. By calling out Boeing, he could win a better deal for taxpayers from a sole-source contractor, said Mark Cancian, a former Office of Management and Budget official now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“As a negotiating strategy it might work. It might push the Air Force to go back to Boeing and renegotiate the contract,” Cancian said. “If I were the Air Force, I’d be thinking of going back to Boeing to see if there are ways to reduce the costs.”

As much as a Trump presidency scares me, I do think some good may come out of it. Like calling out corruption (despite, uh, containing lots of it within his fucking cabinet), and causing people to have a lower tolerance for corruption overall in the long run, perhaps.

But Trump’s attacks have other executives and business groups worried that they will be singled out for making moves dictated by the marketplace and demanded by shareholders. They also fear that the incoming president won’t have all the facts straight before he takes to Twitter to vent his outrage.

Dictated by the marketplace, fine. Demanded by shareholders? Like I give a crap about them.

Another big concern for executives is that Trump’s aggressive approach will be politically popular, leading him to make it a regular feature. There are signs that this is already happening. In a new Morning Consult/POLITICO national poll, 60 percent of voters said Trump’s Carrier intervention made them view the president-elect more favorably. The poll found that 56 percent approved of presidents negotiating deals with companies on a case-by-case basis.

Still, Trump’s approach is at odds with many Republicans in Congress who prefer to address incentives for companies to move production abroad through broad policy changes, including sweeping corporate tax reform, rather than individual attacks and tariff threats.

Trump was also supposed to be better for the pharmaceutical industry than Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who had vowed to go after price “gouging” by drugmakers. But Allergan Plc CEO Brent Saunders said at a conference last week that Trump could be even more “vicious” toward the industry than Clinton.

“I worry today that the pharmaceutical industry has a very false sense of relief or security because of a Trump administration and Republican-controlled Congress,” he said at the Forbes Healthcare Summit.

Again, at least some good may come of this...

Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#160762: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:06:14 PM

To be honest, I don't think any callouts Trump makes about companies are going to be based on good information and a desire to punish them for hurting society. Hurting a company out of personal, petty spite (Trump's modus operandi) is meaningless and proves nothing.

edited 6th Dec '16 4:08:02 PM by Draghinazzo

RabidTanker God-Mayor of Sim-Kind Since: May, 2014 Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
God-Mayor of Sim-Kind
#160763: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:07:39 PM

In an way, Trump does have an point about refusing to pay $4 billion for an new Air Force One, since it's technically taxpayer's money.

Answer no master, never the slave Carry your dreams down into the grave Every heart, like every soul, equal to break
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#160764: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:09:17 PM

Only he's lying through his teeth and it'd actually cost a little until $200 million.

Oh really when?
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#160765: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:09:34 PM

Thing is it won't take long before large companies just start either bribing Trump or feeding him false info the mess with stock took prices. They could either bribe him so he calls them awesome on Twitter or they could even just send him (via twitter) a fake story claiming a comeptetor is doing something bad and then watch as he retweets. Trump's twitter is going to become a weapon for cooperationd to use.

It sounds good now while he's having a go at companies we don't like, but what happens when he calls a green energy company stupid on twitter or says that a company in a bunch of poo for having a equality osptunity hiring practices.

edited 6th Dec '16 4:10:12 PM by Silasw

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
RedSavant Since: Jan, 2001
#160766: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:10:13 PM

Yeah, Trump isn't going after corporations because he thinks they're bad for the common man. He's lashing out personally at people who insult him personally, like he always has and always will.

It's been fun.
Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#160767: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:12:09 PM

It's darkly humorous to me that a bunch of companies are probably gonna use Trump and his twitter as a puppet for corporate warfare.

Wildcard Since: Jun, 2012
#160768: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:14:44 PM

Draghianzo: Yeah but "make America great again" and "build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" are undoubtedly partisan and it worked great for them! It sucks but I worry they may feel the need to fight fire with fire.

Wryte Since: Jul, 2010
#160769: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:18:08 PM

I'll laugh when real peoples' lives aren't being put at risk by corporate shadow puppetry of the Conflict of Interest in Chief.

pwiegle Cape Malleum Majorem from Nowhere Special Since: Sep, 2015 Relationship Status: Singularity
Cape Malleum Majorem
#160770: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:19:51 PM

Trump was a good enough manipulator to get people to vote for him. But other people are discovering that he's just as easy to manipulate, himself. What's sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander...

This Space Intentionally Left Blank.
Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#160771: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:23:44 PM

It also dawned on me that it's barely been a month since he won the election. He's not even president yet, and the prospects for this presidency are just getting lower and lower with every bit of news.

It hasn't even started yet.

Wildcard Since: Jun, 2012
#160772: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:33:40 PM

Heres hoping it ends when the people who voted for him realize he won't build the wall or put Muslims in camps.

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#160773: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:39:24 PM

Taking a stand against corporations on twitter and threatening to bully them is not any real good thing. Remember that Putin became respected in Russia for getting the oligarchs behind him, putting the money into Russia and jailing two or three of them for corruption (for which they were guilty). It didn't amount to an end of kleptocracy in Russia by any means.

Trump is basically creating a neo-feudal presidency and governing by decree by running his big mouth like that.

Remember that businesspeople like to screw each other over, there's no loyalty among thieves after all.

Wryte Since: Jul, 2010
#160774: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:44:35 PM

^^ Oh, that's already happening.

Three groups of people elected Trump: deplorables, chumps, and sycophants.

Deplorables voted for him because of all the terrible stuff he stands for. Chumps overlooked all the red flags because they bought his sales pitch. Sycophants vote for whoever has an R next to their name regardless of who it is. These groups are not mutually exclusive. The chumps appear to be starting to realize they've been swindled, but as with any good snake oil salesman, only after they can't get their money back.

edited 6th Dec '16 4:45:13 PM by Wryte

Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#160775: Dec 6th 2016 at 4:52:05 PM

One might hope this chips away at the turnout for 2020, as more and more people realize they've been conned.


Total posts: 417,856
Top