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

RedSavant Since: Jan, 2001
#161326: Dec 9th 2016 at 8:00:35 PM

Protests don't work in civic centers because people are more likely to complain about slow traffic than they are to ask what the protesters are protesting.

It's been fun.
BrainSewage from that one place Since: Jan, 2001
#161327: Dec 9th 2016 at 8:07:01 PM

[up][up] DAPL is going ahead despite the lack of a permit. And Trump is certain to push it through, no matter what anyone says.

How dare you disrupt the sanctity of my soliloquy?
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#161328: Dec 9th 2016 at 8:10:22 PM

[up] Civil disobidience does not mean law abiding protest, it just means nonviolent protest. Blocking highways, disrupting infrastructure, trespassing, and so on is fair game so long as you do not fight back.

MadSkillz Destroyer of Worlds Since: Mar, 2013 Relationship Status: I only want you gone
Destroyer of Worlds
#161329: Dec 9th 2016 at 8:14:23 PM

That feeling when you realize we elected Biff to be our president.

(Biff was meant as a parody of Trump during the 80's.)

kkhohoho (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#161330: Dec 9th 2016 at 8:18:04 PM

[up][up][up]So basically, we shouldn't try to fight back or do anything of the sort because it's all essentially doomed to failure anyway? If that's the case, then what's the point of even doing anything? Even if the country is going down the shitter, the least we can do is accomplish what we can; not for any greater purpose, (though that would be a plus,) but mostly for its' own sake.

I may not be actively going out and attending protests, (yes,) but I do sign petitions and whatnot up the whazoo, because I want to do something. Not because it'll necessarily change the world or anything, but just because I think it's the right thing to do. And it's the same case with standing up against Trump.

[up]Oh God. You know what this means? It means we still have a chance! Quick, somebody dig up Doc Brown's rotting corpse so we turn it into a zombie and go steal a Dolorean! We've got a timeline to fix!

edited 9th Dec '16 8:21:52 PM by kkhohoho

Geostomp In the name of the POWER, I will punish you! from Arkansas, USA Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: What is this thing you call love?
In the name of the POWER, I will punish you!
#161331: Dec 9th 2016 at 8:29:47 PM

I agree that fighting is absolutely necessary. Trump is a dictator in the making, selling off the country piece-by-piece. If we sit back, he will do so with no real opposition because the Republicans will not give up the golden opportunity to have him rubber stamp their worst ideas and the Democrats are still at each others' throats. If we let even a tenth of what he's promised to his idiot supporters through, we will be screwed for decades. The checks and balances we depend on will not save us here. If we're complacent, this will become so entrenched that there will be no hope of improving anything for decades while we devolve into a police state for this bigoted manchild's power trip.

If the people won't listen, then we'll just have to find a way to be too loud to let them ignore. Either we snap them out of complacency on or own, or we wait for the worthless tub of spray tan's horrible ideas do it for us much more catastrophically.

"When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all" Futurama, Godfellas
Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#161332: Dec 9th 2016 at 8:37:17 PM

Trump can't overturn the halt on DAPL that easily The decision was made by the Army Corps of Engineers and there would have to be judicial review to demonstrate the reasons they refused to grant the easment (permission given to another to do stuff on land they own) have been addressed.

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#161333: Dec 9th 2016 at 8:53:57 PM

It'll probably end up in court for years at this point, stuff which Trump supposedly can't undo. Which makes me question the legality of BP continuing the construction after the Corps of Engineers has declined to grant the easement. Are the proponents not now in opposition to the law after this if they continue with construction?

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#161334: Dec 9th 2016 at 8:54:13 PM

Sorry about getting the FBI and the CIA mixed up. I keep forgetting that the CIA are the responsible ones now.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#161335: Dec 9th 2016 at 9:08:35 PM

[up][up]The easement only covers a small strip of land that makes up the banks of the river the pipeline is intended to go under. The reason it stops construction is that without it the oil company has to re-route their plans if they want to continue. But if they want to gamble everything on getting approval from the new administration (which they could but it would be foolish to expect) they could keep construction going on the rest of the pipeline without getting in legal trouble.

The article I linked also mentions that some of the contracts the company needs expire on January 1. So there's that too.

TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#161336: Dec 9th 2016 at 9:27:04 PM

No more playing nice. We need to take the fight to the republicans and wage the largest ideological war since the Civil War. These people are a threat to social progress, global stability, and basic human decency.

If any of you want to play nice and turn the other cheek, be my guest. Some people can can't be reasoned with and have to be defeated.

New Survey coming this weekend!
iflewaway someone from somewhere Since: Dec, 2016
someone
#161337: Dec 9th 2016 at 9:30:33 PM

[up] The republicans have been waging an "ideological war" since the at least the 80s, and it got us into the shit show we have now. We cannot respond to their authoritarianism and propaganda by employing it for ourselves.

edited 9th Dec '16 10:38:46 PM by iflewaway

something
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#161338: Dec 9th 2016 at 9:31:25 PM

[up][up] Should I be expecting you to join a left wing anti-Trump militia then?

What do you think we're doing? People are still protesting Trump in the streets, people are still trying to get electors to go rogue, democratic politicians (And Sanders) are preparing to filibuster his congress. In other words we are taking every legally permissible action to minimize the damage of a Trump presidency.

edited 9th Dec '16 9:39:15 PM by CaptainCapsase

iflewaway someone from somewhere Since: Dec, 2016
someone
#161340: Dec 9th 2016 at 9:44:05 PM

[up] Wouldn't want EPA agents caring about the environment now, would we?

Really, though, we are fucked.

edited 9th Dec '16 10:51:39 PM by iflewaway

something
AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#161341: Dec 9th 2016 at 10:33:39 PM

Tactical; I pointed out a few pages ago that you seem to favor being very authoritarian in your approach here. You talked several times during the primaries about purging "Sanderistas" or whatever from the ranks of Democrats. What, exactly, does not strike you as hypocritical about this? What do you even mean by not playing nice anymore? You keep taking rather extreme positions while also being quite vague about what steps, exactly, you want us as a country to take. Nor do you seem to be taking into account whether or not these are practical, or thinking about whether or not what you want to do ends up subverting the democratic process.

If this is not how you mean to come off you perhaps need to work on communicating your ideas more clearly to us so we don't misinterpret you.

TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#161342: Dec 9th 2016 at 11:04:13 PM

Not playing nice? Easy, we simply take a page out of the GOP playbook. Obstruct Trumps attempts to subver our democracy. Be prepared to turn MSNBC (possibly CNN too( into 24/7 Democratic agenda. Outright call out politicians by name. Call a spade a spade.

Meanwhile organize. GOP wants to suppress voters with I Ds? Fine. Call up billionaire Dem donors to start the largest voting registration campaign in modern political history. Make sure your constituents have EVERYTHING possible so they won't be turned away in red states.

Don't let Trump get away with ANYTHING. Even if he does something "good" spin it. He's an existential threat. Every day of his presidency should be hell on earth because we refuse to give in and cooperate. We give him an inch, he's going to go ten miles.

Liberals got out asses kicked in part because we spent 8 years being complacent, as if the gains that had been won would last forever. Well now they've been lost, perhaps for multiple generations because of Supreme Court. It's time to put in some work. Trump seems likely to fuck up on his own, based on his cabinet. But you're not going to win if you aren't ready to capitalize.

I'm already planning on attending some events with my local county reps and work my way up, even tho I live in a solid red state.

New Survey coming this weekend!
JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#161343: Dec 9th 2016 at 11:17:46 PM

I admire your passion, good sir, and wish you the best of luck for you do bear our most ardent hopes.

Turning CNN into a Democrat Fox News is going to be hard because they are owned by corporations and those guys look out for number 1. And besides CNN is plenty liberal fox news as it is...I mean the success of Fox News more or less forced other channels to borrow some of its tricks.

It's basically quite hard to get corporations to become advocates for a left position, in fact I don't think that has ever really happened. You would do better to appeal to Hollywood...those are the only people with money who want to use it for a cause. And in any case, reality has a liberal bias...so there's no need to do propaganda anyway.

Starting NGO s to shell out money for Mass Voter Registration however is a solid plan and I suggest you push that.

As for Democrat Party Obstructionism...well that's not really the Democrat party way. Remember the government involves a lot of people we don't see and a lot of functions we aren't aware of. Historically the fascists strengthened their power when the liberals walked out in protest.

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#161344: Dec 9th 2016 at 11:19:11 PM

If by turnining MSNBC into the Democratic agenda you mean turning it into the equivalent of Fox News, that's really fucking stupid for one reason. Fox pushes an agenda regardless of the actual facts of the situation. The reason I consider MSNBC reliable is that so far they seem dedicated to relaying actual facts. That they are also usually liberal is just a bonus. But if you want them to be solely about the Democratic agenda then I have doubts about how much you care about the truth. (Also how the fuck do you even plan to achieve that unless you actively pursue a job there to gain influence I don't know.)

We must remain truthful in seeking out our goals. There are some tricks in the Republican playbook that aren't worth taking up. Our goals will eventually be subverted if we sacrifice integrity. Everything else you've suggested is what other people are already and have been doing so you're going to have to again, be more specific. Probably specific to your location in particular at this point.

Seriously, you're going authoritarian with that first bit. And a bit "feels not reals".

[up]Actually a lot of businesses are alarmed by Trump currently because he's highly disruptive. Businesses, in general, like having a stable economy. They also have a tendency to donate both parties frequently. If there ever was a situation where we could swing larger companies towards the Democratic cause, this might just be it. Might be.

edited 9th Dec '16 11:21:11 PM by AceofSpades

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#161345: Dec 9th 2016 at 11:31:22 PM

The fact is corporations stand to gain under Trump. Huge tax-cuts coming in next year. The Carrier deal and Trump's Infrastructure privatization scame is going to bring back a new age of Robber Barons.

Trump is backed by plutocrats and oligarchs, and staffed his cabinet with them. One of his backers is Peter Thiel...another oligarch in the making with weirdo pseudo-intellectual pretentions.

So there's no point expecting corporations to support Trump much. In fact you can already see how many people are already starting to "work towards the Fuhrer" by gaining advances by supporting positions and ideas that appeal to Trump's extreme tastes.

It wouldn't take long for someone to propose policies muzzling free speech and free expression, and other comments critical of Trump.

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#161346: Dec 9th 2016 at 11:38:47 PM

Please note that I said "might be" twice in my statement before assuming I think it's for sure going to happen.

Also, proposing laws like that are not the same thing as such laws getting passed. And hoo boy would that garner a whole bunch of vicious criticism and outcry. Somehow I doubt such things would pass, but even if it did it would just make people protest harder. (Ironically we may be looking to Pence to school him on this issue, as out of the two of them Pence clearly handles criticism in a far more mature manner, whatever other awful qualities he has.)

Wryte Since: Jul, 2010
#161347: Dec 10th 2016 at 12:04:57 AM

And in any case, reality has a liberal bias...so there's no need to do propaganda anyway.

Reality doesn't get much say when the fiction is drowning it out. The Dems absolutely need to do a better job of shoving real facts down the fake news audience's throats, and public pressure on news outlets to drop the damn equal time mandate and actually fact check Republicans would be a starting point.

AngelusNox Warder of the damned from The guard of the gates of oblivion Since: Dec, 2014 Relationship Status: Married to the job
Krieger22 Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018 from Malaysia Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: I'm in love with my car
Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018
#161349: Dec 10th 2016 at 2:46:02 AM

Speaking of US intel investigating Russian interference, Wikileaks implicated themselves.

Also, the Trump transition team insulted the US intelligence services again.

I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiot
PushoverMediaCritic I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out. from the Italy of America Since: Jul, 2015 Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out.
#161350: Dec 10th 2016 at 2:47:02 AM

What would be the potential downsides of a law that makes factually incorrect news illegal?


Total posts: 417,856
Top