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
Can't really call yourself a liberal if you think Assad and Putin are wonderful human beings. Heck, can't really call yourself anything other than an authoritarian at that point, left-wing/right-wing be damned.
It really didn't. I'd explain how Clinton (or Sanders or a braindead chimp for that matter) was vastly better than Trump but we spent most of the election either explaining that to people or discussing it amongst ourselves, so that is well-trod ground at this point.
edited 3rd Feb '17 3:34:49 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
@Dingo-
Looking quickly at The Other Wiki page on her
, I guess you could consider her economic positions as a difference as well as her opposition to drone strikes. Her social positions (which are what I at least think of when I hear liberal) are fairly liberal.
Kind of odd though in terms of gay rights in that while I know that of course Clinton and Obama were behind in terms of their support, it sounds like she was markedly homophobic before flipping her views.
edited 3rd Feb '17 3:35:09 PM by Hodor2
I would note that her support for Assad makes me question how liberal her opposition to drone strikes and military intervention in general really is. After all, I wouldn't say there's anything especially liberal about decrying the use of military force to remove a dictator when you are personally a fan of that dictator and deny that he is doing anything wrong.
I don't like to denounce someone as an opportunist but that genuinely does smack of opportunism. As does the fact that she hitched herself to Sanders, then turned around and started talking about the need to cooperate with Trump, etc.
edited 3rd Feb '17 3:38:28 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
These are all non-issues deliberately spun to attack Sanders: 1) He voted to ship low-level nuclear waste
, meaning gloves and such, not what people usually refer to as 'nuclear waste'. It was shipped to Texas because there was a slight risk that it could pollute the groundwater in Vermont and Maine. 2) He said the southern states, not black voters, which is factually true considering the nature of the electoral college. It's true that this has awful implications (and he later apologized for the remark), but it's rather hypocrite for the Clinton camp to point this out, considering Clinton has said the exact same thing, except that she explicitly mentioned that white voters matter more, during the 2008 primaries
. 3) He often talked about the high incarceration rates of blacks, voter suppression etc., and didn't even started to talk about white voters specifically until after Clinton didn't manage to win their support in the election.
And about the essay: he wasn't defending rape, this claim has already been debunked
multiple times.
![]()
![]()
Those were what I was referring to, yeah.
Also, to be fair, a lot of Democratic Politicians slowly came around from either being hostile or neutral towards Homosexuality, to supporting it outright (with a few exceptions of course). Although it is a little interesting that she waited so long to change her views on the matter. I must've missed that part originally.
edited 3rd Feb '17 3:40:15 PM by DingoWalley1
@Ambar- That is a fair point. Was trying to not get into the "support for dictators thing" I'd also say that outside of the merits of drone strikes, there's kind of an issue in terminology here, where whatever people feel strongly about (myself included) they consider that view essential to a liberal view. Like I'd consider the definition to be all about views on social and racial issues, other people would point to views on military actions and trade policies.
Re her gay rights views, Yeah. At least from the way the article sounds, there was a period where she was actively against gay rights.
@Perian
One might say the same about many of the things that were said about Clinton by Sanders and his fans. Here's the thing—no one is denying that Sanders is a progressive. What I take issue with is the notion that he's vastly more progressive than everyone else. He's not.
And when the people in the town that it was going to be shipped to pointed out that the facilities designed to house it were garbage (which having been built by Governor George W Bush they were) and that it would not be safe there, he refused to so much as meet with them. He literally said that he had no need to because he was running again in Vermont. What kind of supposed champion of the working man does that? Answer—the kind who is thinking about the next election that he has to win.
Which does not change how bloody offensive the statement was. And here's the thing—I'm not claiming Sanders is especially racist. I'm saying he's not any better on the issue than other Democrats, and is worse than some. Which is true.
So did Clinton. So did Obama. So do most Democrats. Again, I didn't say "Sanders is nonprogressive" I said, "he's isn't more progressive than many of his contemporaries." Because he's not.
Good thing I didn't call him a rape apologist then. At any point. I said he wrote an essay in which he claimed that a majority of women fantasize about things like that. Because he did do that, and it's squicky as Hell and demonstrates that he has some less than stellar ideas about how women think.
Once again, no one in the thread, and certainly not me is saying "Sanders isn't progressive." We're saying he's not the progressive icon that some of his fans make him out to be, because he isn't. We're saying he's not that far removed from many of his contemporaries when it comes to social issues, because he's not. And so far, nothing you've written there is proving us wrong. You've demonstrated he has progressive views and is not especially racist, but nobody said he didn't have progressive views, or that he was a gigantic racist. We said he's not as pure a progressive as he's painted as. Because he's not. Because nobody could be.
@Hodor
I'm a social liberal first as well, then an economic one. Militarily I wouldn't say I'm pro-intervention but I don't believe in taking it entirely off the table, and I honestly don't see it as an especially liberal stance, given that isolationists are as often xenophobes as they are pacifists.
edited 3rd Feb '17 3:51:20 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
Doing some reading—Gabbard's father
ran a militant anti-gay group which she was a part of. While working for him, she helped him steal money from a political campaign and convert it into family cash; she was also involved with a number of his "nonprofit" organizations, most of which they seem to have stolen money from. She claims she is no longer associated with her father, but most of her staff are people who worked for him in his anti-gay group
. Etc, etc.
My final verdict? Grifter. There's a reason why Steve Bannon set up a meeting between her and Trump
.
Federal judge temporarily halts Trump’s immigration order
http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/nation-world/national/article130673369.html
A federal judge in Seattle has joined the ranks of judges halting the Muslim Ban.
Yes, he didn't want to visit the site (remember that it wasn't even his bill, he was just one of the people to vote for it). It's not a diplomatic thing to say, but it's not as if he ever put people's lives in danger.
So he undeliberately made statement with some awful implications. This is hardly anything to dwell on.
You said that he ignored racial issues, which is just untrue. On some issues on which Sanders is more progressive about than most Democrats, how about the death penalty, soft drug legalization, privacy, military interventions etc.
No, this is only if you give the worst possible interpretation to it, but that a majority of women fantasize about rape is never said in the text. See here
for an analysis.
edited 3rd Feb '17 4:10:25 PM by Perian
Trump continues to mock and degrade Arnold Schwarzenegger
.
I'm worried that Trump might try to deport him if this continues.
EDIT: Also, Trump Administration begrudgingly accepts Australian Refugees, says will put them through "Extreme Vetting" Process
.
edited 3rd Feb '17 4:26:52 PM by DingoWalley1
The irony of Trump having the nerve to take potshots at Arnold is palpable. Arnold is one of the best modern-day examples of the american dream, a poor immigrant who through hard work and excellence built up a fortune and became a respected member of the community.
Trump is a loathsome, spoiled roach who's coasted on his family money his entire life and has never had to stand on his own two feet.

To be fair, this election basically boiled down to hoping that the one that won used lube.
Your momma's so dumb she thinks oral sex means talking dirty.