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

Hodor2 Since: Jan, 2015
#174551: Feb 16th 2017 at 8:26:57 AM

Yeah. Don't think there's any way you could pass a law saying "it is illegal for the President to surround himself/herself with super-shady people who may be beholden to foreign governments".

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#174552: Feb 16th 2017 at 8:28:28 AM

Indeed it won't. The Supreme Court has repeatedly said that the Constitution sets out the requirements and that further ones cannot be added without a constitutional amendment. There was a case in the 90s about term limits, SCOTUS found them OK on a state level but said that federal ones need a constitutional amendment.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Zendervai Since: Oct, 2009
#174553: Feb 16th 2017 at 8:29:59 AM

You can, however, require that a presidential candidate release their tax returns, if only to try and determine the extent of any conflicts of interest.

[up]Oh, okay then.

I think a tax return amendment wouldn't go over that badly though. Maybe the parties can require it.

edited 16th Feb '17 8:30:49 AM by Zendervai

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.
#174554: Feb 16th 2017 at 8:31:57 AM

Yeah, make all those unspoken agreements that Trump just ignored into written law. Presidential candidates must release their tax returns, they must put all of their prior holdings into a blind trust, etc.

edited 16th Feb '17 8:33:32 AM by PushoverMediaCritic

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#174555: Feb 16th 2017 at 8:32:09 AM

I'm thinking more along the lines of making it mandatory for presidents to release tax returns and other documents that may detail conflicts of interest.

edit: While it's true that the Democratic president would need to go through congress I think the Republicans would be stupid to not go along with this. If Trump is forcibly removed from office because of this shit then it's going to be very hard to argue against this stuff.

edited 16th Feb '17 8:33:51 AM by Kostya

Hodor2 Since: Jan, 2015
#174556: Feb 16th 2017 at 8:32:41 AM

Not on this topic (is there a better thread for it?) but Robert Kennedy Jr. and Robert De Niro offer $1000,000 to anyone who can prove vaccines are safe. I guess it's kind of connected to this thread because although those two are at the opposite end of the political spectrum as Trump, he's on the same page as them with antivaxer craziness. As mentioned in the article, RFK Jr. recently met with Trump to float the idea of a "vaccine safety commission".

edited 16th Feb '17 8:35:04 AM by Hodor2

math792d Since: Jun, 2011 Relationship Status: Drift compatible
#174557: Feb 16th 2017 at 8:37:19 AM

Also, yeah. TYT act like freaking cultists.

I mean, when haven't they been? They've pretty much always been bad history being weaponized for political purpose incarnate, sometimes to Bill O'Reilly levels of abject absurdity.

Still not embarrassing enough to stan billionaires or tech companies.
Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#174558: Feb 16th 2017 at 8:39:27 AM

[up][up]I'm pretty sure that's in "science does not work that way" territory. One, biology is messy and there will always be edge cases. Two, science relies on consensus and preponderance of evidence and has to remain open to the fact that someone screwed up along the way. Three, it ignores the preponderance of evidence that already exists for vaccination safety and the dangers of not having them.

edited 16th Feb '17 8:39:43 AM by Elle

Falrinn Since: Dec, 2014
#174559: Feb 16th 2017 at 8:43:19 AM

[up][up][up]I'm guessing by "safe" they mean zero side effects whatsoever for any vaccine recipient, which is fundamentally impossible for anything that has an actual biological effect, and not "vaccinating everyone is significantly safer than letting the disease it prevents from running rampant", which is what really matters.

SeriesOfNumbers Since: Jun, 2013
#174560: Feb 16th 2017 at 8:57:52 AM

@174217

When I called Trump and co a bunch of Captain Planet villains last summer, I was joking.

It can be hard to parody Trump when he's so over-the-top and evil in reality that there's not much room for exaggeration. I wouldn't be surprised if the Daily Show's job gets a lot harder for the next four years.

@174228

Seriously, the only more obvious way you could have announced that Flynn was a potential mole would have been to have him go around wearing a fur hat and drinking vodka while saluting people and calling them "comrade".

Which is why I doubt he's actually a spy. More likely, he's just somebody Russia thought would encourage Trump to make deals that are favorable to Russia. He might even have some financial ties to Russia (given the amount of brazen corruption in the Trump Administration, that wouldn't be surprising).

@174235

They're spending hawks. They'll oppose anything that involving parting with so much as a nickel, be it Healthcare or walls.

Would they support cutting our bloated military budget?

@174237

Being personally (and oftentimes superficially) nice and pleasant while not being personally hateful only means so much when you still support a complete idiot who represents a wave of reactionary bullshit and contempt for millions of people just for existing.

Why does everyone on this thread keep ignoring Hillary Clinton's evil? Don't get me wrong, Trump's call for killing the families of our enemies and bringing back torture is evil, too. I would even argue he's worse than Clinton. But to act like there's no legitimate reason to vote Trump and everyone who voted for him is a bigot is just silly. You're all only paying attention to the bad things about Republicans and ignoring the bad things about Democrats, even when a lot of those bad things are the same for both parties. This willful blindness is puzzling and frustrating to me.

What would you say to someone who told you "being personally (and oftentimes superficially) nice and pleasant while not being personally hateful only means so much when you still support someone who represents wanting more deaths of innocent children"?

@174298

Yeah, thanks Obama. You just took the Bush-era policies that violate our privacy and civil liberties and put them on steroids even more than you've done for your entire term. Truly, you've proven yourself to be Republican lite.

@174307

On the contrary, I think Pence is worse than Trump. He's all the bad stuff about Trump + a greater dedication to theocracy.

@174314

What with Republican voters who voted Trump while wishing they could've nominated somebody sane.

Well, saneer. Sanity is relative in the Republican Party.

@174330

I do like the idea of him being kicked out with a giant boot like in that Simpsons episode. But only if Pence if removed, too. Preferably the same way.

@174333

if the DNC race could have less ideological purity wankers and more people using this to point out a way forwards, that would be nice.

Well, the general public largely seems to agree with these "ideological purity wankers", so I'd say the DNC race needs more of them, not less. And given how sensible the policies of the Bernie wing and "purity wankers" are, you seem to be succumbing to the Golden Mean Fallacy.

@174360

That EPA bill is horrifying. Because god forbid that you live in a country that isn't a blasted unliveable wasteland with undrinkable water and no food.

And who founded the EPA? Why, Richard Nixon, of course.

I mean, seriously, what the hell? The Republicans are stomping on their own legacy because they can't remember what's actually theirs and what's actually Democrat related. The National Parks thing is in the same boat. Theodore Roosevelt was one of the biggest driving forces behind them, and he was a Republican.

The Republicans have moved way to the right - off the cliffs of sanity - since the days of Nixon, let alone Theodore Roosevelt. The policy we call Obama Care was proposed by Nixon and later supported by the conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation and Newt Gingrich. Heck, Republicans even praised Merrick Garland when a previous Democratic president - I think it was Bill Clinton? - picked him for a lower court position, only to oppose him when Obama picked him.

The Republicans now turn against their own ideas when Democrats support them. Not that some Democrats are much less tribal to judge from how their position on Russia has turned into that of Mitt Romney in 2012 (as has been seen multiple times on this thread, now). Speaking of which, Captain Capsase, you seem to be by far the most reasonable person on this thread. You aren't Kyle Kulinski by any chance, are you?

@174504

The Justice Democrats are correct about nearly everything, so I don't see the problem there.

edited 16th Feb '17 9:08:16 AM by SeriesOfNumbers

CenturyEye Tell Me, Have You Seen the Yellow Sign? from I don't know where the Yith sent me this time... Since: Jan, 2017 Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
Tell Me, Have You Seen the Yellow Sign?
#174561: Feb 16th 2017 at 8:57:56 AM

The best argument against anti-vaxxers should be pictures of children in iron lungs.
That kinda beats autism conspiracy theories, even if the connection wasn't implausible.

Look with century eyes... With our backs to the arch And the wreck of our kind We will stare straight ahead For the rest of our lives
tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#174563: Feb 16th 2017 at 9:28:00 AM

I love it when someone claims they're not trolling, then cites Glenn Greenwald as evidence of Clinton being pure evil. All while continuing to post defenses of a cast of characters that includes or has included in prior posts grifter and dictator apologist Tulsi Gabbard, genocide denier Cenk Ugyur and his "movement", the absolute fringe left, and Assad himself.

In other news, Rachel Maddow on physical abuse and the White House.

edited 16th Feb '17 9:34:47 AM by AmbarSonofDeshar

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#174564: Feb 16th 2017 at 10:11:58 AM

The problem with "ideology purity wankers" is in the end they tend to care more about principles than helping people. Also, they're part of what got Trump into office. On both sides.

In any case, no, Hillary Clinton is not all that evil, and we are freaking tired of that drum being beat. She was clearly the better candidate out of the two, and Trump is proving constantly that there's a whole bunch of shit that the public in general will gloss over and ignore when it's performed by a man and a "political outsider", as if that last one had any sort of value.

@TC: Oh no, a Texas official has been implicated in corruption involving oil! How unusual for our state!

On a more serious note, I wish Texas Democrats would stop running into these small to medium scandals because they sure as shit are not helping us get a better foothold in this state.

[up]Domestic abuse: Enough to ruin the Secretary of Labor's chances, but not the President's apparently.

edited 16th Feb '17 10:12:41 AM by AceofSpades

math792d Since: Jun, 2011 Relationship Status: Drift compatible
#174565: Feb 16th 2017 at 10:25:28 AM

If only there was some kind of precedent for far-left movements refusing to work with the center-left leading to exploitation by a reactionary right wing.

If only...

Still not embarrassing enough to stan billionaires or tech companies.
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#174566: Feb 16th 2017 at 10:32:26 AM

And if those far-left movements hijack the Democrats, and you end up with Trump (or whoever takes over if he does go down) vs some protectionist/isolationist crackpot....

2016 ruined American politics.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
CrimsonZephyr Would that it were so simple. from Massachusetts Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
Would that it were so simple.
#174567: Feb 16th 2017 at 10:39:09 AM

The solution to Democratic electoral woes is to have the previous unsuccessful candidates burned at the stake as a blood sacrifice to ensure future victories.

"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#174568: Feb 16th 2017 at 10:43:10 AM

Re: #174527

Why does everyone on this thread keep ignoring Hillary Clinton's evil?
Because it's irrelevant, and has been from the moment she and Trump became the Presidential nominees.

It was irrelevant during the election because no amount of "evil", real or imagined, turned her into a worse choice than Trump. It's irrelevant now because she's since suffered the political equivalent of Mike Tyson being OHKO'd by Little Mac. It's irrelevant because Donald Trump has spent every day since the election treating the accusations of corruption against Clinton like they were his job description.

In short, it's irrelevant because we have much more important and immediate factors to worry about than a politician whose career, after a loss like that, is as good as done as far as holding elected office is concerned.

edited 16th Feb '17 10:52:40 AM by sgamer82

Zendervai Since: Oct, 2009
#174569: Feb 16th 2017 at 10:50:57 AM

Also? She didn't win. She has nothing to do with the presidency or the government because she isn't part of it. If things are done in reaction to her or her proposed policies...well that isn't her fault. It's the fault of whoever can't let the idea of EBIL HILLURY go because the need something to fight against, regardless of how stupid the fight is.

edited 16th Feb '17 10:53:39 AM by Zendervai

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#174570: Feb 16th 2017 at 10:55:53 AM

That thing with child soldiers is troubling, though. Although I am not certain if her fault directly (let alone whether there'd be a way to improve the situation at the ballot box).

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#174571: Feb 16th 2017 at 10:58:07 AM

An insistence on ideological purity is a problem across the spectrum from center to left; there are plenty of centrist democrats who are acting like preventing the Sanders wing from gaining ground in the party is more important than stopping Trump.

edited 16th Feb '17 10:58:46 AM by CaptainCapsase

3of4 Just a harmless giant from a foreign land. from Five Seconds in the Future. Since: Jan, 2010 Relationship Status: GAR for Archer
Just a harmless giant from a foreign land.
#174572: Feb 16th 2017 at 11:03:45 AM

I'm getting some "Not Making This Up" Disclaimer from US friends about Trumps Press Conference.

What happened?

"You can reply to this Message!"
Deadbeatloser22 from Disappeared by Space Magic (Great Old One) Relationship Status: Tsundere'ing
#174573: Feb 16th 2017 at 11:05:04 AM

Also? She didn't win. She has nothing to do with the presidency or the government because she isn't part of it. If things are done in reaction to her or her proposed policies...well that isn't her fault. It's the fault of whoever can't let the idea of EBIL HILLURY go because the need something to fight against, regardless of how stupid the fight is.

BUT HER EMAILS

"Yup. That tasted purple."
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#174574: Feb 16th 2017 at 11:06:18 AM

[up][up]To quote another forum I follow, Trump's been "Bragging about best electoral win since Reagan, inheriting a mess from Obama, admin is running like a "fine-tuned machine", murdering immigrants roaming the streets..."

Not sure what that last ones about

edited 16th Feb '17 11:06:31 AM by sgamer82

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#174575: Feb 16th 2017 at 11:06:23 AM

Trump compared his admin to a well running machine and blames all of his problems on Obama. And the media of course.

[up][nja]

EDIT: Also, he claims that he has no connections to Russia.

edited 16th Feb '17 11:08:08 AM by Rationalinsanity

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

Total posts: 417,856
Top