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
The election has been delayed 3 times now over the period of two years. Damn near every lawmaker seats on the parliament are filled with "qualified" high-ranking army officials and their family members. Civilians are still on trial in military court, even after lifting the state of emergency. Judges in civil law countries don't make policy rulings like you guys'. The revered, rightly or not, old King is gone, putting his widely scorned son on the throne. We only have 1/5 of our treasury deposit left, compared to last year's.
There's a bloody National Security Council full of old military generals who never fought in a war for eff's sake.
So yeah. Not to undercut your trouble with Orange-in-Chief, but deposing your elected officials with your security apparatus like the Military or Intelligence Agencies? Bad, bad idea.
I know it's a worrying notion with Russian interference, but I truly hopes CIA stays away from anything ever that could be construed to be for a political purpose.
I don't follow?
edited 23rd Feb '17 6:16:13 AM by pblades
Democrats gather in Atlanta to set course for party’s future
In part because of the burgeoning field, no candidate yet has a lock on the majority of the 447 committee members needed to win, though Perez is believed to have an early advantage. What is for certain, though, is the winner won’t shy away from joining the “resistance” movement against the president.
All the leading contenders for the seat have pledged to defy Trump. They have also vowed, in one way or another, to pump more money into a 50-state strategy and rebuild a party infrastructure that’s been decimated in the past four election cycles.
The vote will surely resonate in Georgia, where state party leaders are wrestling with some of the same strategic divides the national party is: Should they appeal to disenchanted Republicans and moderates skeptical of Trump in next year’s election or cater to left-leaning voters already likely to support them?
Most of the state’s establishment wing has endorsed Perez, including the state party’s top two officials, former Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin and her successor, Kasim Reed.
“Tom understands the critical issues facing Democrats in their fight against a dangerous Republican agenda that has endangered American voting rights and pursued discriminatory legislative redistricting which leaves many citizens without an equal voice in their government,” Reed said in his endorsement.
Lining up behind Perez’s top rival are state Sen. Vincent Fort, a Sanders supporter and candidate for Atlanta mayor, and U.S. Rep. John Lewis, a civil rights icon who became a face of the opposition to Trump when he boycotted his inauguration and questioned the legitimacy of his presidency.
“As Democrats, we must seek a leader who has demonstrated the ability to continue the fight to protect all that we hold dear as a nation,” Lewis said. “Keith is ready to take on the fight, and I am proud to stand with him.”
Also in the mix is South Carolina party Chairman Jaime Harrison, a potential kingmaker in the DNC vote who wants to wage an all-out war on the GOP.
“Republicans don’t cede any territory to us,” he said in an interview. “Look at Maryland, Massachusetts and Maine — what do they have in common? Republican governors. Democrats have to take a page of that playbook. If we do that, it will pay dividends.”
His campaign, in particular, focuses on areas of the country he said were long neglected by the national party.
“The party has failed in the South and in some states in the West, too,” he said. “A million dollars in South Carolina goes a long way. It will help build these regions up, because right now we’re ceding that ground and territory.”
Nothing wrong with a bloodless revolution.
"Greatness" doesn't necessarily mean anything other than being influential and having a large historical impact. In that regard, you could argue that Trump is influential and has left a massive impact.
A better way to counter the Great Man theory regarding Trump would be to point out that all of the things that led to his election: racism, misogyny, right-wing populism, anger at globalization and immigration, a weakened left-wing, etc. have all been present in American politics for decades. The Great Man theory would posit that Trump is the cause of the horrible shit that we are seeing now, but I would argue that he is only a symptom.
That's my point, really. If you look at the influence Trump personally managed to have, it was all pointed against getting himself elected. Trump must be the symptom, not the cause, because he ran such a shooting-himself-in-the-foot-campaign. Under the Great Men theory of history, Trump's personal influence would've caused the GOP to lose an election that economic and historical factors said they were going to win.
He also turned a lot of his "scandals" into Positives. If anyone else hadn't paid taxes for years and got caught doing it, they would've been embarrassed, ashamed, and probably would've dropped out then and there. But to Trump, not paying taxes for years "Made him Smart" and "Proves how incompetent the Government is".
The only negative he couldn't really spin was his "Grab'em" comment, which he sort of, kind of apologized over (cough coughnot really cough cough), but it wasn't enough to get him to lose the Electorate of the Rust Belt...
I mean, he didn't actually turn the scandals into positives, though. He still took a hit in the polls everytime a new one hit. He just managed to muzzle himself and avoid creating any new News Stories about him for the last few weeks- he won because he stopped actually influencing things in time to recover.
Domestic terrorists killed his son. He wants Trump to remember that America makes extremists, too.
So, what are the chances of Trump listening to this sort of thing?
edited 23rd Feb '17 8:26:14 AM by KarkatTheDalek
Oh God! Natural light!Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) 2nd American Legislature to make Secret Trip to Syria since Trump became President
. The first was Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI).
How much money do you want to bet that McCain changes his tune on the War and says "We should support the Assad Regime"?
![]()
![]()
Slim to none unless the victim was a white, straight, native-born, Christian man (bonus points if explicitly Republican) and his killers were any combination of nonwhite, LGBT+, immigrant, non-Christian, and/or gender-inclusive (bonus points if explicitly opposed to the GOP). Then he'd hear about it on Fox or InfoWars, and then promptly mangle the English language while making a hate speech about it.
As it is, even if Trump managed to hear about it, he'd probably dismiss it as "fake news", maybe even hatch a harebrained conspiracy theory about the guy and the terrorists all being actors (a la the Sandy Hook "truthers").
edited 23rd Feb '17 8:40:57 AM by TrashJack
"Cynic, n. — A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be." - The Devil's Dictionary
Yeah, in Trumpland white right-wingers can't possibly be terrorists.
Edit:
On another note:
tl:dr; she is pushing a childcare bill that would effectively grant half a trillion dollars in tax deductions to rich people who employ nannies.
edited 23rd Feb '17 8:59:34 AM by M84
Disgusted, but not surprisedThen you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I don't claim that there aren't some very annoying, rude and vocal supporters of Sanders active on the internet (these people annoy me too after all). What I'm referring to is the widespread media narrative that Sanders was mainly supported by white, racist misogynists, and that this is Sanders's own fault, since he only cares about white people anyway.
Nevermind the fact that research has already indicated that Sanders supporters have, in fact, less negative racial stereotypes than Clinton supporters do, that Clinton supporters were thought to be more aggressive on social media than those of Sanders, that minority groups, especially blacks, currently think very highly of Sanders, and that it is only a very small number of Sanders supporters who didn't vote for Clinton (I can show you all the data if you don't believe me). If you want an example of some very aggressive people who are indistinguishable in their hatred from Trump supporters, just go visit Clinton's subreddit, but somehow Clinton was never asked to apologize for her supporters while Sanders did have to.
So I don't see why the media should give so much attention to a vocal minority of people on the internet - of course, the answer is that this was a deliberate attempt to discredit Sanders's movement, promoted by people like Perez, by focusing on some 'bad apples'. And as I said, I don't feel comfortable seeing minority groups used as a pawn in a political game like these people did.
I backed Clinton from day 1. Still do.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.

Well yeah, but the governorment under the constitution is a Junta.
Speaking of Thailand UNTIL WHEN DONALD TRUMP.