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
Yes and no.
Imperialism itself is a right wing concept. That doesn't mean that a left-wing government can't be imperialistic.
The US is a right wing government but that doesn't mean it can't practice left wing policies.
I mean Mao thought the USSR was an imperial power hiding behind a socialist facade.
There are arguments to be had about the lines of imperialism but I was being overly simplistic to get ideas across.
Yeah that list given is bull by the way, like they're all real Democrats and with the exception of Gbbard the ones I can find info on all seem like solid reasonable progressives, but only Barragán was actually not running as an incumbent in 2016. So the idea that Sannders movement got these people elected is horse shit, they were all already elected well before Sanders came along.
In the end Gabbard is one of the most prominent voices when it voems to that moment, and she's a supporter of dictatorships with a spotty record on LGBT rights. Show me the people they want to primary existing Dems with and tell me how they intend to win said seats anyway.
No it's not, it's a political ideology certainly, but the standard left-right system fo political divisions doesn't even account for foreign policy, it barely accounts for social policy. Even a political square won't account for foreign policy properly, this simply isn't a thing you can shove onto a left-right line and expect to make sense.
edited 20th Mar '17 1:13:27 AM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranThat's the sort of you take when you want a candidate to win even though she was under FBI investigation the entire time she was on campaign.
It was also only as competitive as it was because Hillary was unpopular.
More people that voted Trump were anti-Hillary rather than pro Trump.
Not to mention making some really dumb mistakes.
Yes, we are. You're telling us to follow you and we're telling you to follow us. We don't want conflict either so let us take over.
It depends on how the campaign is tun. If it's a lot of mud-slinging, sure, it could hurt them. But I don't think we should discourage primary runs by progressives just because we're afraid that they might lose to Republicans and it's possible that a left wing candidate could up turn out leading to making upsets in places where you'd least expect it.
So far, that's been their go-to strategy. Which is a big part of why it's so hard for some of us to get on board the "Justice" train. That tweet Tactical Fox brought up earlier is just one example.
edited 20th Mar '17 1:35:07 AM by M84
Disgusted, but not surprisedWell of course they're real democrats. Did you think they were going to help out an actual unicorn brigade?
I was talking about Our Revolution specifically which is a Sanders-affiliated organization.
If we're talking the Sanders movement in general then it's much more than that.
The Berniecrats took over California's Democratic Party in January.
In the end Gabbard is one of the most prominent voices when it voems to that moment, and she's a supporter of dictatorships with a spotty record on LGBT rights. Show me the people they want to primary existing Dems with and tell me how they intend to win said seats anyway.
Yes, it's more complicated than that but I'm being simplistic on purpose.
I heavily disagree on social policy. Most social policy issues can be boiled down equality versus inequality.
If you're upholding inequality as natural, it's right wing. If you're promoting egalitarianism then it's left-wing.
Actually, this brings up a good point; What's the difference between voting for/supporting Manchin and Gabbard? They're both Democrats that aren't perfectly Liberal but still support 75%-80% of the Party Line.
Are people only 'swallowing' Manchin because he's in West Virginia? If he were in, say, Michigan, would people be calling for him to be primaried like Gabbard?
It's harder to get another Democrat in Manchin's place since he's in a Republcian stronghold while Gabbard could easily be replaced by someone better seeing as she's in Hawaii.
Though such local elections are rarely covered in the mainstream press, the work of activists and organizers in California did not go entirely unnoticed; Sanders applauded their victories in his recent CNN town hall. Also, Our Revolution, the organization set up by Sanders backers and volunteers last year, "sent more than 110,000 emails and 40,000 peer-to-peer text messages in January in an effort to mobilize Democratic voters for California's local elections."
"Bernie always said when progressives show up, we win. In just a few months of organizing, Berniecrats and progressives swept hundreds of the party committee seats in California," Tasini told me. "This is the precise manifestation of what we call 'the political revolution.' It's happening, it's unstoppable if people continue to organize — in every state."
Huh, I guess Our Revolution did help the Californian Berniecrats out after all.
![]()
![]()
That's why I'm putting up with him.
Manchin at least isn't claiming to be part of a progressive movement.
edited 20th Mar '17 1:48:09 AM by M84
Disgusted, but not surprisedOur Revolution was founded in 2016, so I again fail to see how it could have helped elect anyone elected before the 2016 election.
I mean considering the recent election di be iffy about primarying an incumbent in Michigan, but yeah if he was a senator from a deep blue state like New York, Calafornia, Hawaii, Washington, Delaware, etc... yeah I'd be okay with the idea of him facing a primary challenge.
One has to remember how strong the incumbency advantage is, it's huge and can easily swing a seat a lot.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranCongressional candidate and former White House staff member Alejandra Campoverdi talks about the systemic sexism in USA politics
, which she experienced first-hand due to her past as a former Maxim model.
So apparently
the Trump administration has embedded "political advisers" in every cabinet agency to monitor their loyalty to Trump. Unsurprisingly, behind his back, the adviser assigned to Secretary Mattis is being called "the Commissar".
While I was unsure at first whether this was actually something unusual or just business as usual described in a sinister fashion as is often the case on a slow news day, this isn't something that was seen with the Bush, Obama, or Clinton administrations.
edited 20th Mar '17 4:56:18 AM by CaptainCapsase
Since someone in the last page mentioned 583's analysis of the election, here it is
.
![]()
Of Course its new. The cabinet appoints are the freakin "political advisors." It's the undersecretaries and other bureaucrats below that do the staff work. The cabinet exists to carry out the president's agenda.
Even if they weren't, well, Trump's picks to begin with, the message that they're not trusted—by him, they should know the populace doesn't trust them—and going to have every mistake, real or imagined, thoroughly scrutinized and used to throw them under the bus is going to do wonders for quality of work.
As for left-right wing thing, there's the Standard European Political Landscape trope that has them all in detail.
My support for Manchin is entirely contextualized by his representation of WV — were he not in a region that was, by-and-large, a blood red hellhole, I would say tthat primarying him would be a viable option. Gabbard is a homophobe and an Assad fangirl in sky-blue Hawaii and pretends to be a progressive. She's replaceable, and ultimately, Manchin is more honest in how he presents himself.
Also, I'd like to contest the notion that we need a conservative faction in the American political sphere — we do and we don't. We need a faction that isn't revolutionary leftist, but if we're going to have a faction that's for "less change," then let it be of the center-left. The right wing can burn in Hell; it has nothing to offer except right-libertarianism, xenophobia, and jingoism.
"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."
Although that useful notes completely fails to explain Socialists as their own thing and seems under the impression that parties the the German Die Linke and the Dutch SP are far-left rather than, more accurately, the furthest to the left you can get before heading into far-left territory.
edited 20th Mar '17 7:48:23 AM by Robrecht
Angry gets shit done.Warning! Have Barf Bag on standby—or at least not be leaning over your computer...
I thought we all were thoroughly schooled in false equivalence, but WaPo ended their "political aide" article
with, well...
Gettysburg College professor Allen C. Guelzo described Lincoln as “surrounded by smiling enemies,” which prompted him to embed his friends into army camps as well as some federal departments.
“I think that presidents actually do this more than it appears,” said Guelzo, adding that Lincoln dispatched Quartermaster General of the U.S. Army Montgomery Meigs to circulate among the Army of the Potomac to pick up any negative “doggerel” or insults officers made about him.
Lincoln had reasons to fear traitors, defeatists and subversives. Half of his goddamn country (including a large chunk of his officer corps) was committing treason in the name of slavery, there was an active anti-war movement in the loyal states, and the Copperheads were a thing.
edited 20th Mar '17 7:29:54 AM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

Didn't 538 point out that Clinton's odds weren't nearly as good as the media claimed and that Comey's letter screwed the campaign over?
edited 20th Mar '17 1:08:44 AM by M84
Disgusted, but not surprised