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
I hardly think that's a bad thing though. Fiery rhetoric and big dreams are a starting point, and while it's very often the case, perhaps almost universally the case that such rhetoric and grand visions never come to fruition in the way their originators intended, they can and do produce meaningful long term reevaluations among the political elite about what is possible and permissible.
edited 27th Mar '17 9:21:43 AM by CaptainCapsase
So guess where Nunes' got the Information that Trump and his team were incidentally picked up by Intelligence Agencies?
From the freakin' WHITE HOUSE! At least, that's what he claims. Supposedly, someone from Trump's team got that information, showed it to Nunes at the White House on Monday, and then Tuesday Nunes went to the President and the Press.
Nunes needs to go! Even Sean Spicer says that this smells like complete bull!
edited 27th Mar '17 11:17:34 AM by DingoWalley1
Would it still trend downwards, or more importantly stay down, when Trump is out of the news though?
(Perhaps Trump's antics may never leave the news cycle, making this moot, but I really don't like the implications of Trump and his cronies doing something newsworthy every single day.)
I'm not sure Trump will do something terrible every day. But the man just can't get go, he has to have the last word. So he'll be the news all the time because anything from a damning scandal to another Twitter rant will keep going for a week because he won't stop feeding the fire.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
And meanwhile, the rest of the Teapublicans will happily take advantage of everyone paying attention to the monkey to pass all their bills to tear down the government while simultaneously making it a capital offense to even think anything negative about the Glorious Leader.
They've done a piss poor job of passing those bills so far, thanks to their monumental (and predictable) incompetence at actually legislating. So there's hope yet.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"It'll cause damage, but both of those are liable to either not be able to pass, or to backfire hard. The education one especially. I could see things getting to the point that universities and colleges outright refuse to take any students from certain states because the education systems have degraded just that much.
And the EPA? If the EPA is gone, more Flints are going to happen. And people living in those places will make the connection.
I can kind of see the philosophy behind trying to reduce the government, even if I disagree. However, of all government departments to axe the Department of Education and the EPA would be near the very bottom of that list.
It just doesn't make any sense to me.
"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work." -Thomas EdisonThere is a bill filed in Massachusetts that would if passed, set a goal for 100 percent renewable energy by 2035.
http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/02/environmentalists_push_for_100.html
not sure that video works outside of Germany
but Trump now claims he never 'wanted to repeal Obamacare' and how everyone heard his speeches.
Followed by 50 seconds of speeches where he said exactly that.
#ThatsYourPOTUS
edited 27th Mar '17 2:54:21 PM by 3of4
"You can reply to this Message!"The interesting part of this, though, is that is was specifically drafted in response to trump wanting to kill the EPA.
"State Senator Jamie Eldridge, one of three legislators who first filed the bill, pointed out that even if the Trump administration refuses to act on climate change, states can wage their own war. He said in a statement, βMassachusetts has been a leader on alternative energy policy for over a decade, and now with federal assaults on efforts to combat climate change, it will be up to individual states to protect the environmental and health interests of the public.β
http://inhabitat.com/massachusetts-lawmakers-sponsor-100-renewable-energy-bill/
For those people who are hoping that a future president can fix what Trump and the GOP are doing, they've started doing this:
Trump strikes down teacher, school regulations
This article is about Trump repealing the teacher preparation and school accountability rules that will govern things like training regulations for school educators and the like. However, not only do the bills Trump signed repeal those laws, they also make it illegal for future presidents to do anything to restore what Trump is repealing.
If he's dumb enough to actually write in something that says "neener neener you can't undo this" you can damn well bet that some later president will challenge that, and likely win. Because that's fucking moronic and impractical. Limits on presidential power are supposed to come from the judicial or legislative branches, not from previous presidents.
Also, prohibited doesn't seem quite as severe as illegal, but whatever. I'd like to see the actual passage that's about, because this is an article very scant on details. It's quite too short to actually give details.
Nah. Legislative vetos and executive orders binding future presidents are nonstarters, but this was done through "bicameralism and presentment."
They followed the steps its constitutional, if highly immoral, because Congress passed—and Trump signed away—restrictions on powers that Congress had granted in the first place.
Doesn't mean a future Congress can't change it back, just you have to go through a future Congress to change it back.
Yeah while congress (with Trump's approval) can bind a future president a future congress can simply ubind them at any time. Which just shows how important it is for the Dems to retake congress.
edited 27th Mar '17 5:01:53 PM by Silasw
βAnd the Bunny nails it!β ~ Gabrael βIf the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.β ~ Cyran

Probably won't get learned, though.
Your momma's so dumb she thinks oral sex means talking dirty.