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 had a weird dream that Trump was Yertle the Turtle.
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Oh, bother.
Trump has thankfully stayed out of my dreams.
Disgusted, but not surprised
Disasturbator
That's why I have Dream Catchers deployed around my bed,taking no chances that Trump is capable of dream walking
Edited by Ultimatum on Jul 16th 2018 at 2:27:33 PM
New theme music also a box
Trump visited my dreams once.... For some reason he was in the room while I was briefing my old bosses on a mundane file. He had a creepy as fuck smile but thankfully just Tweeted the entire time.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
It's a bird.
I'm pretty sure a lot of people once said very similar things about regular cars too.
"Why would I need one of these things when a horse is both twice as fast and needs less maintenance?"
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.
Jupiterian Local
The thing that most people don't understand is that "self-driving cars" don't exist yet. The most advanced version of that sort of thing that you can currently actually buy and use is basically just lanekeeping + adaptive cruise control. On the highway, it will keep you in your lane and at a set speed when it can (but will automatically slow down to avoid rear-ending slower-moving cars in front of it). That's about it.
It's certainly not nothing, but it's not exactly fully autonomous, either. One of the big limitations of such systems is that they basically can't deal with stationary objects while they're travelling at highway speeds — the false positives are so common and the consequences (slamming on brakes and/or swerving to avoid the obstacle) are so bad that the system literally just ignores stationary objects. This has caused accidents when cars on "autopilot" plow into stationary objects like traffic barriers or stopped vehicles.
That problem is the main reason why you're required to pay attention even with "autopilot" on. Not because the automated system will suddenly freak out and swerve wildly out of your lane for no reason, but because it won't do that even if it needs to.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Isn't the Tesla autopilot system meant to require that you keep your hands on the wheel?
"Yup. That tasted purple."
Jupiterian Local
"meant to" nothing, there are literally sensors in the steering wheel and the system will literally pull over and stop if you let go for too long. So naturally, some people wait until it beeps a warning at them, grab the wheel just long enough to reset the warning timer, and then go back to ignoring it.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I think we're getting off topic a bit.
To bring it back to politics, Trump just blames America for increased tensions with Russia and refused to say whether he believes Russia interfered in our election.
The two presidents held their first summit meeting as Mr. Trump was throwing into doubt longstanding assumptions about the West’s political, military and trade alliances. He began the day by blaming the United States, not Russia, for tensions between the two countries, though he later said both sides were to blame.
The timing was exceptionally awkward, just days after the Justice Department indicted 12 Russian intelligence agents on charges of hacking the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, in an attempt to aid Mr. Trump. Speaking briefly with reporters before the meeting, Mr. Trump said they would discuss trade, nuclear arms and China, but he did not mention Russia’s interference in the 2016 election that brought Mr. Trump to power.
Later, Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin both said that Mr. Trump had raised the issue of election meddling, but Mr. Putin again denied that it had taken place.
No surprise at all, but Trump believes Putin's denial, rather than his entire Intelligence Community.
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-putin-helsinki/index.html
Trump just got retweeted by the Russian foriegn affairs Twitter account.
I refuse to link to it, it was this tweet.
They said "We Agree"
Edited by megaeliz on Jul 16th 2018 at 12:58:19 PM
Get this, the Orange House is filing a case in the WTO against countries who have retaliated against their trade tariffs.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/us-tariffs-wto-1.4748459
"Its illegal for our victims to defend themselves and fight back." This is going to get tossed out....now that we'd ever abide from a ruling in the US' favor, because they historically ignore the WTO when it (often) goes against them.
The good news is that if they are bothering to challenge them, it means that the counter attacks are inflicted the desired economic pressure and damage.
Edited by Rationalinsanity on Jul 16th 2018 at 2:06:23 PM
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Need I remind you of what he said during a debate? "No puppet! No puppet! YOU'RE the puppet!".
...it makes me feel ill to think that's verbatim. I'd like to think that this will hurt Trump drastically, but you never know...
The Mod with the Migraine
Economic prosperity is here to stay, because the Trump administration has declared the War on Poverty has been a huge success, and the poor have clearly lost so let's have a big parade for the victors of the war.
President Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers declared in a report earlier this week that the war on poverty “is largely over and a success,” saying only around three percent of Americans are really poor and the best way to help them is to boost the economy as a whole.
“Over the past 54 years since President Lyndon B. Johnson’s declaration of a War on Poverty, federal spending on welfare programs targeting low-income households has grown dramatically, contributing to a substantial reduction in material hardship,” the White House Council of Economic Advisers wrote, noting the programs had contributed to help poverty plunge by 90 percent.
That new messaging strategy provides fresh support for the administrations stated goal of tying public benefits to work requirements more closely. The report argues that more than half of those who are not disabled and receive benefits work fewer than 20 hours per week. “Expanding work requirements in these noncash welfare programs would improve self-sufficiency,” the report said, “with little risk of substantially reversing progress in addressing material hardship.”
Many are criticizing the White House for understating the problem of poverty in the United States. And they also see this latest report as part of a strategy to demonize the poor to make it easier to cut social programs. “It’s all part of a carefully calculated strategy to reinforce myths about the people these programs help,” Rebecca Vallas, the vice president of the poverty to prosperity program at the liberal Center for American Progress, told the New York Times. The ultimate goal is “to smear these programs with a dog-whistle of welfare, in order to make them easier to cut.”
V
I get that the U.S.A. dislike Russia, but I have a hard time taking it seriously. Why? Well, I live in Sweden, and our president, with no proof why, is saying that Russia is the biggest threat to Sweden. As previously stated, I still understand American concerns over it, but I do have a hard time taking people saying how dangerous Russia is seriously due to Stefan Löfven's... very strange comments.
Edited by MenInGreyToBlak on Jul 16th 2018 at 7:51:06 PM
Professional Forum Ninja
And it looks like Ajit Pai has done something good for the sake of media: Pai says he has "Serious concerns" about the Sinclair-Tribune merger, saying evidence suggests Sinclair will still hold control of stations it's divesting for the deal, and will propose it be sent to an administrative law judge.
It's still possible he's talking out of his ass though.
In a statement, Pai questioned the company's plans to get the deal approved by selling off some television stations and said he would propose sending the deal to be reviewed by an administrative law judge.
"The evidence we’ve received suggests that certain station divestitures that have been proposed to the FCC would allow Sinclair to control those stations in practice, even if not in name, in violation of the law," Pai said.
The move to toward an administrative law proceeding is a step toward likely killing the merger altogether. In 2011, AT&T and T-Mobile withdrew a merger application after then-FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski circulated a similar proposal to the commission.
The Sinclair, Tribune deal would have given the combined media company massive reach among the country's television-viewing audience, putting it over the top of the legal limit on serving 39 percent of households.
In order to bring the merger in compliance with the ownership limit, the two companies agreed to divest 23 local television stations around the country.
But some of those sales would still leave Sinclair with some control over the stations' operations.
Critics said that the sidecar deals were an effort to evade the law while still allowing Sinclair to spread conservative, pro-President Trump programming.
"I think Sinclair has been disingenuous about divestitures for months now," Gigi Sohn, who served as an adviser to Democratic FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, told The Hill in an interview. "I think the last filing didn't satisfy anybody that Sinclair wasn't going to still have some control over these stations."
Sinclair declined to respond to a request for comment from The Hill.
The announcement also comes as a welcome surprise for many opponents of the deal who had been concerned that the FCC was giving conservative Sinclair special treatment.
The agency's inspector general had opened an investigation into whether Pai's efforts to deregulate the broadcasting industry were intended to clear regulatory roadblocks for the deal. Pai has denied that his campaign to roll back media ownership restrictions was designed to help any single company.
The scale of the deal though also attracted an unlikely alliance of groups on the left and right in opposition.
Last week, a coalition of liberal consumer groups, cable companies and the conservative news outlet Newsmax, petitioned the FCC to delay its review of the merger while a federal court reviewed an agency order that would have helped the deal gain approval.
Jessica Rosenworcel, the lone Democrat on the commission, hailed Monday's announcement.
"As I have noted before, too many of this agency’s media policies have been custom built to support the business plans of Sinclair Broadcasting. With this hearing designation order, the agency will finally take a hard look at its proposed merger with Tribune," she said in a statement.
"This is overdue and favoritism like this needs to end."
The decision also rattled investors, with Sinclair's stock price dropping sharply after Pai's statement.
I don't see what's strange about it, Russia wants to subvert the Democracy's of anyone who isn't already their puppet. That desire to seize control of your political apparatus (or at-least drive it into chaos) is a very real threat, and I highly doubt there are other threats that Sweden faces that are more dangerous.
Russia has violated Swedish airspace to conduct a simulated nuclear strike on Stockholm. Moscow is quite literally Sweden's only serious threat when it comes to foreign states. Same goes for the entire region.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
A procrastination in of itself
Russia wants to dismantle the entire EU and is funding far right nutjobs to do it, that kinda makes it a threat to Sweden.
Also who else would be the biggest threat to Sweden? Denmark? Disgruntled polar bears?
"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran
Yes, if not Russia, than frankly who would you consider the biggest threat to Sweden then?
Citation? I'm finding articles about simulated nuclear attacks on Sweden, but none that indicate they violated Sweden's airspace.
Edited by Larkmarn on Jul 16th 2018 at 2:29:34 PM
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
Just a harmless giant from a foreign land.
Nevermind, missed RI's post.
Edited by 3of4 on Jul 16th 2018 at 8:13:50 PM
"You can reply to this Message!"
From Reuters twitter:MORE: Putin says we suspect U.S. intelligence officials were involved in channeling $400 million from businessman Browder to Hillary Clinton election campaign
Yeah, he's going after the USIC and Magnitsky Act very aggressively.
Different case, part of a series of incidents. Don't need to violate for a nuclear attack.
Edited by TerminusEst on Jul 16th 2018 at 11:36:48 AM
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
Just a harmless giant from a foreign land.
So, countdown for Trump to tweet angry about US Intelligence Services because Putin told him that?
V
That wasn't my comment on who is Sweden's enemy, it's why they are. Russia doesn't have anything against Sweden, no recent wars, no power to gain if that's something people worry about, Sweden isn't even part of NATO. So why would Russia go specifically after Sweden, when there are so many other countries. If anything, the multiple statements that Russia is an enemy might just make them exactly that.
Also, the power thingy, small little Sweden is nothing to Russia, there is nothing to win over.
Edited by MenInGreyToBlak on Jul 16th 2018 at 9:03:07 PM
This is going to be fun. [1]
Edited by megaeliz on Jul 16th 2018 at 9:41:28 AM