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

Demongodofchaos2 Face me now, bitch! from In a Cultivation World (Ancient one) Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
Face me now, bitch!
#250976: Aug 2nd 2018 at 6:41:54 AM

I've been saying that Robert Mueller is basically the real life Pheonix Wright.

Does that make Donald Trump the real life Redd White?

Watch Symphogear
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#250977: Aug 2nd 2018 at 6:48:41 AM

I don’t know if it was mentioned, but yesterday Congress approved a new military budget of $717 billion. [1] That’s a $83 billion increase over last year, and we’re slowly inching back to the record high from 2011. If funding continues to increase this way we could hit 1T within the decade.

There’s been a lot of discussion on this, I think ultimately it’s right for the wrong reasons. The military needed a spending increase, but this budget isn’t putting it in the right places.

The areas that received the largest increases were stateside upgrades, overseas contingency, and “other”. There was very little increase in personnel funds, it seems like most of the money is going towards classified programs and our wars in Syria and Africa.

Edited by archonspeaks on Aug 2nd 2018 at 6:54:34 AM

They should have sent a poet.
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#250978: Aug 2nd 2018 at 6:49:06 AM

That's about how I feel on it as well.

Oh really when?
Steven (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
#250979: Aug 2nd 2018 at 6:50:42 AM

Nah, Mueller would be more like Edgeworth.

Remember, these idiots drive, fuck, and vote. Not always in that order.
Demongodofchaos2 Face me now, bitch! from In a Cultivation World (Ancient one) Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
Face me now, bitch!
#250980: Aug 2nd 2018 at 6:52:20 AM

@steven: He just needs to wear a fancy cravat.

Watch Symphogear
kkhohoho (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#250981: Aug 2nd 2018 at 8:08:45 AM

Mueller is a classic Noir antihero. Just look at that chiseled jaw and that thousand yard stare. All he needs is some moody jazz and he'd be set.

unknowing from somewhere.. Since: Mar, 2014
#250982: Aug 2nd 2018 at 9:05:04 AM

[up]That is why I laught at Trump trying to nickname him "blood hound muller" because if anything it really set is noir anti hero imagine around him.

"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"
TheWildWestPyro from Seattle, WA Since: Sep, 2012 Relationship Status: Healthy, deeply-felt respect for this here Shotgun
#250983: Aug 2nd 2018 at 11:03:40 AM

The White House press conference over Russian meddling is broadcasting live right now.

Sarah Sanders has been trying to guilt trip the CNN correspondent - Jim Acosta - into admitting that they've been personally attacking her and her religion.

Also, it seems funny that they're all aggressively promising to take down Russia and Russian interference when they've been openly cooperating with them in the past.

Seems like this is more of the classic "dictator grants concessions and pretends to be nice as it becomes apparent their power is really threatened." Or, in this case, as Mueller gets closer and closer to the truth.

Edited by TheWildWestPyro on Aug 2nd 2018 at 11:08:59 AM

CrimsonZephyr Would that it were so simple. from Massachusetts Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
Would that it were so simple.
#250984: Aug 2nd 2018 at 11:40:07 AM

[up][up]"Bloodhound Mueller" sounds like a hardboiled detective.

Which he is. It's actually kind of amazing that we have a textbook version of Always Gets His Man IRL.

"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."
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#250985: Aug 2nd 2018 at 11:46:51 AM

@archon, garcon: I can’t say I really agree with that line of argument. The United States’ time in the sun is slowly but surely coming to an end, there’s really no way around that absent a black swan event utterly ruining the developing world, it’s just a question of how long US dominance will last, and what the world looks like the day after.

Spending more on guns and less on butter will in the short term delay more severe indicators of the decline of American power, but in the long term it would seem* inevitable that the ever rising cost of keeping that up will lead to growing economic stagnation, inefficient spending, and rent-seeking behavior by procurement officials and military contractors. All of that’s assuming you can get the public to support such spending, and the global military interventions that come with it, when in reality public support for overseas deployments of US military forces continues to decline.

* I haven’t found anything addressing this question specifically, but forecasts of the global economy in 2050 by PWC, the IMF and other institutions put the US share of global GDP in 2050 as around half of what it is today, down to 10% from around twenty. The real clincher is that considerably more of that projected growth is concentrated in places which aren’t all that friendly to the United States (such as China) or are fairly indifferent (such as India) versus American allies in Europe and Asia which would seem to imply that simply doubling US military spending as a percentage of GDP from 3.5% to 7% to sustain current levels of military superiority could be a major lowball, especially if more countries move from the “ally” group into neutrality or hostility as a result of the current administration burning bridges left and right.

While that’s not out of line with cold-war era budgets, that level of peacetime spending is also enough to be a noticeable drag on the economy, enough that I suspect it would be politically untenable with the sweeping ideological narrative of the Cold War having lost its urgency in the public consciousness.

__________________________________________________________________

Regarding the Mueller investigation, the big sticking point is that his findings only matter for Trump if Congress is willing to impeach and convict him, and so far there’s every indication the GOP will not abandon Trump under any circumstances unless his support among the Republican base starts seriously slipping. Impeachment requires 66 votes in the senate, and the Democratic Party unilaterally impeaching Trump, while probably preferable to the alternative sends us further down the road of constitutional hardball towards the kind of democratic breakdown and constitutional crises that have tended to characterize presidential democracies elsewhere in the world.

Edited by CaptainCapsase on Aug 2nd 2018 at 2:59:21 PM

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#250987: Aug 2nd 2018 at 12:22:34 PM

[up][up] Those predictions for China and India seem a little optimistic. China's economy in particular is likely to break apart in the next few decades, and as India's stabilizes it will level out. I'm not really sure I can get on board the imminent "end of an empire" narrative with almost no evidence to support that.

The West will continue to rely on the US for their collective defense, that isn't likely to change barring a geopolitical realignment of unprecedented proportions similar to the two world wars. Our military spending doesn't just benefit us alone, major cuts to our military spending would be catastrophic for Europe.

The issue with this budget is that it allocates a large amount of funding to things with very little military necessity. It seems clear that they want to escalate engagements in the Middle East without properly funding them, so instead they direct money to hideously inefficient contingency funds. There's also an increasing focus on big-ticket items the military doesn't even want, like more tanks.

They should have sent a poet.
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#250989: Aug 2nd 2018 at 12:45:35 PM

[up][up] A Chinese economic collapse is far from assured as much as certain pundits keep repeating it; as much as the CCP tends to drag its feet on economic reforms, especially in the Xi era, there’s still a huge range of macroeconomic policy options available to China’s policymakere to avert a hard landing. It’s still very possible, but so is a scenario where China muddles through and stabilizes as “a moderately prosperous nation” on the road to becoming a developed country, which is what these projections show. Demographics will eventually become a serious problem for China, and that more than anything is why this is going to be a multipolar (rather than Chinese) century, but it’s hubristic to assume we can count China out.

Edited by CaptainCapsase on Aug 2nd 2018 at 3:52:20 PM

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#250990: Aug 2nd 2018 at 12:52:39 PM

[up]Hmm, seems fair. But isn't a scenario where the PRC muddles through and stabilizes also one where the US hegemony is not replaced by them? I'm not saying we'll be exactly as powerful as we are now (or rather after Trump's done with us) but it seems like "muddling through" doesn't really align very much with replacing/undercutting the US.

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#250991: Aug 2nd 2018 at 12:55:15 PM

[up] A China that muddles through isn’t a global hegemon but it is the world’s largest economy and a lower end developed country, and is also capable of beating the US in a shooting war over Taiwan, and powerful enough to seriously challenge the US Navy within range of Chinese coastal defenses. That’s what people mean when they talk about a multipolar world; no single power dominates.

But this isn’t just about China, being a global hegemon means being more powerful than everyone else in basically all possible theaters, and keeping that up is what I see as the real problem.

Edited by CaptainCapsase on Aug 2nd 2018 at 3:59:07 PM

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#250992: Aug 2nd 2018 at 12:56:37 PM

Why would there be a shooting war over Taiwan?

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#250993: Aug 2nd 2018 at 1:02:00 PM

[up][up][up][up] I'm not quite ready to count China in either, though. There's no indication they're going to pursue any of those economic solutions, and there's no way their economy will remain at its present strength. The scenario you're presenting with a militarily and economically superior China is unlikely to manifest based on all current evidence.

Even with a superior economy, it's unlikely China would be able to command the political power the US does. Their military, while nothing to laugh at, is unlikely to be able to meaningfully oppose the US military for quite a while, if ever.

They should have sent a poet.
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#250994: Aug 2nd 2018 at 1:02:06 PM

[up][up] If Taiwan were to formally declares itself independent from the PRC, China is highly likely to invade the Island; that’s a red-line they are dead serious about.

[up] As I said, this isn’t solely about China, it’s about the relative power of the US versus the rest of the world, which is decidedly trending in favor of the world, with an emphasis on parts of it that aren’t stalwart US allies. That makes it harder for the US to maintain the total superiority it enjoys now across nearly all potential theaters of conflict the further into the future we go, since nearly ever potential adversary will be capable of putting up a better fight than they are now, and most (current) US allies will also be losing ground relative to the larger world.

Edited by CaptainCapsase on Aug 2nd 2018 at 4:07:55 AM

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#250995: Aug 2nd 2018 at 1:08:38 PM

Keyword "If". You seemed to throw it in there kind of randomly unless I missed something. It's the first time Taiwan appears on this page

Edited by sgamer82 on Aug 2nd 2018 at 2:10:46 AM

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#250996: Aug 2nd 2018 at 1:08:45 PM

As I said, this isn’t solely about China, it’s about the relative power of the US versus the rest of the world, which is decidedly trending in favor of the world, with an emphasis on parts of it that aren’t stalwart US allies. That makes it harder for the US to maintain the total superiority it enjoys now across nearly all potential theaters of conflict the further into the future we go.

Sure, but that isn't really "the end of the empire" as much as it's a downgrade from Hegemon to large Great Power. Which frankly is not some horrible fate or collapse in any real sense.

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#250997: Aug 2nd 2018 at 1:11:54 PM

[up][up][up] The US, and NATO by extension, will enjoy military supremacy for the foreseeable future. Political supremacy is another story, but there won't be any military challengers any time soon. Russia, China and India have no ability to meaningfully oppose the US in the military arena, and Russia and China in particular are intensely aware of that fact which is why so much of their money goes towards unconventional warfare and anti-access.

Edited by archonspeaks on Aug 2nd 2018 at 1:12:55 AM

They should have sent a poet.
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#250998: Aug 2nd 2018 at 1:18:47 PM

[up][up] My point wasn’t about the end of the US as a major world power but rather that this isn’t something that more military spending (relative to GDP) is really going to help much with in the long term; the US either needs to be much, much more efficient with how the military budget is spent (and achieve this in a way that other nations can’t easily copy) or expand its network of allies to maintain its edge, neither of which are things the current administration seems to be interested in, it’s just more unilateralism.

Edited by CaptainCapsase on Aug 2nd 2018 at 4:24:11 AM

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#250999: Aug 2nd 2018 at 1:25:23 PM

[up]Then we agree, mindlessly raising the military budget while destroying soft power are not the means to reliably maintain or expand a modern hegemony.

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#251000: Aug 2nd 2018 at 1:27:23 PM

[up][up] We already have both capabilities no other nation can match, and the largest network of allies. Unless the current administration does way more damage that isn't changing.

We're in agreement that the military budget doesn't need to simply expand but be spent more effectively.

They should have sent a poet.

Total posts: 417,856
Top