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

Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#252076: Aug 14th 2018 at 12:16:50 PM

Its not just you. His particular trial is supposed to go by fast.

TheRoguePenguin Since: Jul, 2009
#252077: Aug 14th 2018 at 12:19:20 PM

That can be blamed partly on Ellis, who has insisted the trial not drag on.

wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#252078: Aug 14th 2018 at 12:21:48 PM

This article discusses the definition of centrism and argues that to become truly centrist, the Democratic Party must move far left.

In fact, there are two kinds of political centers: There’s the ideological center—the one that Democrats are waging a civil war over. And there’s the majoritarian center—the one where most of the people are. If Democrats hope to be a majority party, it’s the majoritarian center they need to embrace. And to understand the difference between these two strains of centrism, it’s important to understand exactly what the center is measuring.

...

The U.S. economy was never as strong, nor its middle class as secure, as during the three decades when the real minimum wage and the overtime threshold and public subsidies for higher education were at their peak. Medicare for All wouldn’t burden employers; it would relieve them of their costliest employee benefit. And if we do need to raise taxes on the wealthy in order to rebuild the middle class, so what? There is simply no correlation between top tax rates and growth. Stand up for the middle class for a change and you might be rewarded. But there is absolutely nothing to gain—economically or electorally—by aping a trickle-down narrative that just isn’t true. On economic issues, the Democratic Party has long embraced an ideological definition of centrism that simply has nothing to do with the center. And both the party and the nation have suffered as a result.

I highly recommend reading the entire article. It’s a very thoughtful analysis of what centrism means, and what the true center is in American politics in 2018.

AngelusNox Warder of the damned from The guard of the gates of oblivion Since: Dec, 2014 Relationship Status: Married to the job
Warder of the damned
#252079: Aug 14th 2018 at 12:24:19 PM

The diplomatic spat with Turkey seems to have reached a crescendo, as Trump just signed a bill blocking the sale of F-35 fighter jets, which they've invested over a billion dollars in, and calling for a full review of our military cooperation with them This could potentially include closing our airbase there, removing nuclear weapons from their soil, and ending material and financial support for their military. [1]

This comes after the recent sanctions put their economy in a tailspin, with Erdogan lashing out at both the US and his domestic opponents.

In one hand, it is good because fuck Erdogan and his bullshit.

On the other, surely Putin will love to encroach even more in the Middle East by turning Turkey away from US and EU towards Russia.

Edited by AngelusNox on Aug 14th 2018 at 4:25:06 PM

Inter arma enim silent leges
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#252080: Aug 14th 2018 at 12:25:12 PM

Trump made the right call in not selling Ankara F-35s, they'd have handed the stealth suite specs to Moscow in a heartbeat (if they haven't already).

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
AngelusNox Warder of the damned from The guard of the gates of oblivion Since: Dec, 2014 Relationship Status: Married to the job
Warder of the damned
#252081: Aug 14th 2018 at 12:28:07 PM

Turkey going full apeshit and selling F-35s to Russia was already a major concern for NATO and the Pentagon, when Erdogan started courting with Putin.

You know the saying about stopped clocks, but the call to abort that deal was being pushed more by the Pentagon than by the Mango Mussolini, Trump is just ridding along and sadly making him be the reasonable one this time.

Inter arma enim silent leges
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#252082: Aug 14th 2018 at 12:56:25 PM

It's clear that Erdogan can't be trusted but letting Turkey become a Russian ally would be a catastrophic setback.

It'd give them direct land access to the middle east and even more access to the Mediterranean.

Oh really when?
DingoWalley1 Asgore Adopts Noelle Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Can't buy me love
Asgore Adopts Noelle
#252083: Aug 14th 2018 at 1:08:24 PM

[up] I know this isn't the Turkish Politics thread, but my question is; would the Nationalist Movement Party support Erdogan joining the Russians? I have a hard time believing that the Nationalists would side with Russia, considering Russia and Turkey have long been enemies of each other. If anything, they might instead join the Republican Party's Coalition and destroy Erdogan's Party's Rule...

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#252084: Aug 14th 2018 at 1:09:35 PM

Turkey is kind of that guy you heard was untrustworthy but you met, befriended, and were like, "Okay, he should show up to our wedding. He's got an undeserved rep."

Then you hear about the domestic violence charge and then he shows up completely drugged up to the gils, yelling and screaming that you never respected him.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Aug 14th 2018 at 1:09:28 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#252085: Aug 14th 2018 at 1:20:46 PM

[up][up] You’re right, it’s not the Turkish politics thread. And I don’t know; like most posters in this thread, I’m not very well versed on the nuances of Turkish politics.

I would really like to hear everyone’s thoughts on the article I posted [up]x7 above; it’s very relevant to the current state of US politics.

Edited by wisewillow on Aug 14th 2018 at 4:21:15 AM

Izeinsummer Since: Jun, 2013
#252086: Aug 14th 2018 at 1:24:00 PM

Crimsonzephyr: No. That is not how nuclei work. Activity is inversely proportional to half-life. If it is still radioactive in a thousand years, it is barely radioactive at all. High-level waste is dangerous because of fission products -the bits left over when uranium and plutonium are smashed apart. These have ratios of neutrons and protons that are very unstable, and fall apart further until they hit a configuration that is stable. That process basically runs to completion in 400 years - at which point, the former fuel rod contains uranium, plutonium, and Technetium. You know what you call that? "Fuel".

It is not significantly more dangerous than the uranium ore that was dug out of the ground in the first place at that point. You cant eat it or make jewelry out of it, that would eventually kill you, but in terms of left over trash one could dig up from our civilization, it just does not rate any level of concern as a hazard at all. Your descendants are far, far more likely to come down with.. everything poisoning from a coal ash pond fucking up their water than the tiny quanity of heavy metal buried under some mountain is to ever hurt them.

Edited by Izeinsummer on Aug 14th 2018 at 1:29:58 AM

BlueNinja0 The Mod with the Migraine from Taking a left at Albuquerque Since: Dec, 2010 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
The Mod with the Migraine
#252087: Aug 14th 2018 at 1:28:32 PM

I would really like to hear everyone’s thoughts on the article I posted [up]x7 above; it’s very relevant to the current state of US politics.
I would absolutely love to see the 2020 Dem candidate running on a platform of universal Medicare, $15 min wage, and paid family leave, paid for by higher capital gains taxes and maybe a tax on stock market sales.

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#252088: Aug 14th 2018 at 1:36:43 PM

I would really like to hear everyone’s thoughts on the article I posted [up]x7 above; it’s very relevant to the current state of US politics.

I've read it.

And more or less immediately I take issue with the line "Every time Democrats lose a presidential election, blue America promptly collapses into civil war—and never more so than in the aftermath of 2016.", this is true but it's not some uniquely Democratic phenomenon.

This happens to Republicans too for the simple fact that in the US when a party wins the Presidency their candidate will act as the leader of the party, but when a candidate loses they don't become the leader for obvious reasons and thus factional infighting begins to determine what course the party will take to (hopefully) rectify the factors that led to defeat.

Other than that I more or less agree with their point, that programs like Medicare for All or raising the minimum wage are not radical and have a very real viability that can and has translated to electoral success.

Though I resent their apologism for the people who saw Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton as equivalent, yes neoliberalism is a major factor responsible for Trump but that doesn't make the people who voted for him any less degenerate nor does it change the fact that Clinton's economic policies were not neoliberal.

Such people did not bother to actually research what she proposed and just assumed that she was a centrist who wasn't going to make anything better, for that they wholly deserve my scorn and contempt while I also acknowledge that Democrats can't afford to be seen in that way again.

I would absolutely love to see the 2020 Dem candidate running on a platform of universal Medicare, $15 min wage, and paid family leave, paid for by higher capital gains taxes and maybe a tax on stock market sales.

Agreed, for the primaries I personally only intend to support someone who runs on medicare for all. Anything less just isn't acceptable and doesn't justify supporting them in the primary.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Aug 14th 2018 at 4:40:14 AM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#252089: Aug 14th 2018 at 1:43:58 PM

Those are pretty much the baseline requirements to be acceptable as a Democratic Presidential candidate at this point, although I find it amusing how they seem to have been cherry-picked to distinguish Clinton from not-Clinton, as if falling slightly short of the Progressive Dream platform makes you the Antichrist.

Clinton was running on a realist platform: she knew quite well that Congress would never pass Medicare-for-all and envisioned a public option that would seamlessly merge into fully nationalized health insurance once enough people bought into it. The litmus test of "$15/hr minimum wage" is also a bit too arbitrary for my tastes. We ought to be going for a living wage, full stop: tying it to a fixed dollar amount makes for an easy rallying cry without a lot of actual substance behind it.

In other words, the exact number is not as important as whether a person earning that wage can support themselves without requiring additional government aid in the form of welfare, food stamps, etc. — not counting health insurance, of course. Anything less is effectively taxpayers subsidizing employers.

Edited by Fighteer on Aug 14th 2018 at 4:48:05 AM

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#252090: Aug 14th 2018 at 1:47:38 PM

[up]Well said.

I don't disagree with the article but it seems... unnecessary? Like there are 5 Democratic plans to expand healthcare and A Better Deal for the American Workers so calling for the Democratic Party to go left when they've been consistently going left since 2016 seems rather silly.

It's like how a vocal portion of the Populist Left seems unable to understand that it's not the 90's and Bill Clinton isn't going to swoop out of the bushes and implement neoliberalism. Which is... annoying.

And yes I too would rather a living minimum wage that scales depending on the local economic conditions, but $15 has sunk in the popular consciousness and thus is probably the best thing to focus on due to that reason alone. It's just more memorable then the a variable minimum wage.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Aug 14th 2018 at 4:48:52 AM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#252091: Aug 14th 2018 at 1:52:19 PM

I too would rather a living minimum wage that scales depending on the local economic conditions,

Honestly, that's a bad idea, and here's why: it promotes wealth stratification. If a living wage in NYC is $30/hour, a living wage in Podunk is $10/hr, and you set those as your standards, then people living in NYC will just keep getting wealthier compared to the folks in Podunk. Not healthy in the long term. This could lead into a very lengthy and complicated debate about economics that I'm not really up for at the moment, though. cool

It's fine if cities set their own wage standards. That maintains a spirit of competition between cities that set a lower wage in the hopes of attracting employment vs. a higher wage to improve the quality of said employment.

Edited by Fighteer on Aug 14th 2018 at 4:57:18 AM

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#252092: Aug 14th 2018 at 1:52:21 PM

My issues with Clinton's economic policies boil down to the fact they're designed to benefit the employed and struggling middle-class. There wasn't a sufficient benefit for the genuinely destitute in America.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#252093: Aug 14th 2018 at 1:53:06 PM

[up][up]Hmm interesting, I wasn't aware.

I'll take your word for it then smile

[up]This is an argument I can at-least respect even if I disagree, much better then that "Clinton and Trump are the same" privileged garbage.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Aug 14th 2018 at 5:04:43 AM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#252094: Aug 14th 2018 at 2:14:59 PM

Clinton was running on a realist platform: she knew quite well that Congress would never pass Medicare-for-all and envisioned a public option that would seamlessly merge into fully nationalized health insurance once enough people bought into it. The litmus test of "$15/hr minimum wage" is also a bit too arbitrary for my tastes. We ought to be going for a living wage, full stop: tying it to a fixed dollar amount makes for an easy rallying cry without a lot of actual substance behind it.

I disagree. I think that progressive campaigns should run on bold policy proposals, because those proposals will get watered down during the process of taking proposal to bill to law. Running on a “realistic”, watered down proposal is setting yourself up for a worse eventual bill.

For example, if you run on fight for $15, by the time the bill is passed, it may be a $12 minimum. If you run on a $12 minimum, by the time you get it passed, it’ll probably be $10.

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#252095: Aug 14th 2018 at 2:18:26 PM

[up]Hmm, this is a convincing argument. But what happens when people feel betrayed that you didn't get them exactly what was promised? Obama ran on Change and many of his promises were either unable to be provided or were watered down, which caused people to feel betrayed.

I think there is something to be said that we should be bold and inspire people but I think there is a risk to promising too much and giving people unrealistic expectations.

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
TVRulezAgain Since: Sep, 2011
#252096: Aug 14th 2018 at 2:19:01 PM

[up][up][up][up] Did you read her policies? She had an entire platform on poverty.

Edited by TVRulezAgain on Aug 14th 2018 at 2:19:36 AM

Imca (Veteran)
#252097: Aug 14th 2018 at 2:59:51 PM

While it is harder to pull off, I think UBI or a reverse income taxes are better long term ideas then raising the minimum wage.

The later is way too likley to cause employers to enact massive layoffs, and the former doubles as a saftey net with the apcoaching fact that large chunks of the population will become unemployable (even looking over those who are already)

speedyboris Since: Feb, 2010
#252098: Aug 14th 2018 at 3:10:30 PM

First time voting in a primary today. Interested to see what the results are.

megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#252099: Aug 14th 2018 at 3:35:48 PM

On the Manafort Trial going surprisingly fast, there’s a reason that that the Virginia federal court is known as “The Rocket Docket”.

Edited by megaeliz on Aug 14th 2018 at 6:38:36 AM

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#252100: Aug 14th 2018 at 3:41:32 PM

Someone, please remind me that just because someone's endorsed by Our Revolution does not make them a bad candidate if I liked them before.

Edited by Ramidel on Aug 14th 2018 at 2:48:21 AM


Total posts: 417,856
Top