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
So, more Midterm good news. While most of the 538 models gives the Republicans 20%-15% chance of retaining the House, the reality is that Republicans need polling errors to occur across several states (even nationally) in their favor to win.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-need-a-systematic-polling-error-to-win-the-house/
CNN moves 6 districts in favor of the Democrats.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/03/politics/cnn-house-key-races-final-update/index.html
![]()
Wanting to avoid hostilities is understandable, nothing wrong with that. You just have to realize what’s at risk here.
This isn’t some regional squabble or deterrent action. Russia has been successfully undermining what many would describe as the work of a lifetime. They’ve single-hadedly brought the world order built after the most destructive war in human history all but to its knees, and it’s clear they aren’t going to stop unless someone makes them.
They should have sent a poet.While everything that has been said is true about what Russia under Putin is doing, what I think few are paying consideration to is why.
What could they want from all of this? A sense of national pride? Doing it due to misplaced rage at the West?
I get that Putin and Co. obviously are only in it for themselves - pork barrel and all that - but I don't get the Russian public's motivation for this aggression. I understand that the initial economic reforms were a big disaster due to inept handling, but this bout of aggression in response seems excessive.
Don't know if this should be in this thread or the European Politics one. But it's an interesting question.
I hold the secrets of the machine.Because Putin is an old school Russian nationalist. The dude cut his teeth as a KGB agent stationed in East Germany.
Putin isn't in it to line his own personal pockets. Don't mistake him for some tin pot dictator.
This is 100% a revival of classic Cold War era geopolitics and thinking.
Oh really when?> Putin isn't in it to line his own personal pockets. Don't mistake him for some tin pot dictator.
Hard not to,guy rules a state that's barely democratic and invades neighbouring countries and annexes them
Also he has this huge house
which is basically a palace,which he probably builr thanks to his deep pockets,which in any democratic country would result in scandal.
Edited by Ultimatum on Nov 3rd 2018 at 3:14:40 AM
have a listen and have a link to my discord serverYes, he's authoritarian and imperialistic, but the point they're making is that the guy isn't some petty minor dictator in that he's ambitious and ideological enough to have motivations beyond corruption.
See above.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangTechpriest: I don't know why you think the Russian public's opinion matters at all in this case, since governments don't typically go asking their citizen's opinions on whether or not they should go around committing acts of espionage. Yeah, sure, it seems like a lot of Russians are very nationalistic and suspicious of the West, but that's not why their government is committing specific acts.
Putin has already stolen billions of dollars from the state for himself and his daughter.
The big difference between him and your typical island dictator who bankrupts a nation is Russia is large enough that it can absorb such a loss without really being noticed. 300 billion dollars is more money than he could ever spend in a lifetime but was siphoned off gradually.
It's important to understand that Russia isn't as powerful as the United States or as rich by far but it's pretty damn rich and powerful.
Even in its current mediocore state compared to what Putin wants.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Nov 3rd 2018 at 7:13:30 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.Not really. Putin has yet to demonstrate that his embezzlement is anything more than a side project for his greater aims about Russian Imperialism.
Do not write Russia or Putin and his government off as generic authoritarians. Underestimating them is exactly how they managed to cripple us so badly already.
Oh really when?He stole 300 billion dollars.
There's not really a way around that.
I also don't understand why you feel that's writing him off. You can want to be the richest man on Earth and help Russia become a superpower again.
It worked for Stalin.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Nov 3rd 2018 at 7:14:32 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.Election Update: Gender Might Be Shaping Democrats’ Senate Chances
Basically among the Red State Dems up for election only Claire Mc Caskill (Missouri) and Heidi Heitkemp are at serious risk of losing, and that they're women might be a serious factor in why.
Edited by LSBK on Nov 3rd 2018 at 9:29:21 AM
Alright, kind of have a conundrum while finishing up my research for Tuesday. Most of the projected ballot is straight forward, but I am torn on Angus King: on the one hand, he remains an independent with a few issues I dislike, including voting alongside the GOP more than most Democrats. On the other hand, the only Democrat on the ballot for his seat is someone who has never held office before, wants to tear up NAFTA and any other trade agreement that does not massively favor the US, he seems clueless on gun issues, and there are two missing components in his resume that are deafening in their absence: Reproductive rights, with him refusing to say anything Pro-Choice, and nary a peep about restoring/improving protections for LGBTQ. His 'call everyone to immediate public service' spiel is also kinda freaking me out, and reminding me of some of the pseudo-Leninist whackjobs I have seen on ballots from time to time.
I know soliciting an opinion at this stage is kind of out there, But my home state of Maine is one of the few where Independents can and often do take elections outright rather than merely spoiling major parties.
King votes with Trump approximately 45% of the time, which is about the same as some red state Democrats and actually less than a few of them, like Joe Donnelly of Indiana. On all the major issues, he's voted with the Democrats. The way you're describing this other guy, he actually sounds like he's break with the rest of the party on a number of issues.
That is my fear-his views on trade look like copypasta from a GOP platform, and with so many federal challenges to equality and reproductive rights in Congress as well as the courts, the silence is deafening. Whatever odious views King has on taxes, he voted against the wealthcare bills, he supported LGBTQ equality before most of the Democrats, and his support for reproductive rights has been unwavering. That is a whole lot of uncertainty if he is replaced by the guy who has never held elected office and has zero government experience; plus the issues I mentioned above.
Edited by ViperMagnum357 on Nov 3rd 2018 at 11:20:59 AM
I will say this - King's seat is universally regarded as safe. He is almost certainly not going to lose. Any vote to the Democrat is going to be a protest vote, and if you ask me, the individual in question sounds pretty iffy on a lot of key stuff.
Oh God! Natural light!@Viper: Sounds to me that you've got a very likely, honestly-blue-really DINO (and doing a poor job hiding or explaining the reddy-greeny bits) vs an actual Indie (who wears his purple on his sleeve). Go for the Indie. At the very least, he's being honest about being purple, and you know what the shade of it he actually is, too (and if you can stand the mix).
Edited by Euodiachloris on Nov 4th 2018 at 4:13:39 PM
You know, I have never heard of Angus King being anything but a reliable Democrat until now. Are you sure that he isn't one?
Even a dyed-in-the-wool, Trump-is-a-baby-eating-monster Democrat will sometimes vote for Trump e.g on disaster aid and resolutions celebrating the 4th of July which are actually a large proportion of all laws voted on. So "votes for Trump N% of the time" does not necessarily say much.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Wait, turn hostile? Have you not been paying attention recently, Russia has been hostile for a while now.
That’s just not true. Even during the height of the Cold War the USSR did not want a war, it feared that the US did and was terrified of the idea, even the most hardline parts of the USSR establishment only argued for war because they thought the US was going to start a war and they wanted to preempt the US by striking first.
You are vastly underestimating how hard it is to start a war when neither side wants one, Russia does not want a war, it wants to be allowed to carry out warlike actions without facing retaliation, which is exactly what you’re suggesting.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran