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
>Ginsberg Hospitalized.
Wait what, NO! Nonononono. Hoping she recovers...her resigning oor dying would be very bad.
>Kemp I don't dare hope that he loses in the end, but it would be very nice...
Edited by AzurePaladin on Nov 8th 2018 at 10:39:30 AM
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -FighteerI'm sure it's exactly a sign that he's confident he's won. The votes are in and being counted; there's very little he can actually do to influence things now. The damage is already done.
His resignation is a token gesture. Like someone getting caught embezzling billions of dollars and then demonstrating his remorse by donating $500 to charity.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.So did y’all not click the link I specifically included for further context on Kemp?
![]()
As far as I can tell in Florida, if any vote is within .5% (which it is), the State is forced to automatically recount. I'm not sure if the Race has been called yet, though, so I can't say if recounting for the Senate has begun. I also think that the Governorship is still currently out of reach (but not by a lot) to have that recounted.
Edited by DingoWalley1 on Nov 8th 2018 at 10:47:12 AM
Governor's race is heading there too, according to the Orlando Sentinal
.
(Not sure how reliable it is, but here's the story anyway)
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -Fighteer
The Miami Herald is also indicating that we might be looking at a few recounts in Florida. The Governor’s race is still only a possibility though.
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article221341425.html
Because I'm just a Doom And Gloom kind of a person, I thought I'd share something about how Trump's race-baiting attacks will get him re-elected in 2020
, thanks to the country's demographics.
I thought this was a risky play. Yes, Trump used racist appeals in his 2016 presidential campaign, but they were tied to his interventionist economic message of entitlements, health care, and infrastructure. As president, Trump hasn’t delivered on that full promise. He’s followed through on the racist appeals with punitive immigration and criminal justice policy, but he’s rejected a more liberal approach to the economy, instead embracing Republican orthodoxy with steep tax cuts and a yearlong effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act. It was unclear, from my view, if he could generate similar turnout without a heterodox pitch on the economy.
The results from Tuesday suggest that his strategy might have been an effective one, even if it promises to destroy the country’s social cohesion. Democrats won the House of Representatives, yes, but results in the Senate—and in several races for governor—show how Trump’s gambit paid off. After weeks of relentless demagoguery from the president, the Trump coalition was on war footing, ready to counter an energized Democratic base. Unsurprisingly, President Trump is treating Tuesday as vindication of his race-baiting and a victory for the Republican Party. There’s truth in that analysis. Against a diverse class of Democrats promising economic security, Trump and the GOP fielded a largely white and male phalanx of candidates offering cultural dominance, and in critical places, it worked.
Trump’s strategy supercharged the underlying realignment of the electorate that we’ve been watching since 2016. Urban and suburban voters revolted, producing the Democratic majority in the House and governorships in several states where their turnout can determine outcomes. Rural and exurban whites also turned out, deepening the red color of many of the states Trump won in 2016.
There’s an exception to this dynamic: the Midwest. In Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin, Democrats recovered lost ground thanks to both turnout and persuasion. Candidates there mobilized suburban and urban voters and recouped enough losses with working-class whites to secure wins in critical Senate and gubernatorial races.
You can point to several factors that made the difference for Democrats in those states versus places like Missouri or Florida, where Sen. Claire Mc Caskill and gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum lost their races. Midwestern campaigns capitalized on still-existing labor infrastructure to mobilize union members and bring them back into the Democratic fold. College-educated voters are numerous enough in several of these states to make a key difference, and the president is deeply unpopular with them. And then there’s the provisional nature of white working-class Trump support, which likely swung thanks to the tangible promises of support and benefits that the president reneged on.
The suburban collapse and Midwestern regression tell an important story: that Trump can only count on his base, which hasn’t expanded beyond its narrow demographic confines. But “narrow” isn’t the same as “small.” The president’s racial demagoguery laid the path for several Republican candidates. Republican Ron De Santis worked hard to tie Gillum, his black opponent, to crime and disorder, and he won the Florida governorship. Indicted congressman Duncan Hunter of California ran a viciously Islamophobic campaign against his Muslim American opponent, Ammar Campa-Najjar, and won. Georgia Republican Brian Kemp accused his black opponent, Stacey Abrams, of ties to black radicals and warned of subversion should she win the governor’s mansion, and it’s likely to have worked for him, too.
The problem for Democrats remains the same: Donald Trump’s coalition of rural and exurban whites is large and geographically well-distributed. This has given Republicans an advantage in the Senate, which the party shored up, and it gives Trump a similar advantage in the Electoral College. Plot Tuesday’s statewide results onto a map of the 2020 election and—with Ohio and Florida under his column—Trump is just a stone’s throw from winning re-election.
Make no mistake, Democrats won a victory in the midterm elections. Their newfound House majority represents a substantial majority of Americans who want a significant check on the president. And in building that majority, they’ve increased their gains with college-educated voters and shown how diverse candidates can prevail (or come close) in majority-white electorates. And if the Senate map shows a way forward for the president’s re-election campaign, the House map—and the wide national Democratic majority—suggests Democrats have a real path to unseating Trump in two years.
But Tuesday makes equally clear the Democratic Party must find a response to the president’s political racism. Stoking white fear and resentment works well enough to energize a powerful electoral coalition and secure critical victories, and unless Democrats can push back effectively, they may find themselves losing to Trump for a second time come November 2020. How they do that is an open question, but the success of candidates of color—and the near success of Andrew Gillum in Florida and Stacey Abrams in Georgia—suggests that a direct confrontation with the politics of race and division is possibly the only way forward.
Anyone saying that Trump's victory or defeat is guaranteed in 2020 is a moron, I will remind everyone that Trump barely won against a deeply flawed candidate with decades of (undeserved) baggage.
Should we assume victory? Absolutely not but white racism barely let him win in 2016 and I see no reason to believe that it can guarantee his victory in 2020.
Furthermore the article including Florida in Trump's camp when it just gave more than 1 million ex-felons their votes back (who are 40% of Florida's African-American community) pretty much tells me exactly how little I need to take them seriously, De Santis barely won and the political landscape in Florida is likely to change massively. It's massively preemptive and counterfactual to assume that the state is definitely for Trump.
Also when looking to 2020, Democrats rebuilt the Blue Wall in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin
which is very important to theoretically winning the Presidency. Which if anything tells me that my impulse to dismiss that article was right, it would be a mistake to assume that Trump's 2020 chances are set in stone. If any President could lose their second election then it would be Trump.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Nov 8th 2018 at 11:56:34 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
White Identity politics may have only barely pushed them over the top, but now that they are they will no doubt move forward with voter suppression and other anti-democratic policy.
It’s already proven to have worked for them so I see no reason to not expect them to do it even more. The newly reenfranshised people in Florida is a great thing, but I will expect efforts to keep them disenfranchised to be immediate and constant.
That’s why if/when we get back into power we are going to need to completely overhaul the system in order to prevent anyone (and in particular the Republicans) from being able to establish the minority rule we’ve been drifting towards for some years.
It’s already proven to have worked for them so I see no reason to not expect them to do it even more. The newly reenfranshised people in Florida is a great thing, but I will expect efforts to keep them disenfranchised to be immediate and constant.
They've done this for decades, including 2016. The year in which he barely won against a deeply flawed candidate.
I don't see any reason to believe that it could guarantee Trump's victory.
Yes, I agree.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangVoter suppression is a great tactic when you are working in a direct popular election.
When you are working with swing states and an Electoral College you need to put it into the right places, and that includes states like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania where Republicans don't hold the governorship anymore and thus will eat vetos if they try.
So the tactic won't be as effective as that.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanYou can't hope to fix entire system just by voting the democrats in,to mend the broken system you'd need to get both parties to put aside their differences work together,unfortunately the Republican party thrives in the broken system with gerry mandering and redrawing election maps so they have more,so it's never going to happen
If it any attempts are made it will be done gradually,and by that I mean slowly,like decades from now you might see some change depending on who wins elections and whatnot
have a listen and have a link to my discord serverDemocrats have now time to strengthen the voting rights in the states they have (remember, they have multiple trifectas) and the maps will be redrawn in 2020, too. There will be still the issue with the electoral college, but it will be much, much harder for the Republicans to snatch the win next time. I am actually way more concerned about the Senate and the Supreme court and the judge appointments in general than about the next presidential election. The only worry I have regarding it is that it will actually happen. I wouldn't put it past Trump to try to cancel it altogether (hence it was so important that the Democrats get the house).
Also, in 2020, a lot will be different. At this point the impact of the tariffs will be felt by a lot of people in red states. If Trump continues to attack the EU (not that I hope that he will, but he might), doubly so, because the EU knows exactly what to target as a response.
Also, more school shooting survivors will have reached voting age, and more Republicans will have died. I know this sounds morbid, but if you look at the age demographic of the voters of those two parties, well, currently the Democrats have a future. The Republicans don't.
> Also, more school shooting survivors will have reached voting age, and more Republicans will have died. I know this sounds morbid, but if you look at the age demographic of the voters of those two parties, well, currently the Democrats have a future. The Republicans don't.
The two are not connected,just because some Republicans might have died and survivors of a shooting have reached voting age does not suddenly mean the Republicans have no future,utter nonsense
have a listen and have a link to my discord server

He didn't get the job just yet. So far he hasn't been called the winner and he won't be until every vote is counted - which could include some of the ones he tried to hold back.
So let's hope that this isn't a sign that he is confident that nothing can stop him at this point.
Btw, something I have been wondering regarding the whole story: If votes are put "on hold", how does this work with the rule that voting has to be anonyme?