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
Let avoid the whole "People not vote for hilary because they are evil" or some idea.
But Trump have many thing in is favor: a weariness of politica status quo, a sense that people hate political cloud of the time but nobody said for politeness(which is typical) which trump broke and atack everything, in fact I will said that he did what many expect from obama in the 2008, to tell those fuckers they suck.
"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"However, I was wishing for another candidate the entire time simply because I did not think her economic proposals or foreign policy. When I said why, people said, "Well clearly you don't understand it." There's a large amount of defensiveness around criticizing any element of her campaign or platform
You've got me intrigued, Charles. Now, I know you regularly decry Republican policies in regards to healthcare and the economy, (to the extent that you often accuse Republicans in your home state as being murderers or say they're in a literal war against anyone not rich enough to be in their club) so I'm wondering what specific policies of Clinton's you disagreed with. Because her economic policies seem, at first glance, to be the sort you'd largely agree with, and while she was stereotyped as being aggressive in foreign policy, I think Trump's administration has proved that America retreating into a cave to tend solely to our own problems does have the effect of eroding our place in the world, leaving other actors to fill it in ways we don't like. (Such as Russia helping to carve up the Middle East and Eastern Europe, China continuing to flout international laws and bend trade agreements and the internet to its will in East Asia/internationally.)
So what didn't you like? (Again, specifically, if you can recall particular items.) How did you want things to be different? And what do you see as the way to create economic/social policies that don't make you like the "murderous Republicans", as you've characterized them on a number of occasions, but also don't line up with the platform Clinton ran on? (If we can lets not talk about what we think Clinton's policies would have really been like because we know her so well and have the inside scoop, but what she ran on, and which you seem to have not cared for. For example, as a concession to the Sanders wing she adjusted her minimum wage raise to $15 an hour instead of $12, IIRC, and said when doing so "If I find $15 practical and get the bill, I'll sign it." I always took that as lawyer speak for "I don't think $15 is practical and am much more inclined to go with the lower number as it is more likely to improve things without being disruptive to low cost of living areas, and I'll use my influence to push Congressional Democrats towards $12 an hour instead, but whatever.")
Edited by TheWanderer on Dec 5th 2018 at 9:42:29 AM
| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |And the GOP in Wisconsin has gutted the executive, after the Democrats swept it.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/05/politics/wisconsin-legislature-power/index.html
Criminals, one and all.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Guiliani finally realized that someone messed with his tweet. (But he still still hasn’t deleted the tweet.)
People are not saying that voters who didn't vote for Clinton are evil, simply that they're ignorant. Which is true, the electorate does not vote based on knowledge or policy. They vote based on emotions and the people who fire them up the most.
Clinton did not fire enough people up (but barely, it was still close) and thus she did not win, simple as that.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yanghttps://www.cnn.com/2018/12/05/politics/wisconsin-legislature-power/index.html
Criminals, one and all.
Is NC still tied up in legal wrangling over that? I thought I remembered a judge smacking it down, but some news sources I saw/heard seemed to indicated that the legal battles are still ongoing.
There's a strong expectation for them to try to do the same in Michigan as well. I suspect both of these states, and any others that try to follow suit, are in for years worth of legal fighting. If allowed to stand, this would definitely pave the way for Republicans to try to steal states where they lose, especially when you put it together with rampant gerrymandering. (According to a stat I saw the other day, in Wisconsin Republicans got 46% of the vote in the recent midterm and yet got 63% of the state legislature thanks to their breathtaking precise and thorough gerrymandering. Only a small handful of state legislators expected to vote for these bills to gut the executive would be in any danger of a challenge by Democrats, and in short Wisconsin is desperately in need of having itself and its electoral districts unfucked by an outside source, as judicial rulings did to Pennsylvania.)
More proof that Republicans suck, hate democracy, and that lame duck sessions either need to end, or the parties in power must be expressly forbidden from making any rules/law changes that would extend beyond the changeover period.
Edited by TheWanderer on Dec 5th 2018 at 10:01:07 AM
| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |Oh, people who didn't vote for Hillary aren't evil (but partly responsible for Trump getting into office). The voters which voted for the first time specifically because there was a candidate promising them to build a wall are racists, though, no matter what excuse they claim.
Edited by Swanpride on Dec 5th 2018 at 7:08:27 AM
Agreed, there is a massive difference between not voting for Hillary and voting for Trump.
The former includes people who didn't vote, which could be irresponsible depending on whether or not they lived in a safe state. But even then it wouldn't be evil, just a wrong thing to do.
But I absolutely consider Trump voters evil, maybe not unsalvageable but still evil (i.e bad people doing a bad thing).
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangVoting for Trump requires some combination of selfishness, ignorance, or malice.
The only way someone could vote for Trump without being "evil" (in this case malicious or selfish) is if they're incredibly, incredibly ignorant.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.![]()
![]()
I think that sums up a lot of what I was trying to say earlier.
@M84 I'm not calling anyone inherently petty. Just saying it's a petty, hypocritical argument (admittedly less so if their attitude towards Sanders shifted over the past few years).
Edited by TroperOnAStickV2 on Dec 5th 2018 at 10:46:47 AM
Hopefully I'll feel confident to change my avatar off this scumbag soon. Apologies to any scumbags I insulted.Generally, I was of the mind Hillary's economic policies were underwhelming. I felt like the economy was in a shitty place and not we needed a far more comprehensive plan than the one she was proposing. The economic situation in the United States is in need of a big overhaul and Hillary was doing her best to pitch small scale reform that would certainly be better than anything Trump was doing.
I've also criticized the handling of the Obama Administration on the War on Terror which has been effectively, "half a foot in, half a foot out" the entire time. Also, the treatment of Russia with a somewhat "as long as he only takes small countries, its fine." A lot of people agree with this policy that it prevents potential escalation but I feel like the situation has just been allowed to fester. Hillary's particular support of the Yemen conflict really bothered me.
You can more or less summarize my opinion of Hillary that her policy promised more of the same under Obama (which is good) but didn't have any of his more radical policies. Change is something that America is in dire need of and that was the general mood of the country on both sides so "stability" was not a message which, emotionally, was resonating that well.
I voted for Hillary Clinton because, again, the feeling of her not being more Left is hardly an excuse to not vote (and help the Right) or vote for Trump (become temporarily insane). However, the economic situation in rural America at the time, opiod crisis, Rust Belt continued decay, and so on was not going to be overhauled by her Band Aid work.
What I really wanted was something more like Obama's more comprehensive energy and economic reform that, bluntly, was probably never going to pass Congress but at the least was a dream worth pushing forward.
If you wanted a sense of why Hillary was divisive, it's the same basic joke as in Wag the Dog where politicians tend to do very well when they're dynamic.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Dec 5th 2018 at 8:25:31 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.I felt Clinton’s economic and foriegn policy platforms were two of her stronger points. The complaint that her economic policy wasn’t as progressive as Obama’s falls a little flat considering her economic policy was literally the exact same as Obama’s, and she has deep foriegn policy bona fides which I’m surprised she didn’t push more in her campaign.
They should have sent a poet.It's better to have good policies that will get passed and signed into law than great policies that will never make it past the first committee hearing.
Once you've established a precedent with the good policy, you can then pass a better one. But if all you ever do is waste time running in place, nothing ever changes. The world changes in increments, not in climactic earth-shattering scenes.
Edited by TobiasDrake on Dec 5th 2018 at 11:49:38 AM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.![]()
![]()
Yeah, that attitude is arrogant. Granted, it depends a lot on WHERE you are, but someone whose political leanings go against the tendencies of their state/region has a lot less pressure to vote than someone in a swing state. Yes, there are a lot of problems with the system as it stands.
And the whole "you don't get to complain about the result" mindset is contemptible about anything. Anyone has the right to complain about anything. You don't have to listen, but as long as they aren't blatantly crossing a line, you've no right to shut them up.
Edited by TroperOnAStickV2 on Dec 5th 2018 at 2:04:33 PM
Hopefully I'll feel confident to change my avatar off this scumbag soon. Apologies to any scumbags I insulted.![]()
Then it's on the politicians to get the message across that yes, they can. Shoehorned Obama reference intentional.
Or "swinging my area is too improbable".
Edited by TroperOnAStickV2 on Dec 5th 2018 at 2:09:42 PM
Hopefully I'll feel confident to change my avatar off this scumbag soon. Apologies to any scumbags I insulted.
It's... Despair Event Horizon is a bit overblown, but the idea of "why do something pointless" is there. Especially if you have ideological hangup with the options presented.
Edited by TroperOnAStickV2 on Dec 5th 2018 at 2:13:48 PM
Hopefully I'll feel confident to change my avatar off this scumbag soon. Apologies to any scumbags I insulted.
There will ALWAYS be "ideological hangups". No candidate is perfect for every single voter.
And no...voting is never pointless. I live in a Blue district in a Blue state, and I voted a Democratic ticket in 2016 and 2018. Because it matters.
Edited by M84 on Dec 6th 2018 at 3:17:15 AM
Disgusted, but not surprised

I was well aware of Clinton's proposals and disagreed with a lot of them. A lot of Democrats did not like her policies but there was a big rift among voters on the Left that it was like, "You have to be insane not to vote for her." Which, given it was against the Donald, I agree.
However, I was wishing for another candidate the entire time simply because I did not think her economic proposals or foreign policy. When I said why, people said, "Well clearly you don't understand it." There's a large amount of defensiveness around criticizing any element of her campaign or platform with some saying, "Well American voters just suck! That's why she lost!"
Which is an opinion that I don't find very helpful.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Dec 5th 2018 at 6:14:13 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.