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
"Ideological hangups" came with a silent "severe", I probably should have voiced it.
![]()
![]()
That explains quite bit, I feel, you live in a blue state anyway, so you have a less cynical mindset about Democratic chances in your area. I'd be the same way.
![]()
Then what is the best way to convey that message, to inspire people? Actually asking, not just being a smartass.
Edited by TroperOnAStickV2 on Dec 5th 2018 at 2:37:05 PM
Hopefully I'll feel confident to change my avatar off this scumbag soon. Apologies to any scumbags I insulted.I think everyone is wrong here. On one hand, your vote is your primary way to influence government and not using it can screw over a lot of people. If you aren't voting, you do lose out on that chance to get a candidate that will not screw over other people. And if you then complain, well, you had a shot to at least try and you didn't.
On the other hand, if your views significantly diverge from the major candidates on issues you feel are important due to the way American elections are run, telling them "We're not going to actually do anything you want us to do, but give us your vote anyway" is going to feel understandably like you're being taken advantage of.
And that's why primaries are important.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Dec 5th 2018 at 2:37:59 PM
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -Fighteerits definitely a case of stupidity. i mean, after Kanye said that slavery was a choice. support of Trump among Afro-Americans went up by 10%.
![]()
![]()
Yeah, no. I live in Florida, a state that regularly decides to be screwy. I still decided to vote, and there are many others I know in red states and/or districts that voted as well. Such defeatism and fatalism is not valorous in any way, shape, nor form.
Edited by Kakuzan on Dec 5th 2018 at 2:39:13 PM
Don't catch you slippin' now.I would like a source for this, because this doesn't sound like a thing that's actually true.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangHell if I know; I'm not a politician. I mean, I guess there's always the option of informing people that the whole Red State / Blue State thing is largely a self-fufilling prophecy, which is what I'm doing now. That seems to be working okay from my perspective. Or you could use Beto O'Rouke as an example; he probably would've flipped Texas if the GOP hadn't spent the big bucks to defend it.
But in any case, I largely don't think the onus is on the candidate to correct whatever statistical misunderstanding the voters might have about the process. I mean, they obviously need to whatever they think they have to get people to vote for them, but it's not an area where it makes sense to blame them for not doing it, if you follow me.
Isn't the general wisdom that the more "powerful" person has more of the fault for whatever happens? Ergo, the onus SHOULD fall on the candidate.
Edited by TroperOnAStickV2 on Dec 5th 2018 at 3:17:15 PM
Hopefully I'll feel confident to change my avatar off this scumbag soon. Apologies to any scumbags I insulted.Obama's early economic policy proposals were far more drastic in scope, including a switch to nuclear power cross the board. This was when there was a lot of hope on his part (wrongly) for Republican cooperation for repairing the economy versus pointless blocking for blocking's sake.
But bluntly, Hillary's policy at the end like Obama's was not going to help rural or Rust Belt America the level its needs which was a comprehensive massive change.
And let's just say we disagree about foreign policy.
It's hard to get excited about a candidate when there's actual hunger in your state that won't be affected by her plans.
https://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/kentucky
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Dec 5th 2018 at 12:20:46 PM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Clinton supported nuclear energy, and given how uneven Obama’s record on the subject was he’s hardly a good person to compare with.
Clinton’s policies would have helped middle America. Full stop. The whole “if it doesn’t solve everything I don’t want it” stance is ignorant of the way progress actually happens, as Tobias pointed out above.
Edited by archonspeaks on Dec 5th 2018 at 12:28:30 PM
They should have sent a poet.I think this is down to there being a lot of uncontested elections in the US, likely due to a high barrier to entry when it comes to running for office.
As for the importance of voting, it always matters, because you vote has an impact even if your party can’t win, hell even if you spoil your ballot it has an impact.
I’ve given details about how in the past and can do so again if people need reminding.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranWhich alternative? Trump? No, but Charles has made it clear that he still favoured Hillary over Trump and voted such.
The hypothetical rural socialist candidate that Charles wants to exist, probably not.
Guys, not every criticism of Hillary is secret apologia for Trump.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranPerhaps not, but that does not mean we should ignore the issues.
You can support someone's candidacy without being blind to all the ways they could be better. Hell, I'd argue its necessary to criticize the people we're supporting. You can't expect someone to improve or to see the changes you want to see if you never try, right?
Edited by AzurePaladin on Dec 5th 2018 at 3:50:26 PM
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -FighteerThis.
I don't agree with all of or even much of Charles' criticisms but I would never think he was a Trump apologist.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Dec 5th 2018 at 3:50:25 PM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangMiddle America would benefit from Hillary but that isn't the area I think she fails as I'm more concerned with the genuinely destitute in America. A group which benefited tremendously under Obama despite Republican sabotage
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.

Yeah, by that logic, the only time voting matters is if you're in one of one-in-a-billion cases where the candidates end up 1 vote apart.
And, like, if you actually look at vote totals, it's rare for either party to get below 40% in any statewide race. No states are Red or Blue enough for the advantage to survive everyone who thinks 'I won't vote, because my favoured party can never win anyway' choosing to vote anyway.
Edited by Gilphon on Dec 5th 2018 at 2:28:06 PM