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

megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#268001: Jan 20th 2019 at 7:59:05 PM

Bernie has a very Marxist understanding of social class I think. He seems to think that most oppression and other ills of the world stem mainly from wealth inequality, so if we can solve that, the rest, like racism, sexism, etc, will sort itself out.

AzurePaladin She/Her Pronouns from Forest of Magic Since: Apr, 2018 Relationship Status: Mu
She/Her Pronouns
#268002: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:06:17 PM

[up] Right, but that's the issue. You have to accept that bigotry is one of the causes of inequality, not merely the result. By ignoring its role frequently, he minimizes the conflicts so many people face because he is so sure he knows best, despite not having any ground for it.

He needs to tackle sexism, racism, anti-LGBTQ bigotry, etc as an issue all to its own, not just as an afterthought. Otherwise, he is leaving those groups out to dry so he can get his pet policies through. And that's not okay.

Regardless of how well intentioned he is or not.

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
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
#268003: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:09:23 PM

Sidebar, it says something about American politics when your platform can push minorities to the wayside and still be considered "progressive".
To be fair to Sanders, when he was running in 2016 most of his stuff on minority issues came off as more of a Single-Issue Wonk rather than apathy towards their difficulties; it's since the primaries ended in 2016 that it seems he's gotten worse about that, still beating his economics-will-solve-everything drum, blissfully unaware that no MAGA-doffed 'Murican will vote for him because he doesn't hate (insert racial slurs here) enough.
Nevertheless, none of what his positions are, are wrong. They're just incomplete.
Also my opinion of Sanders; he's not the worst candidate the Dems could field in 2020, but he's not the best either.

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#268004: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:15:21 PM

Mind you, again, solving class inequality is a major good thing. Also something very few Democrats talk about. It would be awesome if minorities could have their economic problems solved. It's just that many whites would try and prevent that.

Like they did during the New Deal.

There's also the fact that solving minority and majority economic problems aren't capable of being done piecemeal. You have to tackle the problems as a whole.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jan 20th 2019 at 8:19:31 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
PhysicalStamina i'm tired, my friend (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Coming soon to theaters
i'm tired, my friend
#268005: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:25:07 PM

I agree that solving class inequality is good.

I also think that solving racial inequality is good. And equally urgent. Unlike Sanders.

And all "tackling the whole" means in practice is helping white folk first. Blacks, Hispanics, etc... we just gotta patiently wait, I guess.

Edited by PhysicalStamina on Jan 20th 2019 at 8:25:50 AM

i'm tired, my friend
TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#268006: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:32:40 PM

Rising tide may lift all boats, but some of them still have holes that need to be patched.

New Survey coming this weekend!
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#268007: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:32:54 PM

Trying to lift all boats with a rising tide doesn't take into account that some of the boats have leaking bullet holes.

[nja]

Edited by M84 on Jan 21st 2019 at 12:33:05 AM

Disgusted, but not surprised
Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#268008: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:34:54 PM

My main issue with Sanders is that he continually puts his foot in his mouth when it comes to issues that aren't economics. There have been a few moments where he's acknowleged them in a sensible way, like when he said much of the opposition to Obama was based on racism, but overall he ranks poorly by continuing to undermine the importance of "identity politics". He might even be cognizant of the specific problems LGBT+ people and racial minorities face, but from the way he talks he seems to think that economics will fix their problems by itself, which is a naive view.

It's pretty clear to me that his popularity is largely due to his fiery oratory more than anything else, which is unsurprising. Personal likability and charisma has always been one of the most important factors in politics, especially for the average person who at best had vague sympathies towards one ideology or another.

Edited by Draghinazzo on Jan 20th 2019 at 12:36:19 PM

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#268009: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:35:42 PM

I wish the phrase "identity politics" would die in a fire already, tbh.

Disgusted, but not surprised
Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#268010: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:36:24 PM

[up][up][up] Whoever sells metaphorical duct tape will make a killing.

Edited by Parable on Jan 20th 2019 at 8:36:38 AM

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#268011: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:36:29 PM

Who coined "identity politics" as a term, was that Sanders?

TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#268012: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:38:37 PM

No. It's been around since the 70s, but didn't enter popular political lexicon until there were a number of post-2016 hot takes from, mostly white, mostly male, journalists.

New Survey coming this weekend!
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#268013: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:53:02 PM

Question: Weren't Sanders's economic policies also quite pie-in-the-sky, overly optimistic, and/or didn't hold up to scrutiny?

Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#268014: Jan 20th 2019 at 8:55:52 PM

Incidentally, NBC was caught telling its staff not to call Steve King racist.

Earlier this week, the standards editor at NBC News sent an email advising the network's staff not to refer to statements made by Rep. Steve King of Iowa — statements in which he wondered just what was so wrong with being labeled a white supremacist or a white nationalist — as racist... "Be careful to avoid characterizing [King's] remarks as racist," the editor wrote. "It is ok to attribute to others as in 'what many are calling racist' or something like that."

There was an outcry on social media after that email became public — what's with the abundance of caution extended to a literal defense of white supremacy? — and NBC News quickly changed tack. It was hardly the first time a newsroom got tripped up trying to characterize King's behavior: just last fall, the New York Times had to course-correct after being dragged on social media for referring to King's history of "racially tinged remarks."

Hylarn (Don’t ask)
#268015: Jan 20th 2019 at 9:01:19 PM

Question: Weren't Sanders's economic policies also quite pie-in-the-sky, overly optimistic, and/or didn't hold up to scrutiny?

They wouldn't have gotten through a Republican congress at all (which is what he'd have had to work with), and would probably be watered down even by a Democratic one. Whether they'd work if they were somehow magically implemented is up for debate, but most economists I've heard discuss the matter don't think much of them

PushoverMediaCritic I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out. from the Italy of America Since: Jul, 2015 Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out.
#268016: Jan 20th 2019 at 9:10:13 PM

Personal likability and charisma has always been one of the most important factors in politics, especially for the average person who at best had vague sympathies towards one ideology or another.

Not always. Well... kind of always, but it didn't become a major factor until Kennedy. Television revolutionized politics because now politicians could give their big speeches directly to everyone in America at once, instead of giving it to a large crowd and the rest of America had to read the speech in the newspaper. Because of this, vastly more people than ever before were able to judge politicians by their on-stage performance and demeanor.

Radio, too, to a lesser degree, but there's a big difference between hearing a speech and watching a speech.

Edited by PushoverMediaCritic on Jan 20th 2019 at 10:12:11 AM

TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#268017: Jan 20th 2019 at 9:32:40 PM

I mean, his plans of course didn't hold up to scrutiny, but his healthcare plan, at the time, mind you, was atrociously terrible.

New Survey coming this weekend!
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#268018: Jan 20th 2019 at 9:55:35 PM

And all "tackling the whole" means in practice is helping white folk first. Blacks, Hispanics, etc... we just gotta patiently wait, I guess.

If you try to help white people first then it won't work. Same for any individual group. The problems are systemic and it's not a case of just bandaging things, you need to actively change the nature of how wealth is distributed in America period.

https://kafb.org/hunger/

1 in 5 children in Kentucky go hungry. You need to make sure that people don't go hungry, particularly children.

It doesn't matter if they're white or black.

Hungry children are hungry children and it's intolerable. That's a systemic issue.

What needs to be done is to establish some way of making sure we don't get distracted from the important facts that there are large cross-racial issues that need to be tackled all at once as well as specific racial issues that need to be tackled individually.

The ruling class wants to divide and conquer on racial lines but the poor must be united together to change the fact there's hungry children in America period.

And yes, that's a very easy thing to say as a white person. Which is what people like Mitch take advantage of.

They wouldn't have gotten through a Republican congress at all (which is what he'd have had to work with), and would probably be watered down even by a Democratic one. Whether they'd work if they were somehow magically implemented is up for debate, but most economists I've heard discuss the matter don't think much of them

They're also very similar to what Hillary eventually put as a platform. There was a lot of Bernie supporters needlessly trashing the Hill and Vice Versa.

Tribalism in politics.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jan 20th 2019 at 10:00:35 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#268019: Jan 20th 2019 at 10:03:59 PM

I strongly recommend reading Ijeoma Oluo’s book, So You Want to Talk About Race. She begins the book by recapping a discussion with a white liberal friend. She pointed out raising the minimum wage doesn’t fix the fact that there’s massive racial discrimination in the hiring process (resumes with Black and Latinx names get far fewer responses than identical resumes with white names). Raising the minimum wage won’t stop police profiling or end mass incarceration, etc.

Black voters are the strongest part of the Democratic Party. Their needs shouldn’t be an afterthought. And if you uplift the needs of black people, that will also help poor white people.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#268020: Jan 20th 2019 at 10:17:48 PM

200,000 children struggling with hunger isn't a question about discriminatory practices. It is an issue about food being kept from the public. Minorities absolutely suffer worst and need to be dealt with more and with reforms for their specific issues.

But 200,000 children are struggling with hunger in Kentucky.

The number should be zero.

There's no "either or" in race and helping the poor overall. You can do both and there's no reason not to.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jan 20th 2019 at 10:18:31 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#268021: Jan 20th 2019 at 10:17:55 PM

"I'll tell you what's at the bottom of it. If you can convince the lowest white man that he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him someone to look down on and he'll empty his pockets for you!"

-LBJ.

That quote, is the, and I do mean THE single most succinct explanation of nearly every problem in America.

New Survey coming this weekend!
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#268022: Jan 20th 2019 at 10:20:57 PM

[up][up]I mean, you can and should, but if it's a question of only doing one, what usually happens is that white people get the help, and everyone else, especially black people are left out.

Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#268023: Jan 20th 2019 at 10:21:24 PM

[up][up] Absolutely.

The problem is when, again, people assume all boats are lifted by the rising tide and 'identity politics' should be a backseat concern

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#268024: Jan 20th 2019 at 10:21:33 PM

There's a religiously beloved movie in West Virginia called MATEWAN which stars (among others) James Earl Jones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matewan

The movie takes the premise of a conflict among Native West Virginians, Italian immigrants, and Southern blacks who have left the Deeper South to escape the brutality of white bigotry. All of them are working for the corrupt, cruel, and evil mine bosses.

The protagonist of the movie points out that basically all of the groups are ready to kill each other over racism, unwillingness to help outside their group, and refusal to acknowledge their real enemy were the mine bosses who were playing them against one another.

Only together does the union make any progress but several times it almost falls apart because everyone believes the others will get benefits they all won't—and they all have miserable horrible lives.

And for whatever reason, my state is full of people who can't process that blacks and whites among the poor need to work together (w/ immigrants) if they want all to benefit.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jan 20th 2019 at 10:22:16 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#268025: Jan 20th 2019 at 10:24:56 PM

Also, remember the whole evangelicals that we all know and hate?

Guess how they got started? Abortion?

lol, nope.

Their origins begins with fighting Segregation. In fact, before Reagan's election, they largely didn't care about abortion at all!

New Survey coming this weekend!

Total posts: 417,856
Top