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
Gabbard is exactly the kind of Democrat we should primary. Instead of going after the scary bogeyman of "career politicians, oooooooo", we should be focused on taking down anti-LGBT dictator-apologists like her.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Graham says he's reopening probes into Clinton emails.
An example is AOC's successful primarying of Joe Crowley. Crowley held the seat in his district, a relatively "safe" district (low threat of real competition from Republicans), and as many representatives in such districts do, he assumed his seat was unassailable.
He was proven wrong when AOC took the Democratic nomination from him in the primary election, and then she went on to win the Safe District general election to take what had been his seat. He rightly thought he was safe from Republican competition but failed to take into account Democratic competition.
But - context because I just criticized the practice of targeting career politicians - Crowley was an asshole so f*ck him.
Edited by TobiasDrake on Jan 24th 2019 at 12:09:58 PM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.The investigation into Trump violating the emoluments clause, the EPA being unable to do its job, the IRS being unable to do its job, failing border and national security, all of it helps the GOP. Other than approval numbers, the shutdown is a massive boon to Trump and the GOP, which is why those approval numbers (and in particular getting the blame where it needs to be) is so important.
It's only a feature because they're morons, let's not take Republican propaganda at face value. They don't want a smaller government, they just want a government that has less social funding.
They absolutely want the military and intelligence service arms of the government to be very powerful, and their donors don't want the critical work the other branches do to be left undone.
As such the government shutdown is not a good thing for the Republicans ideologically or practically if they think it is they're either insane or morons (or both). Which admittedly some of them are.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Jan 24th 2019 at 2:15:29 PM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang![]()
![]()
The government shutdown is fantastic for certain other parties, though, like Russia. It weakens our economy; it weakens our security apparatus; it may permanently degrade the ability of critical agencies like the FBI to hire and retain top talent.
I'm not saying that Vladimir Putin called Donald Trump on the phone and told him to permanently shut down the government or else he'd release the "pee pee tape", but Putin is certainly rubbing his hands in glee at what's going on right now.
Edited by Fighteer on Jan 24th 2019 at 2:15:10 PM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
![]()
Basically anyone who's an incumbent.
https://www.rollcall.com/news/democrats-pelosi-trump-vote
30 Democrats suggest Pelosi give Trump a vote on wall funding if he reopens government
Letter designed to provide clear process, timeline for debate, not guarantee passage
An excerpt:
Led by freshmen Rep. Elaine Luria of Virginia, the letter lays out a process that would guarantee a House vote — but not passage — on the $5.7 billion Trump has requested in border wall funding, as well as other funding he is seeking for border security needs.
The letter is not designed to signal support for the president’s funding request. Rather it is intended to lay out a process for the House to truly debate the proposal — with opportunities for Democratic amendments — in hopes that would be enough of a commitment for Trump to agree to reopen the government.
“Effective governing should not result in winners and losers,” Luria said in a statement after releasing the letter. “Our job is to do the most good for the most people. We feel this proposal would gain support across the aisle, allow a transparent process, and encourage much-needed reforms to our immigration system.”
Before releasing the letter, Luria told reporters she had given Pelosi a heads-up that the letter would be coming. She said it is not meant to suggest a disagreement with Democratic leadership’s position of not negotiating until the government is reopen.
“My frustration is not with our leadership in the House,” Luria said. “My frustration is in the Senate and the fact that we have voted nine, now 10 times to open the government. So we’ve given all kinds of opportunities for the Senate to take action.”
More than half of the members who signed the letter are freshmen. In a nod to that, the letter notes, “We understand that this shutdown was not caused by the 116th Congress, but it is our job to fix it.”
Edited by sgamer82 on Jan 24th 2019 at 12:16:44 PM
I'm not saying that Vladimir Putin called Donald Trump on the phone and told him to permanently shut down the government or else he'd release the "pee pee tape", but Putin is certainly rubbing his hands in glee at what's going on right now.
Oh certainly, it is absolutely in the interests of the various actors hostile to the US government to have it continue as long as possible.
My point was mostly just that the Republicans aren't one of them, they just want a friendly Federal Government to enforce the hegemony of their Reactionary ideology for perpetuity.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Jan 24th 2019 at 2:20:27 PM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangThat.
Bernie's supporters kicked up a stink in 2016 about "career politicians", people who've been in Washington for a long time, needing to be taken out of the picture. Since Bernie lots 2016, primarying "career politicians" to replace them with fresh blood has become something of a goal in the movement he started, lost control of, and then found his way back to.
There's even been suggestions that Congresspeople should be term-limited so that no one can ever become a career politician and everyone has to go at some point.
The advantage to getting rid of career politicians is that it prevents people from becoming embedded in Washington such that nothing short of retirement or death will ever remove them (coughcough MITCH cough).
The disadvantage is that career politicians actually know what the f*ck they're doing. Sturgeon's Law applies to political ideas as much as anything else. Everyone goes to Washington thinking they have the BOLD RADICAL PLAN that will fix everything, and then they have to actually work out the logistics of their ideas, compare and compete with the opposition party, find out how doing one thing snowballs into others, etc. etc.
Career politicians have skill and experience in legislation, while newcomers have enthusiasm and 10 bold ideas, 9 of which have already been tried by fifty billion newcomers before them and have never, ever, ever actually worked when taken out of hypothetical and put into practice.
So a healthy mix of both is ultimately preferable. Fresh, new ideas carefully filtered by experienced politicians to weed out the stupid ones and then pushed through with years of hard-learned skill.
Edited by TobiasDrake on Jan 24th 2019 at 12:20:45 PM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Take note that these Democrats want a wall vote after Trump has reopened the government. In other words, when Trump does something that he won't do. This isn't Democrats disagreeing on strategy.
Term limits for Congress get introduced every year as bills and never go anywhere. There is some science out there about the effects and the coda is that they don't appear to have any useful effect on legislative performance.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanTerm limits are an absolutely awful no-good option, if a politician is in office too long it's either because 1) they're genuinely popular in which case arbitrarily removing them is against the spirit of democracy or 2) they or their party electoral domination through unsavory means in which case term limits won't actually address the problem and electoral reform would be far superior.
The cost of term limits is a loss of collective experience and there are no real upsides, it's a bad idea that should only ever be done for very powerful individual roles like the Presidency.
I know that no-one has argued for them but I just feel the need to preemptively say that.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Jan 24th 2019 at 2:23:23 PM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangBernie Sanders (and/or his supporters) raising a stink over "career politicians" when he's been in elected office for 40+ years could be shown in the dictionary as a quintessential example of hypocrisy.
Edited by Fighteer on Jan 24th 2019 at 2:25:47 PM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Career politicians is also a term used to refer to politicians who haven’t had normal jobs, you do get some politicians who go strait from university to working for a political group, often as an assistant of some sort to an elected official then they become an elected official after never having a ‘normal’ job.
Edited by Silasw on Jan 24th 2019 at 8:01:22 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran"can't think of any other field of work where having experience is counted against you."
If you have high level political experience you've definitely done at least one thing that has negatively affected large swathes of people. So despite whatever the balance of your record shows , the longer you've been there the more mud there is to sling.
Eh, Term Limits have a point.
Russia would be very different if Putin hadn't been able to Loophole Abuse it.
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.Russia would be very different if Putin hadn't been able to Loophole Abuse it.
Since I specifically said that individually power posts like the Presidency are the exception this doesn't really contradict my point.
I don't mind term limits for executives, but in general, they rather massively fail a cost-benefit analysis and I haven't heard any convincing arguments otherwise.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang

Seems like Gabbard is about to be primaried
. Probably doesn't have much of a chance, but (FiveThirtyEight) we can hope
. And the links in the FiveThirtyEight are - oy.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman