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
#269476: Jan 30th 2019 at 4:26:09 PM

Surprise, suprise, Evil Turtle is scared of voting.

On Senate floor Mitch Mc Connell rips a federal holiday for Election Day as part of a “power grab” by Democrats to win elections.

Mc Connell said Democrats want “generous new benefits for federal bureaucrats and government employees” including Election Day holiday and up to six days of paid leave “for any federal bureaucrat who decides they’d like to hang out at the polls during an election.”

Mc Connell thinks those federal workers would use their time off to work to elect Democrats. He also ripped federal matching funds for candidates, etc. in HR 1, which he calls “The Democratic Politician Protection Act”

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#269477: Jan 30th 2019 at 4:28:42 PM

We can't let people vote, they might vote for someone other than us!

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#269478: Jan 30th 2019 at 4:31:53 PM

[up][up]It's both funny and sad (mostly sad) how many Republicans legitimately seem to think that and not understand the problem with it.

Like, they legitimately think it's unfair.

Edited by LSBK on Jan 30th 2019 at 6:32:10 AM

Oruka Since: Dec, 2018
#269479: Jan 30th 2019 at 4:35:55 PM

Fallllll of. the. Senior Mutant Evil Turtle, vote-suppressing as he hurtles, straight past reason into gurgles, Senator Kentucky, clings on.

danime91 Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
#269480: Jan 30th 2019 at 4:37:04 PM

[up]I did always think Shredder had the cooler design.

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
#269481: Jan 30th 2019 at 4:43:30 PM

At least Bill Gates is dedicating some portion of his wealth to combating climate change.
IMO, Bill Gates giving away money now is very close to Too Little Too Late. And frankly, he could give away ten times as much money and still be filthy rich.
For reference, Bezos gives 0.0906% to charity.
I'm surprised it's that high an amount.
The nature of capitalism, is that, given enough time, the market will ALWAYS produce billionaires.
My objection isn't the existence of billionairesnote . It's the vast gulf between the tiny handful of people at the top, and the sociopathic, predatory, short-sighted way they've been working to game the political and economic system to rake in more and more, by ensuring that the money goes into a virtual black hole instead of remaining in circulation to help the rest of the population via social programs.
Some people imagine billionaires are innately people who must have built their hordes of treasure Smaug style by taking it from the pockets of the working dwarf.
Because a lot of them are.
I would even go as far as to argue wealth inequality is not necessarily a sign of something wrong in society. There's nothing morally wrong with being wealthy in and of itself.
I think it depends on the degree of wealth inequality. IMO, bouncing up that top income tax bracket, and adding a new top bracket to the estate tax, would do a great deal to reduce the amount of hoarding that many of the rich can do, and improve the rest of the economy.
How do you guys think the veritable cornucopia of democratic presidental candidates will work for the party in 2020?
I expect that by March at the latest, over half of them will have dropped out. By June, if not before, we'll have coalesced around a single candidate. I'm hoping for Warren, but I haven't seen a declaration from anyone who isn't a better option than the KKKlandidate squatting in the White House.
If there aren't enough jobs they still obviously can't get them.
For most places in the US, saying "we'll train you for a job within 500 miles" means they will have a job. It'll just require them to move to a city. If they don't want to do that, well ...
some dickhead in the government decides to paralyze the administration, and the workers and business owners are the one who end up paying the bill!?
Government of the billionaires, by the billionaires, and for the billionaires.
Is it too much to ask for that Schultz just goes the way of Ross Perot election-wise?
Ross Perot, IIRC, actually did help to divide up the Republican votes, helping Bill Clinton get into the job, so ... maybe not the best comparison there.

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw
RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#269482: Jan 30th 2019 at 4:50:11 PM

IMO, Bill Gates giving away money now is very close to Too Little Too Late. And frankly, he could give away ten times as much money and still be filthy rich.

I see you missed the part also in that discussion about how it's really hard to give away that amount of money (particularly as net worth doesn't translate exactly to liquid funds).

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#269483: Jan 30th 2019 at 4:51:47 PM

Arguably, the position they're taking is that someone shouldn't own a corporation.

Which is a different argument than, "Someone shouldn't be a billionaire."

Because the majority of then are those.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#269484: Jan 30th 2019 at 4:52:56 PM

Most billionaires don't actually have a billion dollars in liquid cash.

Almost all of that is a wealth value from stocks, property, or IP ownership.

Oh really when?
HailMuffins Since: May, 2016 Relationship Status: Shipping fictional characters
#269485: Jan 30th 2019 at 5:01:00 PM

@LSBK: No wonder the GOP is so against gay marriage and healthcare: wanting to strip citzens of their right seems to be a prerequisite to be one these days.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#269486: Jan 30th 2019 at 5:06:11 PM

The GOP is becoming increasingly Card Carrying Villains because all pretenses are being stripped away.

I think it began with their ACA.

But it was always there.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#269487: Jan 30th 2019 at 5:06:26 PM

You know I've said before that Mc Connell doesn't understand the concept of shame, and he continues to find new ways to prove me right...

Edited by Draghinazzo on Jan 30th 2019 at 9:07:15 AM

MarqFJA The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer from Deserts of the Middle East (Before Recorded History) Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
#269488: Jan 30th 2019 at 5:46:55 PM

So... the leaking of confidential-yet-apparently-nonsensitive documents from Mueller's probe via the indicted Russians' attorneys is not something to panic about, right? It's just Mueller pulling a "hook, line and sinker" ploy on them to confirm already existing suspicions on his part so that he could have legitimate grounds for withholding any actually sensitive information from them in future dealings?

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#269489: Jan 30th 2019 at 5:47:48 PM

It's documents they had access to as part of standard legal proceedings that they're supposed to share publicly is all.

Oh really when?
MarqFJA The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer from Deserts of the Middle East (Before Recorded History) Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
#269490: Jan 30th 2019 at 5:49:08 PM

... The articles about his leak specifically quoted Mueller's team on the fact that the documents were not supposed to reach the public.

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Ultimatum Disasturbator from the Amiga Forest (Old as dirt) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Disasturbator
#269491: Jan 30th 2019 at 5:50:07 PM

They were going to be made public eventually,but it was too soon

have a listen and have a link to my discord server
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#269492: Jan 30th 2019 at 5:51:11 PM

Nothing I said contradicted that?

I'm confused.

Oh wait, derp. I made a typo

Basically it's standard procedure to give defense attorneys copies of the evidence so they can make their defense case for their client. The Russian attorneys have either let that evidence leaked or are in on Russian psyops plans and are using it to run a disinformation campaign.

Edited by LeGarcon on Jan 30th 2019 at 8:54:38 AM

Oh really when?
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#269493: Jan 30th 2019 at 10:38:05 PM

Ocasio-Cortez, Markey to unveil ‘Green New Deal’ legislation. The trillion dollar question: Will it be eligible for reconciliation? Because unless the Republicans make a sudden volte face on climate policy that's the only way it could pass in the Senate.

Edited by SeptimusHeap on Jan 30th 2019 at 7:38:21 PM

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
AlleyOop Since: Oct, 2010
#269494: Jan 30th 2019 at 10:52:06 PM

I imagine it's largely symbolic at this point in time, although also an opportunity to put it out there so it can be refined into actual practices.

"It's time as a party that we started putting some meat on the bone and laying out exactly what a Green New Deal should include, and I believe that that plan should be bold and ambitious and, most importantly, achievable," Bloomberg said, while adding that it was "great to see so many fellow Democrats embrace the idea of a Green New Deal."

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#269495: Jan 30th 2019 at 11:00:07 PM

Even if it's symbolic now, it will still need to pass the Senate once it's ready. Come to think of it, how do they want to get HR1 passed past a filibuster? By trading it away against a border wall or some other Trump priority?

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Imca (Veteran)
#269496: Jan 30th 2019 at 11:28:06 PM

I dont think it was intended to pass, just to make republicians look bad by arguing agianst an anti-coruption bill.

But they found a way. :/

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#269497: Jan 30th 2019 at 11:33:20 PM

Which way?

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Imca (Veteran)
#269498: Jan 30th 2019 at 11:35:00 PM

There usual fallback of "Free Speech" which there base eats up.

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#269499: Jan 31st 2019 at 1:41:47 AM

[up][up][up][up]Alternately, in 2020 there's the option to kill the filibuster. I mean, obviously that should only be used if Republicans get obstructionist...oh, wait.

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#269500: Jan 31st 2019 at 3:32:34 AM

I don't think you can convince Senate Democrats to do that, considering that it's the only tool by which they can stop voter ID laws, abortion bans and the devil knows what else things.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Total posts: 417,856
Top