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
When people say that being a political means failing basic decency it is the normalisation of corruption.
Being a politician doesn’t make one inherently a bad person, people thinking that is part of why we have so many bad politicians, because that idea drives good people away from politics, draws bad people towards it and makes people think it’s okay to vote for corrupt people because “they’re all corrupt”.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranHail Muffins (like myself) is brazilian and our institutional corruption is much worse than the US's so I assume that informs their viewpoint on this at least a little. Regardless, I agree that normalizing the idea of "politicians are corrupt by default" is not very helpful.
Edited by Draghinazzo on Feb 12th 2019 at 5:09:42 AM
It's not that politicians can't be decent, it's more that political systems reward certain kinds of practical ruthelessness in such a way that The Fettered get out-competed and eliminated. You need to keep the people you need to stay in power happy enough that they don't try to replace you. Fuck everyone else. The trick becomes then to set the rules so that the people you need to keep happy are so many that their interest ends up blending with the general interest, and so that they have the means to quickly and accurately know when they ought not to be happy with you, and then the means to get together and let you know their discontent in ways you can't just ignore until your term runs out.
When the people you need to keep happy are just a few lobbies, and their money and media support can keep you in power by itself or with the help of some voter suppression, censorship, and targeting of political assemblies and civil societies, though... Hello, Georgia!
So here's a question that I don't know how to categorize - General Politics, or if it's a US Politics issue, but here goes.
At the risk of sounding stupid, are we in the Second Cold War? Except that instead of a bipolar world, it's a multipolar one with three major powers vying for influence across the globe?
I ask this because I was reading a book titled The New Cold War: How the Kremlin Menaces both Russia and the West by Edward Lucas, and he made quite a few points stating just that.
I hold the secrets of the machine.I don't think anyone could say we're in a Cold War because so much of every power's economies depend on the other.
China and Russia both love showing the USA up but neither wants it down, which precludes a war. We're in a case of Flanders and Homer these days. Except Homer killed Flander's wise (Putin) and did it deliberately.
There's also a 4th power in the EU. The U.K's leaving disrupting that but I'm not sure for who more.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Feb 12th 2019 at 2:11:44 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.@Techpriest 90: No. The world is currently still monopolar. America is currently a Hyperpower with no serious rivals. Russia is still potentially dangerous but an absolute joke compared to the Soviet Union.
China is one of the most powerful nations on Earth but is a long way from being a true super-power. Also worth noting is that China gets quite a bit of its money from trade with the US and Realpolitik essentially forces the two nations into cooperation.
Leviticus 19:34I don't trust the AG, either. He only came out about this after the skeletons had come out of Northam's closet. It reeks of him trying to save his own ass, purely for his own personal benefit.
"Somehow the hated have to walk a tightrope, while those who hate do not."I hate to be that guy, but calling that "public relations" is giving the human brain too much credit. In the real world, people need a reminder to remember things that happened years ago. Such as a fellow politician having a blackface scandal - that, as discussed a few pages ago
, is viewed through a partisan lens anyhow - reminding you of your own blackface issue.
Edited by SeptimusHeap on Feb 12th 2019 at 11:53:10 AM
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanThank you for your replies.
And no, I didn't mean China. I meant the European Union. Because while the CCP are all bark and no bite, the EU has the potential for both should it get serious. And with the Russians threatening their stability and prosperity, they might.
I hold the secrets of the machine.

"I find it somewhat hard to believe that no white people in Virginia can surpass the base requirement of "basic decency.""
Few, if any, politicians in Virginia can surpass the base requirement of "basic Decency"... which is actually quite plausible.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.