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
So not only is Trump still reliving the 2016 election by attacking Clinton every month, he's still trying to relive 2017 so he can fight with Mc Cain. Must be nice to punch at people who can't punch back.
And screw you, Graham, you're the one blocking the Senate from voting to make the Mueller report public because you're still on "But her Emails!".
Next time Graham utters the word emails in relation to an investigation, I hope a Democratic senator motions to open investigations into Mothman and Bigfoot to go alongside his wild goose chase.
It would be a shame if someone were to leak the entire Muller report as a 'screw you Graham' ,such a pity if someone were to upload on to a cloud somewhere and distribute copies to all the media across the world
Though I'm honestly wondering what would happen if the report really was leaked
Edited by Ultimatum on Mar 18th 2019 at 11:48:17 AM
have a listen and have a link to my discord server- Take control of the government (Trump et al)
- Kick out all the libtards (not working so far)
- Kill/exile all the minorities (trying their best
- ???
- Utopia!
Which is kind of my point? I'll admit that I am making a leap in trying to separate chan culture from white supremacy. Chan culture has no beliefs - not even a belief in themselves - which is what makes it so vulnerable to white supremacist beliefs. White supremacy has hijacked chan culture. So that's why I want to drill down and try and look past the white supremacist element and look at the politics of chan culture directly. So, addressing those points then:
- Feels more like a white supremacist aim, of which the chan isn't going to be opposed. Chan culture wants to be left alone, and white supremacists are going to do just that whilst also protecting it from the nasty outside world. Bannon was the closest to the alt-right (history with GG etc.), and he currently is on the outside looking in. Miller is the other obvious person, but he tends more white supremacist than alt-right.
- This, more than anything else would be a chan goal. Like I say, they just want to be left alone. Unfortunately for them, society doesn't let them, and in particular liberal society is going to (in their eyes) actively harass them.
- I'm going to go out on a limb and say this is again more a symptom of white supremacist thinking as opposed to chan culture. The objective with mass killings from a chan perspective is just to "get a new high score". It's to give meaning to their lives. They idolize the Columbine shooters because of their infamy and status as outcasts. Where the white supremacist element comes in is that they have influenced chan culture such that targeting non-whites nets a greater level of infamy and thus a "higher score". My hypothesis therefore is that if white supremacy was removed from chan culture there would still be mass killings, only the targets wouldn't be as selective. I would imagine that community centers (malls, schools and places of worship) would still be the target purely on the basis of misanthropy. It's the white supremacy element that is protecting (white) evangelical super churches for example.
- ??? Well yes. Pure accelerationism is the only thing I can think of, which leads onto
- I've yet to see a chan utopia defined. When it all burns to the ground, they are not going to claim the rubble - the white supremacists will do that in an attempt to create their ethnostate. Chan culture doesn't care as long as the rubble still has internet - which is why it is so hard to engage in any debate with them, and identify a philosophy.
So it looks like Trump's labour secretary is going to have some problems
regarding his prior job as a prosecutor. Apparently the slap on the wrist treatment accorded to Jeffrey Epstein wasn't the first time that Acosta has white washed something.
But to what end? Look, I get the fact that chan culture is built on a huge storm of self-isolation and persecution complexes. They, like most movements of this type need an unconquerable enemy to justify their existence and loyalty to the group. If they did defeat their enemy, they'd need to invent another one.
But as I said, they are not going to be the ones to claim the rubble. If anything, the goal that comes to mind is that of Henry Bernis is Time Enough at Last from The Twilight Zone. They want society to leave them alone. So if they managed to do that, and remove society? Oh, they'd be in clover, as they finally get to read all those books, create all those memes, play all those video games that society never let them or judged them for. But then their (metaphorical) glasses would break and all of those things would be out of reach, forever.
Yeah, but like with all subforms of Fascism, the fact that they need to pretend that their unconquerable enemy is somehow conquerable to make their system work inevitably leads to them trying to conquer their unconquerable enemy due to the sheer momentum of their hate propelling them forward into a fight they cannot ultimately win (nor do they want to), but are utterly determined to take out as many of them as they can.
Angry gets shit done.An article from University of Pennslyvaia Vice Provost Ezekiel J. Emanuel in the The Atlantic details various implementations of "Medicare for All"
“It all depends what you mean by ‘Medicare for all,’” I said. He was hoping for a better answer than I had. About 70 percent of Americans say they support the idea—under which Medicare, the federal program that now provides health coverage for about 60 million seniors and disabled individuals, would expand to cover millions more people.
Yet Medicare for all is a messy concept. At least four different approaches to health reform could truthfully carry the Medicare for all label. Sanders’s plan is the best known, but it’s also the most politically impractical. It ignores the brutal history of repeated defeats for all Democratic health reform proposals that try to abolish private health insurers.
I tend to agree with Doctor Emanuel that Sanders' plan to essentially nationalize the private health insurance industry and leave them offering only supplementary coverage is politically daunting. The "Medicare for America" or "Medicare Advantage" (universal medicare part C) plans definitely seem more practical to me, and as an added benefit they don't insulate the state run health insurance system from private competition, which is generally beneficial for the consumer.
Edited by CaptainCapsase on Mar 18th 2019 at 10:21:24 AM
Steve King Posts Meme Fantasizing About Violent Civil War Between Red and Blue States
Why the fuck is this guy still a Congressman? This is disgusting as all hell, especially coming so soon after the NZ attack.
Edited by speedyboris on Mar 18th 2019 at 9:36:13 AM
I object to that meme, specifically the fact that my home state, Arizona, is the red side's head. We didn't vote a Democrat Senator into office in the most nail-biting race of 2018 for people to still consider us red, Arizona is now solidly purple, at least.
Edited by PushoverMediaCritic on Mar 18th 2019 at 7:29:58 AM
2020 Dems warm to expanding Supreme Court – A series of White House hopefuls are expressing new interest in remaking the courts — payback for Republican aggression during the Obama presidency.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/18/2020-democrats-supreme-court-1223625
Sens. Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren and Kirsten Gillibrand told POLITICO they would not rule out expanding the Supreme Court if elected president, showcasing a new level of interest in the Democratic field on an issue that has until recently remained on the fringes of debate.
The surprising openness from White House hopefuls along with other prominent Senate Democrats to making sweeping changes — from adding seats to the high court to imposing term limits on judges and more — comes as the party is eager to chip away at the GOP’s growing advantage in the courts.
“We are on the verge of a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court,” said Harris (D-Calif.). “We have to take this challenge head on, and everything is on the table to do that.”
Expanding the Supreme Court would amount to a historic power play by the next Democratic president and Congress, requiring an intense legislative fight and the abandonment of many judicial and congressional norms.
But Democrats say that after Republicans blocked Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland and other lower court judges during President Barack Obama’s final term only to quickly fill those vacancies, the party needs an equally bruising response.

A few stories to add a bit of variety, break out of the off-topic discussion, and make for a handy page-topper:
Inside Rudy Giuliani's cable news vanishing act – Both Trump and White House lawyer Emmet Flood have privately griped about some of Giuliani's TV appearances.
https://www.axios.com/rudy-giuliani-cable-television-mueller-report-d961eecc-271b-488c-bdb3-3c1c459e9027.html
Trump tells Fox to 'bring back' Jeanine Pirro; source says she was suspended for Islamophobic remarks
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/16/media/jeanine-pirro-fox-news/index.html
Fox did not announce the suspension publicly. The network declined to confirm or deny that Pirro has been suspended. There is no word on whether Pirro's show will return next week.
At the same time, there is no indication that she has been fired from Fox. The source said she has not been fired.
Pirro is one of the network's highest-rated weekend hosts, well known for her vehement defenses of President Donald Trump and attacks against his perceived enemies.
CNN anchor hits Trump: He didn't go to Vietnam 'until he was in his 70s' with 'Secret Service protection'
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/434473-cnn-anchor-hits-trump-after-mccain-attacks-he-didnt-go-to-vietnam-until-he-was
Cabrera made the comments while noting that Trump has yet to forcefully denounce white supremacy in light of the mosque shootings that left dozens dead in New Zealand.
"The president did use his direct line to the American people to take more cheap shots at an American war hero who is not even alive to defend himself," Cabrera said on "CNN Newsroom." "Trump again slamming the late senator John McCain today, he says, for trying to derail his run for the presidency in 2016."
Cabrera noted that the attacks from Trump caused one of his allies, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), to defend McCain as "one of the most consequential senators" in U.S. history.
"Clearly not a position held by the president, who did, to his credit, did go to Vietnam, although not until he was in his 70s and with Secret Service protection," Cabrera added, apparently referencing Trump's military record as well as the recent summit in Vietnam between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.
Edited by sgamer82 on Mar 17th 2019 at 10:46:59 AM