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
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
Sounds plausible.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
It's also a big problem for Democrats in 2020 if Trump has approval ratings in the mid 40s, with those numbers it would be Trump's election to lose barring a recession; if (and this is a big if) he can refrain from saying and doing too much outrageously stupid shit on the campaign trail, I expect him to be reelected, and maybe win the popular vote. The fact that it's Trump and his staffers can't keep him off twitter means that's actually not as easy a bar to clear as it should be.
Edited by CaptainCapsase on Mar 24th 2019 at 8:32:38 AM
Yeah, if Trump weren't Trump he would probably have a great chance.
But thankfully for us, he is and thus has a very real chance of losing.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangI mean, that's basically just saying 'a normal politician in Trump's position would have an advantage', which isn't a particularly useful statement, because a normal politician wouldn't have gotten themselves into this position in the first place.
'It would be to Trump's advantage to suddenly became a completely different person' isn't saying much of anything, y'know?
'It would be to Trump's advantage to suddenly became a completely different person' isn't saying much of anything, y'know?
Exactly this.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangIMO part of the problem is that, as much as people said "we can't normalize this", a lot of the low level stuff like the 3:00 AM tweets aren't really newsworthy anymore. I also anticipate 2020 campaign Trump having fewer shocking displays of ignorance, because even a slacker/ignoramus like him will gaining at least a basic understanding of his job after 4 years of immersion in the work environment.
It's definitely going to be competitive, but I think 2020 Trump is going to be a much tougher opponent than 2016 Trump, which was genuinely improbable; maybe a 1:3 chance.
Edited by CaptainCapsase on Mar 24th 2019 at 8:50:24 AM
The piece you're missing there is that Trump likes getting attention, even if it's in a way that's not in his long term interest. He's gonna be actively trying to find outrageous things to say to get the resulting media attention. And even if he doesn't succeed, well, trying to compete his opponent in stuff like policy knowledge is not a fight he'd win against just about any of plausible democratic nominees.
So, on the basis that the AG's report does honestly reflect the findings of the Special Prosecutor (and I have my doubts about that) anyone want to go double or quits?
See Republicans, in the middle of their gloating, seem to want further investigations into how this whole thing started. The three likely targets are Carter Page and the FISA warrant; the Steele dossier and her emails. Out of those three the first two are highly likely to backfire as Carter Page is a known Russian asset and the Steele dossier was originally Republican opposition research, whereas the third could go either way as if it doesn't end up with her locked up it could be Trump's wall redux.
I'm pretty sure at this point another investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails would be a political loser. There have been how many investigations into that already? Hillary's not running again and holds no office. It appeals to no one outside of Trump's base.
And I would not be the least bit surprised if Trump tried it soon, if for no other reason than a vindictive desire for revenge.
Edited by Lennik on Mar 24th 2019 at 9:00:42 AM
That's right, boys. Mondo cool.Huh, so apparently this cycle's meme candidate (a basic income single issue candidate), Andrew Yang, has qualified for the primary debates
. While I'd argue a negative income tax would be a more prudent way of implementing UBI (especially in terms of the political dimensions of it given one Milton Friedman was a proponent of a NIT, hence why some Libertarians support UBI), it's a policy I'm generally interested in.
Edited by CaptainCapsase on Mar 24th 2019 at 9:23:47 AM
Isn't he the candidate that decided to attempt to appeal to an audience on Image Boards?
>Andrew Yang
Oh hey, I remember him! He's the one guy from a while back! I think I posted an article on him.
...He's kinda 'eh' as a candidate though. Rather single issue on UBI, which is something I don't know how I feel about. Into the vague mess of the middle of my rankings he goes.
The NYT article mentions them as "the support he'd rather not have" so I imagine it was not intentional on his part.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Mar 24th 2019 at 9:19:46 AM
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![]()
![]()
An NIT is preferable for political reasons; it's going to require a tax overhaul however UBI is implemented, and one interesting scheme to do that would be via converting to a flat tax system with exemptions that amount to a negative income tax on people below a certain threshold (and which is actually a progressive taxation scheme in disguise); a "flat tax" sounds like a conservative policy as does the association of a NIT with Friedman. Learning to dogwhistle their policy agenda is a strategy that might be prudent for the American left. So instead of UBI, you have "flat tax with exemptions", instead of reparations you have some sort of subsidy that will disproportionately benefit black Americans.
![]()
I don't know that he's attempting to do that, but he is the "image board" candidate of 2020 in the same way Trump, Sanders to some extent, and Ron Paul were the respective meme candidates of their elections.
Edited by CaptainCapsase on Mar 24th 2019 at 9:22:56 AM
The Carter page who cooperated against Russian spies or is there another Carter Page around?
Edited by sgamer82 on Mar 24th 2019 at 7:37:50 AM
![]()
![]()
"But it sounds like something the Republicans might want!" is going to shoot yourself in the foot.
Also, you then end up tying a complete upheaval of the economic foundations of society to... tax brackets.
In a primary yes. In a general election no, in fact centrism (or at least centrist sounding policies and rhetoric), aka appealing to the median voter is the mathematically optimal electoral strategy; policy platforms are polarized by necessity to compromise with partisans, activists, and ideologues who value bold sounding policy over substantive results.
Meanwhile when it comes to policymaking you have a broader coalition that potentially includes Libertarians and libertarian leaning Republicans, and has considerable backing from major corporate interests, particularly in the tech industry.
Edited by CaptainCapsase on Mar 24th 2019 at 10:09:55 AM
That sounds like overestimating the number of people who're going to swap entirely based on policy and underestimating how many you're going to lose for lying in bed with the enemy. The mere fact it's the other party saying it negates any advantage with the people on your own side you're driving off.
And again... if it's just changing the tax code? That's too easily undone.
![]()
Oh, God bless...
I think you'll find that:
is not going to appeal to a lot of more Left-Wing folks. And if you're trying to build a coalition on the Left, you're going to have to include the folks that do not want those having influence.
Ignoring that block means that you don't actually have a Left-Wing coalition, merely a Libertarian-Center one.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Mar 24th 2019 at 10:10:51 AM
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
