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
> Bernie
...Eh. Just...eh. Warren already does his job with more concrete policy, and combined with the ability to apologize (low bar, I know) I think she'd be a much better President.
Course, my ideal President would be off both of their Left, but if we want to discuss Democratic Socialism we're very likely going to need Social Democracy accepted, and that's going to require dragging this overton window Leftwards first.
> Harris
Again...eh. She's not the worst, but as I often mention her handling of the needs of Transgender prisoners is something I'm still low-key upset about. Especially because she couldn't even apologize properly when asked. Incident mentioned in here
.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Apr 16th 2019 at 3:14:20 PM
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![]()
![]()
The second point, too. Obama managed it in six years, but he had only to correct the mistakes of Bush plus the NSA affair. Trump will be harder to forget exactly because he ISN'T unique. We were kind of naively thinking that after Bush, it couldn't get worse.
Edited by Swanpride on Apr 16th 2019 at 12:23:30 PM
Voting reform is also a must, a big part of Trump's election was the ending of the voting rights act oversight for some parts of the country.
Florida, Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina, all states that used to have national oversight of changes to their voting rules but didn't in 2016 and went for Trump by not particularly big margins.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranI don't like being That Guy, but only the first two of these things are the president's bailiwick. Everything else is Congress's job and they don't let the White House micromanage them; "president proposes and congress disposes" is a saying for a reason.
So if you are electing a president on the basis of policy proposals that would need lawmaking, you are doing it wrong. That (aside from the electability thing) is the reason I am less positive on Warren and more on Harris.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanI'd really like if our next President could dedicate time to fighting White Supremacy and fascism too. If we're going to pull the country from the extreme right, we need to start focusing on it, especially on Right-Wing violence and (more long term) the culture that creates it. It won't solve things, but it can help stem the more obviously dangerous side effects.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Apr 16th 2019 at 3:27:08 PM
The awful things he says and does are burned into our cultural consciousness like a CRT display left on the same picture too long. -FighteerThis came up on my News Feed:
And Democrats are eager to exploit that tension — blasting Scott for sticking with the president on a critical disaster relief bill and throwing the freshman senator into the middle of a broader fight over stalled assistance for millions of Americans devastated by wildfires, flooding and hurricanes.
Scott, meanwhile, is lashing out at his Democratic critics, feuding in particular with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) in increasingly personal terms.
“This is a great example of why people hate politics. Not only did @Sen Schumer block a bipartisan bill, now he’s lying about it,” Scott tweeted Sunday evening. “Our bill doesn’t strip funding for P.R. It includes $600 mil in nutrition assistance funding for P.R. that I fought to get in the bill.”
Schumer responded Monday: “We all know @realDonaldTrump took all aid for Puerto Rico but nutrition assistance out of the bill. The bill has none of the long-term recovery & resilience aid PR has asked for repeatedly. Stop the bull. Stand up to the President.”
A couple hours later, Scott tweeted back, “The truth is, you’re more than happy to give Puerto Rico nothing if it helps prolong a political fight with Trump. That’s shameful.”
The disaster aid bill serves as a first crucial test for the former Florida governor, who campaigned in 2018 as an advocate for Puerto Rico and someone willing to split with Trump. During his successful campaign against incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Scott said he disagreed with Trump’s baseless suggestion that Democrats inflated the number of people who died from Hurricane Maria. Scott cited his comments, made on Twitter, in a Spanish-language commercial. According to sources who track media buying, Scott spent $4.7 million on Spanish-language TV and radio during his campaign.
After his narrow victory, Scott delivered a floor speech in which he said he intends to be a “voice for the people of Puerto Rico” in the Senate and offered an amendment to provide disaster aid to Puerto Rico as part of legislation to end the government shutdown.
And here's a bit of context
One plan, from Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.) and Shelby, would have provided $600 million in nutrition assistance to Puerto Rico, as well as money to the Midwest, which has been hit by recent floods.
A Democratic alternative proposed by Senate Appropriations Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Schumer would have provided similar nutrition assistance to Puerto Rico while freeing up grant funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development that has already been allocated to the island; it also would have increased eligibility for disaster relief in Midwestern states and Southern states affected by floods.
The GOP proposal failed to get the 60 votes need to advance, as did a House Democratic bill; Senate Democrats sought to bring their plan to the floor by unanimous consent but were blocked by Republicans.
Democrats blame Trump, who recently complained behind closed doors to Republican senators that Puerto Rico was getting too much disaster aid and that the island was misusing federal hurricane relief.
Mc Connell described Shelby’s bill as “the only game in town” on the Senate floor earlier this month, and Republicans say that Trump is all but guaranteed to veto legislation that includes more money for Puerto Rico.
“He’s pretty upset about how much money Puerto Rico’s gotten relative to other places where there's been serious disasters,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas).
God, this is infuriating.
Edited by megaeliz on Apr 16th 2019 at 9:46:19 AM
Rick Scott, Republican, campaigned on a bunch of Pro-Puerto Rico stuff and is now caught with the sad trombone effect that Trump would very much like everyone on the island to die.
Which would be funny if not for real people dying.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Apr 16th 2019 at 5:57:57 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.I see I missed yet another "which Democratic candidate would be best" discussion, which covered several of the candidates and their flaws.
In the interest of fairness I'll add a few others whose potential flaws and shortcomings weren't discussed as much this time.
O'Rourke is a cheap empty suit who favors style over substance.
Buttigieg has a mixed track record of his time as mayor.
Gillibrand has a bad record when it comes to immigration (though she changed her mind later) and has shown something of a reluctance to criticize people who are very clearly wrong.
Biden has a history of groping women.
Like Lksd said, they all have their flaws. Nobody's perfect.
My least favorite ones are probably Biden (sexual harassment is a dealbreaker), O'Rourke (an empty suit President is not what we need now at all), Harris (the more information that crops up about her record the worse she seems to get), Sanders (for all the reasons already mentioned), and Warren (I've gone on length in this thread about why I don't approve of her and I'm not going to repeat myself unless asked). And of course Gabbard, but she has no real chance anyway.
If any of them become the candidate, I will not be happy come Election Day.
Edited by M84 on Apr 16th 2019 at 11:43:51 PM
Disgusted, but not surprised

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html
Certified: 48.0% West Asian, 6.5% South Asian, 15.8% North/West European, 15.7% English, 7.4% Balkan, 6.6% Scandinavian