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

smokeycut Since: Mar, 2013
#278151: Apr 22nd 2019 at 6:07:56 AM

I’m at the point where I’ve just decided to not pay attention to anyone who’s joining the race now. We’ve seen all the candidates actually worth considering. These guys aren’t adding anything.

Soban Since: Aug, 2009 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
#278152: Apr 22nd 2019 at 6:21:40 AM

>Under Elizabeth Warren's new plan, public colleges would be treated more like K-12 public schools,

Well that happened quicker then I expected, I was expecting it would be another twenty years at least before it happened.

wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#278153: Apr 22nd 2019 at 6:25:57 AM

Funny thing is, pre-Reagan, we did treat public college more like k-12; the current status quo only dates to the 1980s.

speedyboris Since: Feb, 2010
#278154: Apr 22nd 2019 at 6:35:23 AM

Some people will say we can’t afford this plan. That’s nonsense. The entire cost of my broad debt cancellation plan and universal free college is more than covered by my Ultra-Millionaire Tax — a 2% annual tax on the 75,000 families with $50 million or more in wealth. For decades, we’ve allowed the wealthy to pay less while burying tens of millions of working Americans in education debt. It’s time to make different choices.
Has there ever been a legitimate argument against the 1% paying more taxes? And I mean more than "but socialism!"

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#278155: Apr 22nd 2019 at 6:42:41 AM

There has never been a mathematically or economically sound argument against higher taxes on the wealthy. Whether the arguments are philosophically sound is a different matter, and one that I have strong opinions on, but that's not strictly relevant here.

"But socialism" is a straight-up Chewbacca Defense; however, the "individual liberty" (aka strong Libertarian) argument against taxation may have merit when considered in a vacuum.

note 

Edited by Fighteer on Apr 22nd 2019 at 9:57:44 AM

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#278156: Apr 22nd 2019 at 6:48:40 AM

As I think I’ve noted before, pre-Reagan we taxed businesses and the wealthy much differently. Our current mega corporations and glut of billionaires are partially the result of gutting those taxes and gutting (or not enforcing) regulations and anti-trust laws.

TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#278157: Apr 22nd 2019 at 6:55:07 AM

I’m at the point where I’ve just decided to not pay attention to anyone who’s joining the race now. We’ve seen all the candidates actually worth considering. These guys aren’t adding anything.

I'm at the point where I'm like, "Can I just vote now?" I've heard pretty much all I needed to hear: a lot of generic politic-wanking from most of the candidates and a f*ckton of sound policy ideas from Warren.

She seems to be trying to saturate the press with her ideas for how to run a country before her primary opposition and Trump even has a chance to really debate her. And given how eagerly they trumpeted that Hillary had "no policies", that's probably a good idea. She's marching straight into the primary as the unmistakable Policy Candidate.

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
smokeycut Since: Mar, 2013
#278158: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:02:31 AM

Yeah, I'm hoping Warren avoids any slipups, because she seems like a pretty great candidate. I just hope she can manage to handle Trump in debates. My biggest fear is that he'll manage to just bully her around or goad her into saying something that people won't like. Or that she won't get a word in over him.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#278159: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:06:18 AM

Expect him to bring up the whole "Pocahontas" thing again if she becomes the candidate.

Because that's the kind President we've got.

Edited by M84 on Apr 22nd 2019 at 10:06:35 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#278160: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:06:30 AM

I think/hope she’s learned from the flap back in December. I don’t think she’ll make that mistake again.

Few Trump voters will flip; the debates are about exciting the Dem base to donate/volunteer and getting nonvoters excited to register. Why aim to flip those who still like Trump (approximately 20-25% of eligible voters) when there’s nearly 50% of eligible voters who didn’t show up in 2016, just waiting to be engaged and excited?

People are freaking out over her student debt plan btw, my entire twitter feed this morning is people losing their shit about how great it is.

Ultimatum Disasturbator from the Amiga Forest (Old as dirt) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Disasturbator
#278161: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:07:28 AM

He's already baited her with the DNA test thing,my quickly has everyone forgotten about that!Anyway,she's a strong candidate will probably come out top in mosts debates if all Trump does is call her pocahontas and metaphorically blow raspberries

have a listen and have a link to my discord server
CrimsonZephyr Would that it were so simple. from Massachusetts Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
Would that it were so simple.
#278162: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:09:05 AM

Waiting for the debates because that'll show who's ready to face Trump, but I'm enthusiastic about Sen. Warren's proposal.

"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#278163: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:10:25 AM

Few Trump voters will flip; the debates are about exciting the Dem base to donate/volunteer and getting nonvoters excited to register. Why aim to flip those who still like Trump (approximately 20-25% of eligible voters) when there’s nearly 50% of eligible voters who didn’t show up in 2016, just waiting to be engaged and excited?

Now see I was pretty certain that nowadays most voters are motivated by their dislike of the other party so convincing some Trump voters to not vote for him (or the scum in the Senate) is actually more important than bringing your own guys to the ballot box, as most of them will reflexively vote against Trump irregardless of who the Democrat is.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#278164: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:21:02 AM

Nah- look at how high Dem turnout was for Obama in 2008. He took freaking Indiana. Getting people who usually don’t vote excited and running to the polls is the best way to win.

Out of all eligible voters in 2016, 25% ish voted for Trump, 26% ish for Hillary, and 49% ish stayed home.

Why on earth would you try to rely on flipping 1% of the people who love Trump, even after all the evil things he’s done, when there’s so many nonvoters just waiting to be engaged????

Edited by wisewillow on Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:23:21 AM

Ultimatum Disasturbator from the Amiga Forest (Old as dirt) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Disasturbator
#278165: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:27:38 AM

The thing I remember about Obama's election is how it came after almost a decade of Republican rule,in the UK we went from Labour Prime minster to another,I can't recall if Gordon Brown was even voted in(which is my biggest gripe with our system,parties can elect a new Prime Minster and general public elects the party when the public should be deciding on both)

Edited by Ultimatum on Apr 22nd 2019 at 2:28:43 PM

have a listen and have a link to my discord server
Euodiachloris Since: Oct, 2010
#278166: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:36:18 AM

@Ultimatum: That's completely misunderstanding the role of the PM.

The whole point to being the PM is supposed to be having the parliamentary following to get policy voted through from white paper to law. Not a public popularity contest for head of state that doesn't necessarily reflect parliamentary distribution (we've got a head of state — she's a queen).

Separate voting for PM would get us into worse problems than we currently are in when it comes to parliamentary gridlock, cabinets vs parliament fights and generally stupid cross-purposes.

Edited by Euodiachloris on Apr 22nd 2019 at 3:39:39 PM

Ultimatum Disasturbator from the Amiga Forest (Old as dirt) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Disasturbator
#278167: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:45:10 AM

Either way,I wish Labour had been voted out around the same time as the Republicans were,sadly life is not fair

have a listen and have a link to my discord server
TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#278168: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:48:25 AM

Few Trump voters will flip; the debates are about exciting the Dem base to donate/volunteer and getting nonvoters excited to register. Why aim to flip those who still like Trump (approximately 20-25% of eligible voters) when there’s nearly 50% of eligible voters who didn’t show up in 2016, just waiting to be engaged and excited?

This.

I don't remember who it was, but I recall somebody during the midterms talking about categorizing voters between 1 and 5. 5 means absolutely 100% will vote for you, 1 means 100% going to vote for the other person. For the purposes of voter outreaches, debates, etc. 1's and 5's are both pointless to appeal to.

It's the 2 - 4 categories that you want to try and loop in.

The worksheets we filled out to track voters during the 2018 door-to-doors used similar logic. If someone asserted that they were definitely going to vote for your guy (or, alternately, never would) then we tracked that so that we knew to skip this person with follow-up campaign advertising and outreaches.

All the campaigning, advertising, etc. is strictly for the benefit of the Undecideds and the people who Lean Democratic or Lean Republican. Those are the ones you gotta work on. Not the proud MAGA hat-wearers, but the person standing next to the MAGA hat-wearer who looks kinda uncomfortable and waves his American flag a little slower.

And now's a better time than ever to snatch up those 2's because a lot of them are already dissatisfied with Trump. There are a ton of Republicans and "Moderate, Formerly Republican" folks that hate Trump. They just don't hate him enough to vote Democrat. Not yet.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Apr 22nd 2019 at 8:50:19 AM

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
DingoWalley1 Asgore Adopts Noelle Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Can't buy me love
Asgore Adopts Noelle
#278169: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:54:14 AM

Trump is now suing Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) for 'political harassment' and for demanding his Tax Returns 'based on the bad testimony of Michael Cohen' and 'without the consent of Republicans on the House Oversight Committee'.

Trump is absolutely hiding something, and at this point I can't believe it's just he's not as rich as he said he was. There's going to be something criminal in his Tax Returns. Also, if Trump is suing someone over 'Political Harassment', which doesn't exist, I say everyone Trump has insulted or threatened (Obama, Omar, Ocasio-Cortez, Hillary Clinton, a lot of Republicans) should also sue him for 'Political Harassment'.

Ultimatum Disasturbator from the Amiga Forest (Old as dirt) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Disasturbator
#278170: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:56:45 AM

They'll settle out of court if it ever gets that far

have a listen and have a link to my discord server
wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#278171: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:57:59 AM

That’s not how this type of lawsuit is gonna go.

speedyboris Since: Feb, 2010
#278172: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:58:58 AM

Also, if Trump is suing someone over 'Political Harassment', which doesn't exist, I say everyone Trump has insulted or threatened (Obama, Omar, Ocasio-Cortez, Hillary Clinton, a lot of Republicans) should also sue him for 'Political Harassment'.
Like all bullies, Trump can dish it out but he can't take it.

RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#278173: Apr 22nd 2019 at 7:59:37 AM

I also saw that Sanders (the White House one) took a comment about heads rolling as a literal threat of decapitation.

wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#278174: Apr 22nd 2019 at 8:01:26 AM

Did anyone else get a chance to read Warren’s student debt plan I posted? The more I chew on it, the more impressed I am. It would have an incalculable effect on our economy as people were suddenly free to buy homes, have children, go back to school.

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#278175: Apr 22nd 2019 at 8:02:35 AM

Aye, this one sounds like frivolous litigation. Courts are explicitly prohibited by the constitution from ruling on internal Congressional procedure.

As for appealing to Trump voters: You need to do that in order to win Senate elections since that system favours Republicans. Besides, a fair amount of Trump voters don't actually like him.

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

Total posts: 417,856
Top