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
Wait, I thought Barr refused to go to the hearing. Or is this something different?
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.US Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY) will be retiring at the end of his term in 2020.
Edited by tclittle on May 4th 2019 at 1:13:35 PM
"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."11 members of a Neo-Nazi organization were exposed as working within the US military to recruit others. 25% of all US forces polled reported that they had served with a member of a white supremacist organization.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/05/04/nzws-m04.html
A woman confronts Grassley about his 7 Obamacare repeal votes. "You're threatening my life."
https://www.newsweek.com/senator-chuck-grassley-aca-health-care-confrontation-1409921
A part of me is angry enough to go, "People who need Obamacare to survive, why do you keep voting for Republicans then? Is your racism that ingrained? Are you that much of a piece of crap you can't acknowledge the help you have been given by the Democrats?"
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.Racism and political tribalism, it's why people like the ACA while hating Obamacare. Anything that has the "Democrat" name on it is automatically bad and if they previously like a policy they'll suddenly start hating it if it's endorsed by a Democrat.
So yes, they'll happily vote for a policy that screws themselves over if it hurts minorities more and if it's giving a finger to the Democratic Party. That and all of the willful ignorance.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangKirsten Gillebrand has a plan for
a method of curbing the disproportionate power the 1% has in politics. Based off an initiative that is current being used in Seattle right now.
Edited by MorningStar1337 on May 4th 2019 at 3:52:00 AM
> give every voter $600
-a comedian walks into the room-
"600!There's a lot you could with that ,it's a very persuasive amount let me tell you,why,you could say,get people to vote for you with that,here's the thing though,it's oldest trick in the book and we have a name for it,we call it bribery"
-snare drum,next act comes on-
I mean that's what some might see it as based off the amount alone,maybe make it $60,that's a fair amoun,right?
have a listen and have a link to my discord serverIf by fair amount you mean "almost certainly too low to matter", then yes it's a very fair amount.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on May 4th 2019 at 4:35:45 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangThere's a few issues with this idea that come to mind:
-Is 200$ enough to matter?
-You have to already be well-known and famous to get said donations. This is the unstable equilibrium at the root of the issue. When you spend money on your campaign, you're buying fame and notoriety so that people are more likely to vote for you. If you don't have the notoriety already, then why do you think people would vote to give you money?
-The money would be too split between too many people, I'd imagine. Part of the issue is that there can only be so many candidates.
Leviticus 19:34I would say yes, let's say 5% of Voters opt into this program.
That would be around 15 million new donors.
That would have a massive and very real impact on our democracy.
They probably wouldn't, but is this really a problem?
People not voting for you because they don't know about you already exists now. If they aren't going to give you donations then that hardly changes things.
Politicians that people know about will have to deal with a massive influx of new donors, which will change their behavior and political calculus. Which would be a very real success.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangWell, I spoke too soon. That earlier good/bad news article about arresting a small number of child sex traffickers/slavers led to the bust of a much larger network. They've arrested 88 people so far in the network and seemed to have rolled up the ring.
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.If everyone who voted did it, roughly 140 million voters the cost of the program at 200 per voter would be roughly 28,000 million. The total amount spent by Trump and Clinton is less than 10% of that. I'm not sure that injecting that much money into politics, especially when most of it is going to go to those that are already known has any way of ending well. I suspect that the effect of the policy would be the exact opposite of the stated goal.
Her plan isn't a bad one, but the fact that it comes at the expense of a subsidy on CE Os means they'll fight tooth and nail to prevent it from ever being implemented, and the direct benefit it brings to the 99% isn't tangible enough for them to die on that hill.
Pelosi came up with her plan to beat Trump - no impeachment, and stick to the center.
The latter is because she thinks that hewing close to the center and chasing the moderate voters with deliver an election victory big enough that Trump will not contest the results.
Now, anyone who has seen me post here probably knows what my opinion of this tactic is, but even practically Trump will contest it regardless knowing him. So even on a purely practical level, this falls flat. And that's also presuming the party's Left Wing sticks around for a true moderate candidate and doesn't start a third party bid or stay home.
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![]()
Exactly. That was my take on it anyway - if your strategy for beating the Republicans involves bending towards them, people who want more Right Wing policy will still go towards them because they'll do it more effectively while the more Left Wing base won't be as interested in supporting you.
Its a lose-lose. If you want to cultivate your voting base, its going to by requirement involve appeasing your Left flank. And to do that means, yes, actually agreeing to some of their demands.
Edited by AzurePaladin on May 4th 2019 at 2:10:02 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

Harris asked Barr during the hearing if Trump or his cronies "asked or suggested" that he open investigations into people for him. Barr stalled and hawed before dodging the question. Harris believes he was just trying to avoid saying no otherwise he would have perjured himself.
Allegedly, Trump wants Barr to go after Biden.