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

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#282251: Jun 6th 2019 at 7:26:27 AM

The problem with that logic is assuming the radicals outnumber the Moderates. The simple fact was if the Sander-ites outnumbered the moderates then he would have won the Primary against Hillary.

Its very possible the Progressives of the Democrat party are not the majority.

So Depressing.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jun 6th 2019 at 7:28:17 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#282252: Jun 6th 2019 at 7:27:10 AM

And on that note...

Bernie Sanders Has The Highest Floor — And It’s Pretty Damn Low

There's another bullet point pointing out how younger voters don't care as much about "electability". 538 thinks it's partly due to younger voters not having the lived experience of seeing more liberal candidates lose.

Consider the experience of 27-year-old voters. As they were coming of age, they’d have seen George W. Bush’s popularity fall to pieces and a guy named Barack Hussein Obama upend the Hillary Clinton juggernaut and win in a landslide against John Mc Cain. Then they’d have seen the supposedly cautious and “electable” Clinton lose to Trump.

This analysis has several issues, including that voters actually saw Trump as more moderate than Clinton in 2016. Still, younger Democrats don’t have a lot of the memories that might scare older Democrats, such as the landslide defeats of George Mc Govern, Michael Dukakis and Walter Mondale, or the electoral success of Bill Clinton running on a more moderate platform.

[up]If progressives were the majority of the Democratic voter base, we'd have a larger "progressive" wing among the House Reps.

They just happen to be the most vocal and active on social media.

Edited by M84 on Jun 6th 2019 at 10:29:44 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
AzurePaladin She/Her Pronouns from Forest of Magic Since: Apr, 2018 Relationship Status: Mu
She/Her Pronouns
#282253: Jun 6th 2019 at 7:29:45 AM

Well, its a darned good thing if younger voters don't care about electability. That sort of talk very frequently leads to gatekeeping by voters based on race and gender, so the sooner we stop using it the sooner we can move towards actually listening to marginalized groups.

George Mc Govern, too, is an interesting comparison - he was running at the height of Nixon's "Law and Order" campaigns, and had his campaign ratfucked by Watergate to boot.

The man never stood a chance.

Edited by AzurePaladin on Jun 6th 2019 at 10:31:46 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
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#282254: Jun 6th 2019 at 7:30:17 AM

[up]It's great...unless it leads to lost elections. As it has in the past.

Edited by M84 on Jun 6th 2019 at 10:30:42 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#282255: Jun 6th 2019 at 7:33:30 AM

Reminder that younger voters historically don't actually vote anyway. As much as I hate to say it, since I actually agree with those voters that "electability" is bunk. It's a pleasant-sounding buzzword for "Only Ever Nominate White Guys".

We're never going to move this country in a positive direction if we let Trump scare the Left into embracing white-male supremacy. Remember all that talk about "This is not normal, do not let this be normal"? That, right there, is what normalizing the Trump Administration looks like. Surrendering the culture war for sake of a token win is a very Pyrrhic Victory.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Jun 6th 2019 at 8:35:17 AM

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
Wildcard Since: Jun, 2012
#282256: Jun 6th 2019 at 7:37:58 AM

Unfortunately, so many moderates are just people okay with republican bullshit and violence as long as they can feel good. We need to drag this country kicking and screaming into the modern world whether they like it or not. Sooner or later this stranglehold White Evangelicals have on people needs to be broken. For the good of the world.

We need a radical change. Biden cannot give it, I'll still vote for him over any Republican. But I'd pick almost anyone else to give the nomination to then someone who supports the Hyde Amendment and is willing to call Mike Pence a good person.

AzurePaladin She/Her Pronouns from Forest of Magic Since: Apr, 2018 Relationship Status: Mu
She/Her Pronouns
#282257: Jun 6th 2019 at 7:43:24 AM

I could say more on Mondale and Dukakis, but I feel like its beside the point.

Tobias is right here. Focusing in on "electability" can only hurt us in the long run by narrowing our selection of candidates, making us hypocrites when we say we fight for equality when that equality ends the moment we walk into the electoral ring, and furthering the perception that Democrats and Republicans are Not So Different.

On moderate candidates: Tacking to the Republicans might win you an election in the short term, but they inevitably swing to the right and bring the overton window with them. We need to push for more change, start swinging that overton window back and start setting the tune that the rest of the political sphere dances too.

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
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#282258: Jun 6th 2019 at 7:44:49 AM

Well, that would require more younger progressive voters who actually want change to vote. And somehow find a way to convince the older moderate voters (like their parents or something) to vote with them.

Disgusted, but not surprised
Ishntknew Since: Apr, 2009
#282259: Jun 6th 2019 at 7:52:15 AM

Oregon has voted to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Governor Kate Brown has signaled she will sign it into law.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#282260: Jun 6th 2019 at 8:06:49 AM

The issue of "electability" is a dodge on a more uncomfortable truth. One that I don't like to think about but is very probable when dealing with the prospect of Biden as the Democratic candidate.

That some people just want a candidate who is what he is.

Basically, "What if there are more Democrats who vote for him than people who want change?"

The electability isn't Trump but the Democratic Primary.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jun 6th 2019 at 8:08:43 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#282261: Jun 6th 2019 at 8:14:21 AM

Something that the Pod Save America hosts bring up a lot is that Obama's "electability" was constantly in question until he won the Iowa caucus. Then it seemed like people who were like, "I want to vote for him but I don't think he's electable." suddenly piled on in support. Especially in South Carolina, where the mostly black primary voters felt they didn't have to hedge their bets anymore if the mostly white Iowa voters were on Obama's side.

Robrecht Your friendly neighbourhood Regent from The Netherlands Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
Your friendly neighbourhood Regent
#282262: Jun 6th 2019 at 8:15:19 AM

Honestly, though, looking at Biden's actual record, he should be running in the Republican primaries as a moderate Conservative challenger to Trump.

Angry gets shit done.
Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#282263: Jun 6th 2019 at 8:26:59 AM

The problem with that logic is assuming the radicals outnumber the Moderates

No, the assumption is that the non-voters outnumber the voters. And that getting them to the ballot box will be the deciding factor. Because the democrats will vote for whatever candidate, just to get rid of Trump. The Republicans will vote for Trump or stay at home. The swing voters, the lost Democrats and the non-voters, that is the group which needs to get activated. The "lost Democrats" (meaning usually democratic voters who went for Trump) need to be convinced that the Democrats have fresh ideas and a plan. The non-voters need to be convinced that they can change something by going to the ballot box. You won't get neither group with Biden. The only group you might get are swing voters who basically want a republican light candidate.

Grafite Since: Apr, 2016 Relationship Status: Less than three
#282264: Jun 6th 2019 at 8:59:55 AM

The most transformative leaders have been the ones who most radically changed the previously broken status quo, as Clement Atlee or Deng Xiaoping did. Therefore, I would prefer an unabashed progressive Democrat, not Biden, to lead the US out of the Trump age.

Life is unfair...
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#282265: Jun 6th 2019 at 9:41:03 AM

No, the assumption is that the non-voters outnumber the voters. And that getting them to the ballot box will be the deciding factor. Because the democrats will vote for whatever candidate, just to get rid of Trump. The Republicans will vote for Trump or stay at home. The swing voters, the lost Democrats and the non-voters, that is the group which needs to get activated. The "lost Democrats" (meaning usually democratic voters who went for Trump) need to be convinced that the Democrats have fresh ideas and a plan. The non-voters need to be convinced that they can change something by going to the ballot box. You won't get neither group with Biden. The only group you might get are swing voters who basically want a republican light candidate.

There is one issue I need to take with your otherwise correct analysis, I really don't believe we should try to court the Lost Democrats.

If they like the message we give that's good but racists and sexists simply are not people we can court reliably, simply because their interests are naturally at odds with the rest of the coalition. As history has shown us bigots will happily reject good universalist policy if it benefits minorities, and they'll definitely reject policy that's specifically made to help minorities. Both of which are unpalatable for the obvious reasons.

So no, Obama-Trump voters are not a group we need to win and as such efforts should be made to attract the other groups you've mentioned.

(For those who are skeptical of my claim that they're racists and sexists, the data backs me up)

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Jun 6th 2019 at 9:44:35 AM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#282266: Jun 6th 2019 at 10:04:28 AM

I'm confused as what the difference is between swing voters and Obama-Trump voters.

Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#282267: Jun 6th 2019 at 10:04:46 AM

[up][up] They aren't a main priority, but it is certainly possible to catch a lot of them, especially the ones in the rust belt who are now realising that Trump betrayed them. I am not a fan of the "let's excuse their racism because they are poor" narrative myself, but the fact is that voters are egoists. They vote for whoever promises them a better future. And the people living in those areas deserve a better future. But yeah, I wouldn't focus on them first and foremost, and I especially wouldn't attempt to play into the "dangerous foreigner" narrative, but a positive vision for people who are just desperate - like maybe some voters in Flynn were - that would certainly catch quite a few of them and pull them back from the abyss.

[up] Not every swing voter went to Trump. Quite a few voted green or joined the group of the non-voters.

Edited by Swanpride on Jun 6th 2019 at 10:05:39 AM

Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#282268: Jun 6th 2019 at 10:11:11 AM

I'm interested in the who and where voted for Obama, then Trump, and then Democratic in 2018. Our message clearly worked in those places despite Trump going all out on killer caravans all season prior.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#282269: Jun 6th 2019 at 10:11:29 AM

There's a nasty classicist bit of propaganda in the Democratic Party that weirdly echos Republican talking points that the rural poor support the Republican Party and put in Trump. It's not true but it fits into an idea that the only reason that people could vote for the GOP is that they're stupid (and assumes that they vote for the GOP instead of rich educated whites who just hate minorities).

The working class and poor of America don't get much of an opportunity to vote or their votes counted.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jun 6th 2019 at 10:13:50 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#282270: Jun 6th 2019 at 10:13:53 AM

There's a nasty classicist bit of propaganda in the Democratic Party that weirdly echos Republican talking points that the rural poor support the Republican Party and put in Trump. It's not true but it fits into an idea that the only reason that people could vote for the GOP is that they're stupid (and assumes that they vote for the GOP instead of rich educated whites who just hate minorities).

No, the reason they vote for the GOP is that they're racist.

And rural areas which are often poor (and white) do vote for the Republicans, the fact that well off suburbanites are terrible and also support Trump doesn't make that less true.

Also, I don't see the relevance.

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
Grafite Since: Apr, 2016 Relationship Status: Less than three
#282271: Jun 6th 2019 at 10:21:24 AM

@Parable: Those were mostly rural districts indeed, mostly in Iowa, Maine, New Jersey and New York. If a message of healthcare and well-paying jobs is the primary focus, like those candidates made it in 2018, those people can be won back.

Life is unfair...
Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#282272: Jun 6th 2019 at 10:38:48 AM

Honestly, they just have to push a message which will resonate with as many voters as possible and get them to the ballot box. And the best message is always "you'll get something out of it". The smartest thing about Warren's plans is that she always is very specific where the money is coming from. "Tax Amazon", "Tax 2 cent of the people who make millions", the important thing here is that the majority of the voter hears "It's not me, it's people/companies who could use to lose some money" and that the voter hears that the money will be used for better education, healthcare, day care, job creation, all the stuff THEY care about and want.

I btw get the impression that Warren spend a lot of time to study how the most successful European countries work. The whole "if we invest in new technology, companies who use said new technology should be forced to produce here" thing, that is a rule the EU has for its research grants. The whole "stronger unions with a say on the board of the company" as well as the emphasis on apprenticeships echoes the German system. Free university is naturally standard in a lot of European countries, most notable the Scandinavian ones. And she is completely right that China is currently investing a lot in renewables and climate friendly technology because it will be a huge market in the near future.

It sounds like someone FINALLY looked over the borders in order to figure out "okay, how do other countries deal with this issue".

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#282273: Jun 6th 2019 at 10:39:16 AM

A bigger issue than Obama-Trump voters is the Obama-stayed home in 2016 voters.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Wildcard Since: Jun, 2012
#282274: Jun 6th 2019 at 10:50:59 AM

Honestly, a lot of the problem is media coverage. I assure you if they hadn't covered Trump as a serious candidate he wouldn't have won the nomination, let alone the presidency.

Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#282275: Jun 6th 2019 at 10:51:48 AM

Them and the people who have given up on voting at all. The Democrats will need them to overcome all the cheats the Republicans have placed in the system.


Total posts: 417,856
Top