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

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#282476: Jun 8th 2019 at 8:04:07 PM

It does kind of seem like your a bit over invested in Warren's chances being bad M84. I get that you have reasons for not particularly liking her, but still.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#282477: Jun 8th 2019 at 8:05:46 PM

[up]Quite the opposite really. I actually want her to win. I explained my stance in a long post in which I pointed out everything I found objectionable about each candidate and concluded that Warren is the least problematic to me despite everything. But I'm trying not to get my hopes up that she somehow overcomes Sanders and Biden.

It's why I hope she focuses less on Biden and his voter base and more on Sanders and his voter base. Warren's main advantage when Biden entered was that her base has the least in common with his compared to the other candidates. When you're in a race like this, the main opponent is the one you have the most in common with.

Judging by that most recent poll, maybe that's what's starting to happen. Maybe she's cutting into Sanders' base.

If it comes down to Warren vs. Sanders or Biden, I'll mark the ballot in her favor when I receive it.

Aside from that, what I'm really invested in is trying to push back against this idea that we should be ignoring early polls. We really shouldn't.

Edited by M84 on Jun 8th 2019 at 11:15:15 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#282478: Jun 8th 2019 at 8:49:34 PM

Warren is my choice.

However, I don't want to be blindsided if she loses.

And I also need to be aware of who is likely to win as an alternative. I don't want a repeat of 2016 where up became down and blue became red.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
singularityshot Since: Dec, 2012
#282479: Jun 8th 2019 at 11:29:42 PM

To those that are not happy that Biden is leading and therefore likely to win just take solace in the fact that the primary is doing it's job of shaping and defining the Democrat platform, and every candidate has a say in that, albeit indirectly. We've already got a Hyde amendment reversal out of Joe, I'm sure there are other things we can convince him of.

If that is not enough then I would also consider the fact that the next administration will have to spend a lot of their energy putting out all the constitutional fires the Republicans have set off and then rebuilding and strengthening the constitutional firebreaks. I can get behind the idea of Joe running a caretaker administration for a term, cleaning up the mess left by Trump and thus clearing the way for a more progressive candidate.

Gilphon (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#282480: Jun 8th 2019 at 11:47:09 PM

I mean, it's a fair point that the next President's first term is gonna be mostly spent cleaning up after Trump, but I don't see any way that 'replacing the cleaner with somebody more progressive once that term's up' is gonna be a thing that happens.

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#282481: Jun 8th 2019 at 11:48:00 PM

If I recall, Biden at one point said he was planning to do exactly that.

akanesarumara Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: Abstaining
#282482: Jun 8th 2019 at 11:49:15 PM

[up][up] That is, if the Democrats get a second term to be spent on cleaning up. If you go into a period thinking it will mostly be spent cleaning up mess from the previous administration, you run the risk of people thinking you haven't done enough and not giving you more time to finish up.

Edited by akanesarumara on Jun 8th 2019 at 8:49:27 PM

Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#282483: Jun 9th 2019 at 12:04:09 AM

[up][up][up][up] I am not worried about his platform, I am worried that he will lose against Trump and that he, if he doesn't, spends so much time "reaching out" to republicans that the US could just as well have a republican as president.

Edited by Swanpride on Jun 9th 2019 at 12:04:29 PM

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#282484: Jun 9th 2019 at 7:14:22 AM

Trump's incompetence is the only thing that has saved us from war.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/09/opinions/trumps-incompetence-silver-lining-rosenthal/index.html

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
HailMuffins Since: May, 2016 Relationship Status: Shipping fictional characters
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#282486: Jun 9th 2019 at 9:08:57 AM

[up][up] I’m not sure I follow the gist of that editorial. I’d say what has prevented us from a war is the fact that we have robust civilian control of the military combined with broadly apolitical institutions, and that wouldn’t change even if Trump was somehow competent.

They should have sent a poet.
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#282487: Jun 9th 2019 at 9:58:54 AM

Yeah, Trump isn't some of kind of accidental success, he's a stress test for both America's institutions and global alliances.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#282488: Jun 9th 2019 at 10:03:21 AM

This is one of the reasons I usually try not to link to op-eds. They're kind of a mixed bag, after all.

Disgusted, but not surprised
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#282489: Jun 9th 2019 at 12:48:23 PM

In Alabama — where lawmakers banned abortion for rape victims — rapists’ parental rights are protected

Alabama is one of two states with no statute terminating parental rights for a person found to have conceived the child by rape or incest, a fact that has gained fresh relevance since its lawmakers adopted the nation’s strictest abortion ban in May. That statute even outlaws the procedure for victims of sexual assault and jails doctors who perform it, except in cases of serious risk to the woman’s health.

Ned Holstein, board chair for the National Parents Organization, which advocates for shared parenting after divorce, said that allowing family courts to sever parental rights based on rape accusations is “an open invitation to fraud.” “Taking a person’s child away is a grievous act,” he said. “And if it is done to an innocent parent, you are also denying the child a fit parent forever and putting her into the sole custody of a ruthless parent who is willing to fabricate a heinous accusation.” Even if a person is convicted of rape, “there is merit on both sides of this issue, and we have no position on it, either way,” he said of his organization.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#282490: Jun 9th 2019 at 1:02:27 PM

There's just no reason other than pure misogyny for this.

I kinda suspected but it's textual now rather than subtext.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
TyeDyeWildebeest Unreasonably Quirky from Big Rock Candy Mountain Since: Dec, 2010 Relationship Status: How does it feel to treat me like you do?
Unreasonably Quirky
#282491: Jun 9th 2019 at 1:27:19 PM

Ned Holstein, board chair for the National Parents Organization, which advocates for shared parenting after divorce, said that allowing family courts to sever parental rights based on rape accusations is “an open invitation to fraud.” “Taking a person’s child away is a grievous act,” he said. “And if it is done to an innocent parent, you are also denying the child a fit parent forever and putting her into the sole custody of a ruthless parent who is willing to fabricate a heinous accusation.”

Okay, this guy clearly thinks that false rape accusations are way more common than they actually are. But if there WAS an epidemic of false rape accusations (like a lot of righties think), I could understand why he would be concerned about fraud. So it's stupid, but I wouldn't really call it insa-

Even if a person is convicted of rape, “there is merit on both sides of this issue, and we have no position on it, either way,” he said of his organization.

WHAT THE WHAT

No beer?! But if there's no beer, then there's no beef or beans!
ShinyCottonCandy Everyone's friend Malamar from Lumiose City (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Everyone's friend Malamar
#282492: Jun 9th 2019 at 1:47:44 PM

Can we get a movement going to call this pro-rape?

Edited by ShinyCottonCandy on Jun 9th 2019 at 4:48:06 AM

My musician page
Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#282493: Jun 9th 2019 at 2:10:57 PM

Honestly, after Missouri basically decided by law that doctors have to rape their patients before allowing an abortion, nothing surprises me anymore.

wisewillow She/her Since: May, 2011
She/her
#282494: Jun 9th 2019 at 2:18:26 PM

New Iowa poll out.

According to a new Des Moines Register/CNN poll of support in Iowa:

- Biden: 24% (-3%)

- Sanders: 16% (-9%)

- Warren: 15% (+6%)

- Buttigieg: 14% (+13%)

- Harris: 7% (+/-0%)

- O’Rourke: 2% (-3%)

(Gain/loss compared to the same poll in March.)

So, Warren and Buttigieg rising, Harris steady, everyone else is down. Big drop for Sanders.

Edit: adding this because it pleases me and it’s funny: “Current New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio had a particularly dismal showing: He received the support of exactly zero respondents — not just zero percent rounding downward, but he lacked the support of even a single respondent.”

Edited by wisewillow on Jun 9th 2019 at 2:29:34 AM

Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#282495: Jun 9th 2019 at 2:26:21 PM

First though, where does the unlisted 30% go? They're currently going a bunch of way or have not made up their minds, but they will end up voting for someone.

Second though, be aware of the 15% threshold, a candidate needs to get at least 15% of the vote in a state or district to get delegates from that state or district.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#282496: Jun 9th 2019 at 2:31:18 PM

Thanks. I posted that yesterday, but you got the gains and losses of the top candidates.

Warren's making inroads, Buttigieg must be campaigning without sleep if he's shot up so much. Have to wonder what Sander is doing to cost him so much support.

I remember awhile ago voters who supported Biden said their second choice was Sanders and vice versa. It would seem a fair number of those people have started changing their minds, since Sanders losses aren't being made up by people switching to him from Biden. And if people are switching from Sanders to Biden, they aren't enough to stem the tide of his supporters going to other candidates.

TheRoguePenguin Since: Jul, 2009
#282497: Jun 9th 2019 at 3:48:50 PM

With Sanders, Warren's probably cutting into his numbers. They're similar on policy except she's a lot more wonkish than he is, plus she's been pushing plans fairly aggressively as of late.

Edited by TheRoguePenguin on Jun 9th 2019 at 3:49:18 AM

PushoverMediaCritic I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out. from the Italy of America Since: Jul, 2015 Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out.
#282498: Jun 9th 2019 at 4:55:03 PM

Interesting that Warren is almost tied with Sanders now, looks like she has a chance after all.

I'm curious how Buttigieg rose that fast, though, that is a huge jump.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#282499: Jun 9th 2019 at 5:09:38 PM

Buttigieg has had shockingly good polling, especially considering he started relatively late.

Too bad his actual ideas are...not great.

Like I said though, this seems to confirm that Sanders is the one Warren needs to beat first, not Biden.

I suspect Sanders’ problem is that he is offering nothing he was not offering in 2016. Old dogs and new tricks...

Still, we should wait and see if the polling is either part of a trend or an outlier.

Edited by M84 on Jun 9th 2019 at 8:14:49 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
TheRoguePenguin Since: Jul, 2009
#282500: Jun 9th 2019 at 5:29:32 PM

There's a problem with targeting Sanders first, though. As 538 points out, Bernie has a fairly high floor, and I doubt Warren will be able to knock it out from under him. Biden, on the other hand, is mostly running on name recognition and is avoiding public appearances because he sabotages himself when he does. Both she and Sanders need to knock him down, because otherwise he'll carry the nomination through inertia.


Total posts: 417,856
Top