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
Lord YAM; And why, exactly, do you think she dislikes Warren or Sanders? Criticizing the Green New Deal does not an enemy make.
Honestly I was expecting the "she wouldn't have done it for Bernie!" hammer to drop sooner or later considering this poster's history of vocal pro-Sanders statements. Not everything the Democrats do is all about him. As someone who's very cynical about the motives of establishment Democrats I agree with most of this thread that it's got nothing to do with the target being Biden vs. Sanders and everything to do with Trump crossing a blatant Godzilla Threshold of obviousness with his crimes and this being a prime opportunity to do something about him. It could've happened to goddamn Gabbard (well, no it wouldn't, due to her Russian backing, but still) and Pelosi would've still jumped at the opportunity to get rid of Trump as whatever her agenda would be, he's a bigger obstacle than any of the Sanderites combined.
Edited by AlleyOop on Sep 30th 2019 at 10:30:41 AM
Jesus, that guy is a ball of insufferable smugness
In my experience, accusing people of being 'smug' is something people do when someone they disagree with politically says things they can't deny the truth of, but don't like.
See also: The number of times Trumpets accused Hillary of being smug.
Angry gets shit done.What the hell!?
I...I don't know how to properly formulate a response to that, but that's...the AIPAC comment is both out of line and off topic, telling someone to go to hell is a personal attack, and despite my strenuous disagreements with her I don't know if its fair to say that Pelosi doesn't care for the environment at all.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Sep 30th 2019 at 10:21:30 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. -FighteerI’m not sure what the point in arguing this is, considering that it’s about something that didn’t happen and can’t be proven one way or the other.
Oh God! Natural light!Brooks is much more to the left than Seder. I agree with him wholeheartedly on politics and social issues.
It's his know-it-all, holier-than-thou attitude and fanatical praising of Sanders (while tearing to shreds almost every Democrat who isn't him or the Squad) that puts me off him
Wouldn't he have?
Edited by MrHellboy on Sep 30th 2019 at 9:39:05 AM
The hardest thing in this world is to live in it.Sanders winning wasn’t guaranteed but he still had a chance.
The point about the environment is that we’re at a tipping point. Something radical like the green new deal is the only way to really forestall a catastrophe for humanity yet Pelosi seems to think that oh it’s too scary. At this point if you don’t support something radical to help the climate than you don’t really care enough even if you THINK you do. It’s like how white moderates were all “Dr King we support equality but you’re just so extreme about it can’t you tone it down?”
The AIPAC thing was part of an analogy. Given the regular human rights abuses Israel gets up to and that AIPAC not only supports Israel despite that but APPLAUDS the human rights abuses supporting AIPAC shows tacit approval (and yes Chuck Schumer has made some pretty disgusting comments; so has Biden).
Edited by LordYAM on Sep 30th 2019 at 7:41:02 AM
Am I the only one here who's curious about this piece of news from the WTFJHT feed (which was posted on the previous page)?
- Is this a sign that McConnell feels cornered and is cynical about the chances of Trump emerging this with his usefulness for the GOP intact, or an "I'll believe it when I see it"?
- That last line... Can this be used as a loophole, in that the Senate Republicans can simply put their vote on the impeachment on hold indefinitely?
There's still no point in arguing about a might-have-been. There's no real basis for the notion that Pelosi wouldn't be pushing for impeachment if Trump was caught asking Ukraine or Australia for dirt on Sanders or Warren or Buttigieg or O'Rourke or Booker or Klobuchar or Gabbard or Yang or friggin' Williamson.
![]()
![]()
Remember that he couldn't beat Hillary Clinton in the primaries. And yes, there are a lot of differences between that and the General Election, but still.
Regardless, barring the invention of a machine that lets us look into parallel timelines or universes, there's no way to confirm if he could have won in 2016's general election. Because he lost the primaries.
Edited by M84 on Sep 30th 2019 at 10:46:24 PM
Disgusted, but not surprised![]()
Moscow Mitch is definitely planning on delaying it as much as possible if and when the House passes the articles. All those pretty words in the beginning are just dressing so that he can say that "they're working on it" if asked about why voting is taking so long.
![]()
Except it's not actually the worst-case scenario. The worst case scenario is Trump winning re-election in 2020.
Focus more on the efforts to get Trump out of office, whether it's through impeachment or electing a Democratic Party President in 2020.
Edited by M84 on Sep 30th 2019 at 11:31:10 PM
Disgusted, but not surprised

![[up] [up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png)
Sam Seder is a piece of work all right. And as others mentioned he is not even the worst on this front. Even he thought Jimmy Dore went too far, for example.
Disgusted, but not surprised