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

TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#31701: Oct 11th 2012 at 11:33:40 AM

People tend not to die, so much as they die much much earlier. I mean, you can't get cancer treatment, but even with the treatment, you're gonna die.

My father's brain cancer, for instance, would have fallen into this category (were not for the fact that he didn't want treatment in the first place).

edited 11th Oct '12 11:35:10 AM by TheyCallMeTomu

GlennMagusHarvey Since: Jan, 2001
#31702: Oct 11th 2012 at 11:39:02 AM

Mr. Romney, it's because people can get late treatment in a hospital for preventable issues that makes our healthcare system so damn costly.

So, you have two options. You can (1) kill (or let die) all these damn freeloaders, or (2) insure everyone so that risk is pooled properly and preventative care is more affordable in the first place so that people don't have to rely on charity care.

Now, you may not be a doctor, but doctors have something called a Hippocratic Oath, which makes Option (1) rather unattractive.

And by the way:

and it’s paid for, either by charity, the government or by the hospital.

You're running for president. You should be thinking in macroeconomic terms, you doofus.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#31703: Oct 11th 2012 at 11:39:30 AM

On a large enough time scale, everybody dies. The question is whether people die from untreated illness that could have been cured had they been able to seek medical care. I believe the answer to that one is yes, resoundingly. Of course, this calculation also ignores lost quality of life and lost productivity from untreated illness.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#31704: Oct 11th 2012 at 11:40:50 AM

Actually, studies show that 45k people die every year from preventable causes without health insurance. That's one person every twelve minutes. People who could be saved if it was just possible for them to get non-emergency care. Most of these are people with chronic conditions like diabetes that could be managed with regular doctors visits. But can't be fixed with emergency medicine alone.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
NoName999 Since: May, 2011
#31705: Oct 11th 2012 at 11:41:56 AM

[up][up][up][up][up]I'm pretty sure that issue in the middle link is treason.

And of course, they won't get arrested for it.

edited 11th Oct '12 11:43:01 AM by NoName999

CaissasDeathAngel House Lewis: Sanity is Relative from Dumfries, SW Scotland Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
House Lewis: Sanity is Relative
#31706: Oct 11th 2012 at 11:43:57 AM

The BBC has just claimed that Obama has now fallen behind Romney in the polls. Is there any merit to this, or is it another attempt by the BBC to be impartial when most of the country loves Obama?

My name is Addy. Please call me that instead of my username.
terlwyth Since: Oct, 2010
#31707: Oct 11th 2012 at 11:45:35 AM

[up] Oh no,it's true.

Ever since that last debate,and now Romney continues to fly off the handle lying,...and people are buying it.

Hopefully this can be fixed,...but I doubt it.

Linhasxoc Since: Jun, 2009
#31708: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:01:33 PM

You're running for president. You should be thinking in macroeconomic terms, you doofus.

This is a big part of why the whole "businessperson running for president" thing is so overrated. Of course Romney's going to think in microeconomics terms, because that's what you have to do as a businessperson. But being President (or in government in general) requires you to think in macroeconomic terms, which is something that no one in the Republican party seems to get.

edited 11th Oct '12 12:01:56 PM by Linhasxoc

Tangent128 from Virginia Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Gonna take a lot to drag me away from you
#31709: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:06:52 PM

Do emergency rooms treat cancer? I highly doubt they do, beyond the final symptoms... It's a pity the most obvious protest of that statement would probably endanger lives.

If any news stories pop up where a Republican cries liberal conspiracy in response to some massive hiring initiative... I'll be laughing to hide the pain.

I'm not very old, but this is the most disillusioning election of my politically-conscious life. I tend to ground my political views in some rather heavily classical roots, but now I'm "left-wing" simply for believing the President was born in America and mistrusting O'Keefe.

Do you highlight everything looking for secret messages?
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#31710: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:13:20 PM

The jobber conspiracy is actually gaining traction... Big Lie theory proven once again.

And while Romney is ahead in the national polls I believe Obama still has an electoral college edge.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#31711: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:15:37 PM

E Rs do not treat cancer. They will stabilize you if your heart stops because of the cancer or something, but they're not going to give you chemo.

#31712: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:15:54 PM

[up] He still has a very significant electoral edge. If things stay where they are, it will be 2000 all over again, only this time it will be the democrats suing to stop recounts.

<><
TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#31713: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:16:54 PM

Yeah, the reverse of 2000 is possible. I almost look forwards to it-it'll leave a bad taste in my mouth, but maybe Republicans will finally want to abandon the electoral college.

Tangent128 from Virginia Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Gonna take a lot to drag me away from you
#31714: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:18:33 PM

Or they could settle a dispute by ritual combat. Each side sends in their best World of Warcraft player.

Do you highlight everything looking for secret messages?
Enkufka Wandering Student ಠ_ಠ from Bay of White fish Since: Dec, 2009
Wandering Student ಠ_ಠ
#31715: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:20:18 PM

Nonsense. Needs a Hitman Absolution Contracts showdown.tongue

Anyway, here's an explanation as to why Ohio Republicans want to restrict early voting.

edited 11th Oct '12 12:23:35 PM by Enkufka

Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen Fry
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#31716: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:30:37 PM

[up] It's a very consistent narrative. Target your legislation so as to specifically impact voting blocs that are much more likely to vote Democrat. If you can't beat them at the polls, stop them from getting there.

@Linhasxoc: Romney isn't even very good at microeconomics. He's good at one particular type of capitalism: buying weak businesses, loading them up with debt, restructuring (meaning fire and outsource) their workforce, paying himself big dividends, then letting them sink into the murk.

edited 11th Oct '12 12:41:47 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Trivialis Since: Oct, 2011
#31717: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:32:56 PM

I'm not comfortable with the idea of the president winning on a minority popular vote. Well, I would be fine if it was a stable trend throughout the whole year. Maybe that will force the Republican Party to weigh the merit of the Electoral College. But this trend is recent, which means the president is at risk of losing the advantage he had in the past months.

I wish the Democrats actually platformed on constitutional reforms on elections, for example loosening the major parties.

@Linhasxoc I admit that this is a good point.

edited 11th Oct '12 12:34:14 PM by Trivialis

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#31718: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:40:14 PM

How would you even loosen the major parties? That statement means literally nothing.

Also, there's nothing that requires there be two major parties; that's the result of social and historical pressures. There's nothing in the constitution about the forming or maintaining of parties, and to do anything to them could encroach on the Freedom of Association clause. You can't change the current two big parties without changing the social context that allows them to exist. And the Democrats, understandably, see themselves as having more important issues to pursue, since the two party system hasn't killed or caused us to collapse yet. And also it would undermine their own influence, which tends to be dumb no matter which position you're at.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#31719: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:43:32 PM

It is likely impossible to eliminate out the two party system in America without a revolution of some sort.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Trivialis Since: Oct, 2011
#31720: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:44:37 PM

How would you even loosen the major parties?

By reforming elections, of course.

If the other party decides "We'll just go with the same old election methods", then that will pit the progressive reformers against them. And if the voters think those reforms are valid, then it will help the Democrats win and enact those measures.

Karkadinn Karkadinn from New Orleans, Louisiana Since: Jul, 2009
Karkadinn
#31721: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:46:23 PM

[up][up]I wouldn't go that far. But what's got to happen is that we've got to solve all these other major issues - like global warming and the economy - so that the two parties can relax against each other and seem 'not so different.' Once they've taken care of the big stuff, they'll feel comfortable on moving on to the little stuff, like enabling third parties to get meaningful representation through a fairer system.

But I don't know how we could get to that point, short of finding a way to destroy the GOP wholesale and taking advantage of the political environment immediately afterward before something equally stupid spring up in its place. It's hard to take care of major issues when the opposition is literally fighting you every last darn centimeter of the way and using every trick in the book to do so.

edited 11th Oct '12 12:46:42 PM by Karkadinn

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.
GlennMagusHarvey Since: Jan, 2001
#31722: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:49:29 PM

I came up with this fun tidbit.

Democrat n. a person who has figured out that their own actions affect others.

Republican n. a person who has figured out that the actions of others affect themselves.

Discuss.

johnnyfog Actual Wrestling Legend from the Zocalo Since: Apr, 2010 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
Actual Wrestling Legend
#31723: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:50:27 PM

Really, House Republicans? You're going to launch a congressional investigation into the fucking jobs numbers? Because they're optimistic?

This is turning into a bloodbath. Progressives pointed to the 'real' unemployment rate all year. Now Obama turns around and says we can trust the numbers? People are already suspicious; now all Romney has to do is hammer away until Obama has absolutely nothing to point to under his administration to show things have improved. Fish in a barrel.

It is likely impossible to eliminate out the two party system in America without a revolution of some sort.

This is our only hope. I don't advocate revolution, because it's a ticket to the ruling class slamming the door on our cage and calling out the cops; but the Democrats lack the power to change this nation's course. They're overwhelmed by the financial interests, and the Democratic President is under constant pressure to bomb some people somewhere, anywhere.

edited 11th Oct '12 12:51:09 PM by johnnyfog

I'm a skeptical squirrel
Trivialis Since: Oct, 2011
#31724: Oct 11th 2012 at 12:50:54 PM

Let's not. Republicans used to do all sorts of great things.

TrashJack Confirmed Doomer from beyond the Despair Event Horizon (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Confirmed Doomer
#31725: Oct 11th 2012 at 2:05:14 PM

[up]x10 I'm an Ohioan and I already voted. I had to, since I live on-campus during the week in Pennsylvania and I registered to vote in Ohio, not PA. So trying to restrict when and where I can vote WILL rub me the wrong way.

"Cynic, n. — A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be." - The Devil's Dictionary

Total posts: 417,856
Top