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

Galadriel Since: Feb, 2015
#333276: Oct 10th 2020 at 5:39:48 PM

According to Real Clear Politics, Biden is still polling similar to or worse than Clinton was in the midwest swing states:

Michigan: Biden +6.7, Clinton (2016) +10.7

Wisconsin: Biden +5.5, Clinton (2016) +6.7

Pennsylvania: Biden +7.1, Clinton (2016) +8.3

This is despite nationally being +9.6, whereas Clinton was +5.3 at this point.

I don’t trust the Midwest.

Edited by Galadriel on Oct 10th 2020 at 8:41:32 AM

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#333277: Oct 10th 2020 at 5:41:40 PM

I've been informed that polling in those states actually was pretty bad in 2016.

If that's not the case this year, that makes a big difference, because it means though the numbers are similar, they're more likely to be accurate now than they were then.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#333278: Oct 10th 2020 at 5:45:32 PM

Roberts was part of the team that handed George W. Bush an election he did not win.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#333279: Oct 10th 2020 at 5:51:02 PM

It's high time the US just admits defeat and gets out of Afghanistan. They are not going to win. They are not going to get a favourable peace out of it. They lost, and they'll have to face the consequences and stop pretending they can just wait it out.

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#333280: Oct 10th 2020 at 5:55:31 PM

Yes, it's absolutely possible.

No, it absolutely isn't.

The Supreme Court's power lies solely in its legitimacy, the only election they could alter would be one that's extremely close. A landslide or solid win would defacto strip them of any opportunity to change it because the victor would be undeniable.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Oct 10th 2020 at 5:57:28 AM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#333281: Oct 10th 2020 at 6:00:36 PM

[up][up] “Wait it out” is the goal, the problem is framing Afghanistan in the context of win or lose.

They should have sent a poet.
Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#333282: Oct 10th 2020 at 6:04:19 PM

Yeah, the state polling in 2016 had errors that gave the impression Clinton was doing better than she actually was. Plus the undecided voters went largely for Trump.

The national polls ended up being right anyway because Clinton overperformed in the states she won.

Protagonist506 from Oregon Since: Dec, 2013 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
#333283: Oct 10th 2020 at 6:04:29 PM

The problem is I'm not 100% sure it's a war we can afford to lose. I mean, unless we're fighting them, what's to stop the terrorists from pulling another 9/11?

Leviticus 19:34
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#333284: Oct 10th 2020 at 6:06:11 PM

“Wait it out” is the goal, the problem is framing Afghanistan in the context of win or lose.

I'm all for the long term perspective, but we should avoid the sunk cost fallacy. Afghanistan is a failure of nation-building, at some point we have to recognize how little progress we've made.

The problem is I'm not 100% sure it's a war we can afford to lose. I mean, unless we're fighting them, what's to stop the terrorists from pulling another 9/11?

This is probably one of the more convincing reasons to avoid leaving.

But I think, or would hope, that our security apparatus has improved enough to stop such a thing.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Oct 10th 2020 at 6:07:33 AM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#333285: Oct 10th 2020 at 6:11:17 PM

Really, the US staying is not going to prevent terrorism. It sure didn't prevent various terrorist attacks in Europe. And occupying a country just because they might someday commit terrorism is a terrible motivation. With that reasoning, the US would never leave. There would always be a non-zero risk.

The US just needs to accept that there will always be a risk of terrorism, and that occupying entire countries is not going to stop it. Far from it.

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#333286: Oct 10th 2020 at 6:17:37 PM

Really, the US staying is not going to prevent terrorism. It sure didn't prevent various terrorist attacks in Europe. And occupying a country just because they might someday commit terrorism is a terrible motivation. With that reasoning, the US would never leave. There would always be a non-zero risk.

I agree with most of this but I have to disagree with the "it doesn't stop terrorism" bit, a victorious Taliban could very well shelter terrorism. After all, they did before. Thus stopping a haven for terrorists was a legitimate benefit of the occupation.

That doesn't mean that it outweighs the costs, I don't think it does, but it's not non-existent.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Oct 10th 2020 at 6:20:08 AM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#333287: Oct 10th 2020 at 6:24:11 PM

I'm all for the long term perspective, but we should avoid the sunk cost fallacy. Afghanistan is a failure of nation-building, at some point we have to recognize how little progress we've made.

Having not made much progress yet isn’t a good reason to take our ball and go home. The optimal strategy for Afghanistan is a long term one, and we still have time to turn it around.

They should have sent a poet.
Alphatater Since: May, 2020
#333288: Oct 10th 2020 at 6:31:13 PM

I mean, unless we're fighting them, what's to stop the terrorists from pulling another 9/11?

That overweight dude with the buzzcut who makes you do that cute piece of performance art where you take off your shoes and raise your hands above your head in a glass tube at the airport, is my understanding.

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#333289: Oct 10th 2020 at 6:36:05 PM

Having not made much progress yet isn’t a good reason to take our ball and go home. The optimal strategy for Afghanistan is a long term one, and we still have time to turn it around.

I don't know, but right now I'm not interested in continuing our discussion.

So I'll disengage with a resounding maybe.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Oct 10th 2020 at 7:35:55 AM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
Wryte Since: Jul, 2010
#333290: Oct 10th 2020 at 6:49:28 PM

Roberts was part of the team that handed George W. Bush an election he did not win.

Roberts was appointed by George W in 2005, after both his elections.

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#333291: Oct 10th 2020 at 6:52:54 PM

Though speaking of the 2000 election, I was a bit surprised to learn that the Florida state government was contemplating doing the same thing the Republicans in the Pennsylvania state government have brotched about just throwing out the results and appointing their own electors to vote for Bush.

RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#333292: Oct 10th 2020 at 7:01:21 PM

Speaking of Florida, a lot of retirees seem to have come out at once to vote for Biden. Which also for some reason means all the golf carts.

Shaoken (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Dating Catwoman
#333293: Oct 10th 2020 at 7:02:56 PM

Roberts was appointed by George W in 2005, after both his elections.

Roberts was the head of the legal team that argued the 2000 case.

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
#333294: Oct 10th 2020 at 7:08:22 PM

The problem is I'm not 100% sure it's a war we can afford to lose. I mean, unless we're fighting them, what's to stop the terrorists from pulling another 9/11?

How does fighting in Afghanistan relate to 'preventing another 9/11'?

For reference, 9//11 was planned in Pakistan and executed by suicide terrorists who were largely Saudi Arabian. The only involvement Afghanistan had with 9/11 was that the leader of the organization that planned it happened to have been hiding in Afghanistan at some point before 9/11 and Afghanistan refused to extradite him, probably because they physically couldn't (Evidence suggests Bin Laden was already in Pakistan by that point, where he stayed until Seal Team 6 found him and killed him there).

Angry gets shit done.
Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#333295: Oct 10th 2020 at 7:10:54 PM

Got my ballot in the mail. Will probably go to the county office and exchange it to vote in person there on Monday though. I dont trust myself to be able to write my full signature anymore.

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#333296: Oct 10th 2020 at 7:23:38 PM

[up][up] Taliban-held Afghanistan was what allowed al-Qaeda to transform from a local militia into an expansive terror network with international aspirations.

They should have sent a poet.
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#333297: Oct 10th 2020 at 7:45:53 PM

“Wait it out” is the goal, the problem is framing Afghanistan in the context of win or lose.

Am I alone in thinking guaranteeing the rights of people living in Afghanistan is its own victory?

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Galadriel Since: Feb, 2015
#333298: Oct 10th 2020 at 7:53:34 PM

“Permanent military occupation of a foreign country” is not a reasonable objective.

You cannot turn Afghanistan into a liberal democracy by force of arms. The US has been there for two decades, and it has failed to achieve durable political change. Continuing to keep troops there will not change that fact - it just makes the place an effective training ground for extremist groups, in the same way that Iraq was.

US troops in the Middle East play into the hands of anti-American terrorist groups. I’d wager that baiting you into it was a notable part of the motivation for 9/11.

Edited by Galadriel on Oct 10th 2020 at 10:57:17 AM

DingoWalley1 Asgore Adopts Noelle Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Can't buy me love
Asgore Adopts Noelle
#333299: Oct 10th 2020 at 8:00:04 PM

Compromise position: We pull out of Afghanistan, but we also guarantee that all Afghanis, especially those of Religious Minorities (Shi'ites, Christians, Ahmadis, Hindus, Sikhs), have the right to legally migrate to the United States. Similar to how Cubans could just migrate to the US the minute they set foot on US Soil, but not as easy.

Redmess Redmess from Netherlands Since: Feb, 2014
Redmess
#333300: Oct 10th 2020 at 8:03:26 PM

Right, continuing occupation is just going to breed more resentment and hatred of Americans, and lead to more risk of terrorism, not less. This sort of occupation has a way of breeding terrorist movements as a counter reaction.

Hope shines brightest in the darkest times

Total posts: 417,856
Top