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
It is a little disingenuous to bring up an idea like Trump firing off nukes if your starting position is that it's not reasonable. All it can do is cause people to worry for no reason.
"Hey, I'm going to bring up this thing I don't think will happen so it can trigger a side-discussion that will get people panicked."
These firings lead me to think that my belief about the most likely way for Trump to act during his lame duck period is accurate: he's going to sabotage the executive branch as thoroughly as he can to make it harder for Biden to function as President.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I'm not sure if he is going to sabotage it for Biden, but I think he will try to use it to get more money out of it, and to see if he can wrangle a victory out of defeat.
I don't think he is going to outright call for a violent uprising, but he may well incite one through his comments about voter fraud. From what we've seen so far, he is more the insinuating sort. He is not really a leader of anything, much less a revolt.
Hope shines brightest in the darkest timesHe's going to attempt to punish everyone in his reach who he thinks failed to properly support him. He'll incite violence, fire off lawsuits left and right. The important question isn't whether he'll attempt these things, but who among his staff will go along.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Yes, the Biden administration is going to be a fascinating study in how badly businesses and politicians are willing to sabotage their own country's economy just to get revenge on Democrats.
Also, back on Trump: his behavior is consistent with someone who knows he's going to be completely vulnerable to prosecution and financial ruin the minute he leaves the White House. He's desperate to remain President because if he doesn't he's likely to be behind bars for the rest of his life.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I’ll defer to you on the subject then, though I stand that procedures are likely to vary depending on how senior a person is.
That’s a bad example, it is a crime to do that, but the president can’t be charged for crimes while they are president.
5 years ago I think you’d have been right, but it stopped be unprecedented when Trump won in 2016, the possibility has been around and been discussed for years. Now plans might not exist because of a variety of reasons, but the possibility stooped being unprecedented a while back.
That was Rick Perry, who was secretary of energy until 2019.
I was responding to Charles’ post about him being worried about nukes.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranIt's hard for the administration to do worse than absolutely nothing, which is what's currently going on. Although we might note that there's no longer any motive to actively sabotage the efforts of the CDC, since that was based on covering up bad news to improve Trump's chances at reelection. Since the election is done, they may just leave the CDC alone to do its job, which would represent a non-trivial improvement.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Bad news guys: COVID-19 has tested positive for Representative Matt Gaetz (R-FL).
Poor virus.
Edited by Rationalinsanity on Nov 7th 2020 at 11:40:06 AM
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Don't be daft, he's not going to be impeached.
And I think Trump is going to be far more interested in lining his pockets, avoiding bankruptcy, and avoiding jail time than in punishing the country. Any damage he does will be collateral damage.
Frankly, I don't think he cares enough to be vindictive towards the average Trump voter. He's far more likely to take it out on his direct allies and the Senate.
Edited by Redmess on Nov 7th 2020 at 5:06:59 PM
Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
"Don't be daft" is edging really close to violating the "Don't be a dick" rule.
That might well get him impeached, if Trump looks likely to harm the GOP on his way down they’d like to stop that.
It would come down to Republicans weighing up the short-term harm of removing Trump (and pissing off their base), against to the long-term harm him going all Downfall on his way out (and potentially harming the party’s brand further).
Edited by Silasw on Nov 7th 2020 at 4:16:45 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran

Question about the agency directors Trump is firing: Wasn't Chatterjee the one who wanted to abolish his own agency until he actual was put in charge of it and realized "oh, shit this really is a big deal? "