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
A bunch of the people who lost in the House won narrowly in a Democratic wave year in fundamentally Republican seats without a Republican President at the top of the ticket and it makes sense that they would be first on the chopping block in a year with less good fundamentals.
Some moderate Democrats lost while outrunning Biden, because he lost their district by too much. Progressive challengers and moderate challengers pretty much all lost, while both outrunning and underperforming Biden. People who supported M4A lost in districts Biden won. People who didn't also lost in districts Biden won. Some people in safe districts, all across the Democratic spectrum, won even while underperforming the presidential numbers by a bunch. A handful of people of various ideological leanings won in Trump districts.
We don't even have complete numbers yet. But to look at what's happened so far and suggest it means a certain direction for the Democratic Party seems very premature. I see no ideological coherence to Democrats who won or lost. Maybe complete results and numbers will tell a different story, but people mostly seem to be looking for things that support their priors.
The only thing of I've seen pretty much everyone agree on is that Democrats need better ground/digital game, do a better job of pushing back on Republican attacks and not being defined by them, need better messaging. And that's a matter of strategy and execution, not ideology.
Not that I think Fourthspartan is right, but even if he is.
You think that arresting the entirety of the Republican leadership wouldn't cause blood in the streets? Really?
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Nov 13th 2020 at 2:43:55 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangSo apparently, Jaime Harrison is likely going to be the new head of the DNC.
I don't really know much about Harrison other than his unfortunate loss to Graham this year. How does everyone feel about this?
Are we arresting them for actual crimes they've committed? In which case, the situation is worse if you let them continue.
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.![]()
He was Chair for South Carolina's Democratic Party at one point. I wonder if he did a good job then, for example, in helping Democrats get elected at the local level in redder areas, or building up party infrastructure in the state.
Edit: I think he was also worked under Jim Clyburn at one point?
Edited by nova92 on Nov 13th 2020 at 2:58:01 AM
If we straight up arrest hundreds of people, that's absolutely illegal and improper. If we investigate, indict, prosecute, and then potentially convict them, the process of law has been followed.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I really don't. Most of the people who talk about that stuff, as Codafett pointed out, have no actual spine for getting off their burrito-laden asses and picking up guns.
We might (probably would) get a bunch of lone-wolf actors, people driving cars into protests, freemen-on-the-land and isolated terrorism, but large-scale rebellion is highly unlikely.
Indeed. I'm pretty sure that the majority of the big-name Republicans are guilty of something we can put them in jail for.
Edited by Ramidel on Nov 13th 2020 at 2:06:32 AM
Harrison sounds like a decent name for DNC chair, but it does seem like Abrams should also have serious consideration, also as the election doesn’t seem to be until February I’d way to see what other names appear.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranI don't think it's that progressives need to "shut up" but rather that it's too early and disingenuous to draw conclusions about moderates being at fault when we don't even have all the information (this also goes both ways). Until then it's basically people drawing whatever conclusion they wanted to believe in the first place.
Edited by Draghinazzo on Nov 13th 2020 at 8:13:35 AM
I'm partly posting to show my new avatar, but I think there has been an "issue" (at least in the isolated world of Twitter) with leftists buying into shakily supported/false stories from The Hill and Politico about Biden taking various Republican-placating actions.
Like one recent example is a story about Biden's cabinet being heavily Republican and his Chief of Staff being Rahm Emmanuel.
Also, I would definitely be up for impeachment of Alito and Congress should take action against De Joy and other officials who broke the law.
Edited by Hodor2 on Nov 13th 2020 at 5:22:51 AM
I don't think it's that progressives need to "shut up" but rather that it's too early and disingenuous to draw conclusions about moderates being at fault when we don't even have all the information (this also goes both ways). Until then it's basically people drawing whatever conclusion they wanted to believe in the first place.
~Draghinazzo It's very important to acknowledge that the moment the results were announced people were blaming leftists and calling for us to go to the Right. I agree that blaming the failure on insufficient leftism is currently questionable considering the lack of data but it's important to note that we in no way have a monopoly on making broad idealogical claims like that.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Nov 13th 2020 at 3:34:20 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang"We might (probably would) get a bunch of lone-wolf actors, people driving cars into protests, freemen-on-the-land and isolated terrorism, but large-scale rebellion is highly unlikely."
I don't mean to sound heartless or glib, but we already have right-wing terrorism in isolated bursts. The American rightwing held all three branches of government for two years and even that wasn't enough. It's something the sane parts of the country will have to face at some point, but I'm not sure it will ever reach beyond mass shootings and bombings and turn into Civil War 2.
I don't disagree with this, which is why I said it goes both ways. It didn't make sense for moderates to blame progressives for losing districts either before we had all the information.
Civil War 2 is an outlandish concern. There isn't enough regional support for mutually exclusive ideologies to make that happen. More likely is that the Democrats will get their ass kicked in an election as backlash.
Progressives aren't losing districts, they're just not winning them, period, unless it's like a gimme seat with an overwhelmingly Democratic base.
Edited by CrimsonZephyr on Nov 13th 2020 at 6:42:10 AM
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.""with leftists buying into shakily supported/false stories from The Hill and Politico about Biden taking various Republican-placating actions.
Like one recent example is a story about Biden's cabinet being heavily Republican and his Chief of Staff being Rahm Emmanuel."
Are you saying these are fake stories falsely attributed to those publications, or those are fake stories those publications actually are reporting as true?
Edited by Parable on Nov 13th 2020 at 3:44:02 AM
The accusation was that progressives were to blame for moderates loosing districts. I do feel that it seems some people took the bait on it, charging back moderates instead of going “How about we wait like 5 minutes before devolving into infighting?”
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranThe accusation was that progressives were to blame for moderates loosing districts. I do feel that it seems some people took the bait on it, charging back moderates instead of going “How about we wait like 5 minutes before devolving into infighting?”
If politics were rational you'd be entirely correct, but sadly it is not and thus harmful narratives should be attacked as quickly as possible.
I don't disagree with this, which is why I said it goes both ways. It didn't make sense for moderates to blame progressives for losing districts either before we had all the information.
Good to hear.

It depends if the alternative is living under a fascist ethnostate that is determined to kill sexual minorities and religious dissent.
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.