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
Rather, there might be a set of hard-to poll people who seldom partake in presidential elections but are at least Trump-curious. Their existence gives the turnout-vote share curve an U-shape: Both very low and very high turnout favour Republicans.
Mmm, that's not to mention the additional confounding variables we have from trying to conduct polling operations in the middle of a pandemic, so you're going to get extra weirdness from state by state variation simply in who happens to be at home more than they would be for some other reason. If that correlates in some way with any demographic that would experience a split in voting preference, it's another way for the polls to be erratically off.
Regarding rhetoric, it will always depend on who you are talking to. To progressives, Biden often IS the lesser evil. If you are against kids in cages or drone strikes, well it's not like voting Obama or Biden changes that because they did both. A moderate won't care, and a republican would whine about it anyway. To the moderate you say that Biden has plenty of the good stuff of Obama, and to a republican you say "you might not like some of his policies but he's a decent, catholic guy". Framing matters, and who you frame it to matters.
Calling Biden a socialist is what riles up republicans and a segment of cuban immigrants but the average democrat isn't going to care (cause they know he isn't) and progressives almost wish he was. Same take, different outcomes.
x4: The Libyans explicitly told the NATO forces to not send troops. Unless you're angry they didn't shoot their way in to build a government against the wishes of basically every Libyan faction, there was little more he could have done.
It just makes me sad, TBH. A creeping despair that people conflate milquetoast social democracy with, ya know, the actual policies myriad socialists come up with.
Edited by AzurePaladin on Nov 17th 2020 at 7:19:42 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 suspect that some of Trump's extra late support came from low information voters that were deciding at the last minute who saw the 3rd quarter GDP numbers, saw the words "record breaking growth", and didn't understand that those growth numbers weren't good in context, even if they were literally record breaking. I've seen basically nobody consider this hypothesis. (I don't expect this to have much of an effect, but I could see it closing the gap in voting between Biden and Trump by .5%.)
I think its because any reasonable person would be disgusted by Trump's behavior and sadism that they already broke against Trump long ago, and the ones who are still "undecided" were not bothered by his awful personality.
Biden hopes to avoid divisive Trump investigations, preferring unity – Biden has told aides that he's concerned that investigations would divide the country but that he would leave decisions up to an independent Justice Department. (Emphasis Mine)
Biden has raised concerns that investigations would further divide a country he is trying to unite and risk making every day of his presidency about Trump, said the sources, who spoke on background to offer details of private conversations.
They said he has specifically told advisers that he is wary of federal tax investigations of Trump or of challenging any orders Trump may issue granting immunity to members of his staff before he leaves office. One adviser said Biden has made it clear that he "just wants to move on."
Another Biden adviser said, "He's going to be more oriented toward fixing the problems and moving forward than prosecuting them."
Any decisions by Biden's Justice Department regarding Trump, his staff, his associates, his business or his policies wouldn't affect investigations by state officials, including Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., who has fought to obtain Trump's tax returns.
Biden hopes to avoid divisive Trump investigations, preferring unity Biden has told aides that he's concerned that investigations would divide the country but that he would leave decisions up to an independent Justice Department.
WASHINGTON — President-elect Joe Biden has privately told advisers that he doesn't want his presidency to be consumed by investigations of his predecessor, according to five people familiar with the discussions, despite pressure from some Democrats who want inquiries into President Donald Trump, his policies and members of his administration.
Biden has raised concerns that investigations would further divide a country he is trying to unite and risk making every day of his presidency about Trump, said the sources, who spoke on background to offer details of private conversations.
They said he has specifically told advisers that he is wary of federal tax investigations of Trump or of challenging any orders Trump may issue granting immunity to members of his staff before he leaves office. One adviser said Biden has made it clear that he "just wants to move on."
Another Biden adviser said, "He's going to be more oriented toward fixing the problems and moving forward than prosecuting them."
Any decisions by Biden's Justice Department regarding Trump, his staff, his associates, his business or his policies wouldn't affect investigations by state officials, including Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., who has fought to obtain Trump's tax returns.
Trump's refusal to concede creates challenges for Biden's transition process As Biden tries to balance his own inclinations with pressures from within his party, his advisers stressed that he is seeking to reset the dynamic between the White House and the Justice Department from what it has been under Trump.
Biden wants his Justice Department to function independently from the White House, aides said, and Biden isn't going to tell federal law enforcement officials whom or what to investigate or not to investigate.
"His overarching view is that we need to move the country forward," an adviser said. "But the most important thing on this is that he will not interfere with his Justice Department and not politicize his Justice Department."
A third Biden adviser said that when it comes to any Trump-related investigations, the expectation is "it's going to be very situational" and "depending on the merits." Broadly, Biden's priorities will be the economy, the coronavirus, climate change and race relations, not looking back at the Trump administration, an adviser said.
Presidents generally set the tone for what issues they believe should be priorities for the Justice Department, and questions about Trump-related investigations or retrospective reviews are expected to intensify as Biden gets closer to taking office.
"He can set a tone about what he thinks should be done," a Biden adviser said. But, the adviser said, "he's not going to be a president who directs the Justice Department one way or the other."
Recommended
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT Biden team taps Justice Department veterans to circumvent transition standoff Biden's team is also reluctant to send any signal to Trump administration officials that the Justice Department wouldn't look into their actions, given that there are still nine weeks until the inauguration, another person briefed about the discussions said.
"While they're not looking for broad criminal indictments, they do want to make sure that people don't think there are no ramifications for any of their actions between now and the new presidency," this person said.
Emphasizing an arm's-length approach to the Justice Department could give Biden cover from criticism from his supporters about any lack of investigations into Trump, his policies or his staff. Democrats have sharply criticized Trump's direct influence on Justice Department investigations, including his calls for Biden and former President Barack Obama to be prosecuted over allegations of unspecified crimes. Pledging, as Biden has, not to interfere with federal investigations would be welcomed by many of his supporters.
But it will be difficult for Biden to avoid the issue altogether, given the expected calls for investigations into an array of issues involving Trump — from his administration's child separation policy to his taxes, possible conflicts of interest and potential violations of campaign finance law. The issue could set Biden on a collision course with some of his own supporters, who are eager for a wholesale examination of the Trump presidency.
"There's also a strong school of thought that believes the law's the law," a Biden adviser said, describing the internal debate.
Biden said many times during the campaign that he would leave any decision whether to prosecute Trump up to his attorney general. "If that was the judgment that he violated the law and he should be, in fact, criminally prosecuted, then so be it," he said during a debate in Atlanta. "But I would not direct it."
Biden has said he wouldn't pardon Trump should that become a realistic question.
Still, multiple aides said, Biden is generally not inclined to see his Justice Department investigate Trump.
Edited by sgamer82 on Nov 17th 2020 at 8:01:52 AM
You do see the part about him not intending to interfere with the Justice Department, right?
I read it as Biden balancing what he'd prefer to do (move in from Trump) from what others would (prosecute Trump). He won't go out of his way personally, but he won't get in the way either.
Edited by sgamer82 on Nov 17th 2020 at 8:00:04 AM
It's not up to him. That's the point. Trump suborned the Justice Department to be his personal attack dogs. It's supposed to be independent: the President has no say in who gets investigated or prosecuted. In a properly functioning government, those decisions are up to the Attorney General and their subordinates.
This is how it needs to be. We can't turn into an autocratic state wherein the President tells the cops whom to arrest.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"In the proper working of things, it should be the Justice Department and only the Justice Department investigating, without any word from the President for or against. I'm assuming that Biden will be re-staffing the place after all the Trumpets flee, which should be reason enough to hope they'll be after Trump and his staff.
It's been fun.We need someone to also arrest every member of ICE involved in the kidnappings and forced sterializations then send them to jail for the rest of their lives.
The same for Dejoy for election tampering.
There's a lot of people that need to go to jail to protect America.
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters."We need someone to arrest..."
It doesn't work that way. Justice is not supposed to be political. If you break the law, you get investigated, indicted, prosecuted, and potentially convicted if you are guilty of the crimes charged and the government has followed the rules.
We do not go on hunting expeditions, we do not "lock up our enemies". Free countries don't work like that. All persons accused of crimes receive the due process of law. If they are guilty, let the system work to decide that.
Edited by Fighteer on Nov 17th 2020 at 11:05:09 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Neither are kidnappings and forced sterilizations, last I checked those aren't political, those are crimes against humanity.
And just like how "Just Following Orders" wasn't an excuse at Nuremburg...
Edited by AzurePaladin on Nov 17th 2020 at 11:10:17 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. -FighteerAnd those people should be prosecuted and convicted by following due process of law. We must restore democratic norms and adhering to our own rules is part of it.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

I’d argue that it’s a mistake to put Libya and other inventions as the same bucket as Iraq, Libya was in response to an active escalation of the government’s abuse of its population, Iraq was a proactive strike against a particular government for (at best) security reasons. Reactive humanitarian interventions have a much better track records than proactive topplings of dictatorships.
Libya certain has issues with how it went long-term, mainly around how in the West the anti-intervention push helped mean that there was minimal long-term nation building after the civil war started to wind down.
But nobody who criticises Obama over Libya is doing it because he was unwilling to send several thousand US troops to spend a decade doing national building. Well that’s my criticism, but my Socialist principles don’t stop at the border.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran