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
If your analysis is right, then being relevant to American politics would scarcely be my idea of a virtue. Still, you paint a pretty utopian scenario for your own side ... similar to the all-but-Democrat-free paradise that many naive conservatives envisioned back in 1994. Funny how these utopias never quite actually show up, no matter how fondly they're envisioned. And whether or not civilization has any bias toward the slippery and somewhat question-begging notion of "progressive ideals," hubris keeps on reliably incurring Nemesis, congratulate ourselves though we will on our "progress" as a species or as societies. You'd almost think Someone was laughing at us.
Yes, because Obama happened to have a razor-thin margin in a series of critical swing states with a disproportionate amount of all-or-nothing electoral votes.
I mean FFS, the third parties were almost actually a spoiler.
edited 7th Nov '12 1:46:40 PM by Pykrete
![]()
![]()
the change there was the democrats changed game plans to cope with such a scenario. If the republicans refuse to admit change is necessary and simply tailspin further into far right trends while ignoring changing demgraphics, it wont create a democrat utopia. it'll create a scenario where a new party rises to do what republicans refuse to do.
edited 7th Nov '12 1:50:53 PM by Midgetsnowman
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
To be fair to them, while the Democrats made a resurgence, liberal politicians really didn't. The Democrats were forced to go right in order to be electable. The Republicans went right in reaction. All that led to was a two party system where both parties are conservative right-wingers.
edited 7th Nov '12 1:54:49 PM by deathpigeon
![]()
It is when that margin is in an election where by all rights, Obama should have lost by a landslide. And when key demographics continued to grow in size. Its a problem when the youth vote and latino vote is getting bigger, and the share willing to vote republican continues to shrink.
edited 7th Nov '12 1:55:06 PM by Midgetsnowman
2-3% of the United States is actually nearly a million people. (2-3% of voters is a substantially smaller amount, closer to 300,000 voters.) At any rate, it's all in the context— strongly socially conservative Republicans lost elections that they were, according to polling and pundits alike, supposed to win. Their stances on issues like abortion and rape swung the races against them, despite all they had going for them— the down economy, the 'meh' feeling of many progressives towards Obama, the Tea Party base.
@Jhim: You'll note that we barely saw liberal politics at play in this election. Obamacare is a conservative, almost aggressively free market health care system by comparison with the rest of the world. Immigration barely got mentioned, except that Obama discussed "paths to citizenship", something that Ronald Reagan was in favor of. Progressive taxation has been a part of our system since the beginning. Climate science was almost invisible. The most significant liberal initiatives happened at the state level, with the gay marriage and marijuana legalization ballots, something that the "states' rights" people ought to be thrilled with. In foreign policy, the two candidates could have been identical twins.
Abortion rights are indeed a traditional liberal platform, as is gay marriage, but those are about the only cases where there was anything resembling a traditional left-right divide.
This election wasn't liberal versus conservative: it was moderate conservative versus regressive, and despite all the bluster from Fox News, a significant chunk of the country realizes that. The GOP must return to sanity or it will continue dragging its politics rightward into oblivion.
edited 7th Nov '12 2:12:45 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"This is what I call overwhelming rejection of far right ideas.
The link is being obnoxious. The people of Mississippi voted down a ballot initiative to make abortion illegal. If that isn't a clear sign that far right social conservatism is politically untenable, I don't know what is.
edited 7th Nov '12 2:16:33 PM by Fish1
Florida has a lot of absentee ballots to count plus a mandatory recount because the state's election laws say you have to perform one if the margin of victory is less than one percent.
Statistically, Obama wins it. You don't overcome a 50,000+ vote margin in a recount. However, the rules are the rules, and given what happened in 2000 I think we can all say that we'd prefer things to happen by the book.
edited 7th Nov '12 2:16:37 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Of course, even if the Republican party fades into obscurity, there will be no Democratic utopia. It seems odd to assume that Republicans will be the only relevant regressive party.
Also who honestly thinks the Republican party will just up and die tomorrow/other similar claims, rather than gradually lose power over a long period of time (and possibly fall into irrelevance if it goes on long enough) if they don't do a better job at courting minorities? If anyone seriously wants to defend such an alarmist position, that's fine, but it seems like most people lean towards the latter position so that seems more worthy of discussing than this "does Obama's victory mean we will live in a Republican-free super happy liberal paradise" silliness. At least, that's my position. Guess I could be misinterpreting other people.
edited 7th Nov '12 2:18:52 PM by HilarityEnsues
![]()
![]()
Well how long is the recount going to take? BBC has statistics for Florida and while it's close Obama is clearly ahead of Romney.
In my opinion the Republicans fading away means that the regressive stance they take will be considered antiquated and unneeded in modern society. The Republicans could very well hang on in some form but they'll probably just be a shell of their current party.
edited 7th Nov '12 2:18:38 PM by Kostya
American populist conservatism is based on Americans innate individualism, and our sense of competition. People who vote Republican are doing so out of a concern that that they have to protect themselves against the unfair tactics and advantages of groups who are more collectivistic than they are. This isn't going to go away just because Obama won the election and the Dems picked up a few Senate seats.
This is no shift to the left. Unfortunately for Romney, this time around "groups using unfair tactics and advantages" included the rich. But that wont necessarily be true in four years. The Dems had better not rest on their laurels, or an economic recovery could put them right back out again (because the business interests would claim credit for any recovery).
And all it would take is a few adjustments to immigration policy and the Hispanic vote could be up for grabs. Eventually gay marriage will be national policy and that issue will be off the table. Another eight years and potentially everything could be different.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.@Hilarity Ensues: Nobody said anything about living in a "regressive free liberal paradise". We said that this election may mark the gradual decline of the reactionary GOP into obscurity. Either they move to the center and dump their extremists, or they cater to extremists and become irrelevant. Neither process will happen overnight, but simple demographics makes it inevitable that if they keep courting the WASP vote above all else, they'll continue to lose.
@De Marquis: A GOP that softens its stance on immigration, gay marriage, and abortion has, by definition, become less extreme, and is therefore one of the scenarios we have proposed for how it can remain relevant. It would also be quite welcome, as it would make room in the political landscape for more liberal positions to enter the conversation.
For example, I'd like an honest discussion on what to do about climate change, before my kids' kids think Manhattan Bay is a fun vacation spot.
edited 7th Nov '12 2:23:00 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
Thats our point though. Clinging to hardcore rabid conservativism is obviously not a good plan. Either the republicans will change or they will fade into obscurity and be replaced by a better positioned conservative party. Either way, their core policy will alter to something else.
If they pick up latino , Black and youth voters, they did it by catering to policies those groups SUPPORT. T His is an overall win for those of us on the left who WANT a sane conservative party around to temper us. I'm well aware liberals like me can get carried away with idealism. Thats why we need a strong conservative party around that is willing to point out when we're going too far instead of a regressive monstrosity that assumes all liberal ideas are evil.
edited 7th Nov '12 2:23:18 PM by Midgetsnowman
@deathpidgeon; I'm not sure where you're getting "Obama wins means we're going further right" thing from, as voting for him generally appears to mean "We don't like how far right the other guys have gone" and would be more of an indication that voters in general are far more comfortable with where Obama and other Democrats stand than they are with where Romney and his ilk do. What with the general rejection of a whole lot of far right nut jobs at state and congressional levels also having happened in this election.
So. Yeah. It's a rejection of going even further right by a good chunk of the population. Not the doomsday scenario you seem to have painted up.
@Hilarity Ensues: Well, yes, that's the point. The strawmanning in this case is that we're talking about the inevitable and abrupt demise of conservative politics. That is not at all what's being said. What we are saying, which you and I agree on, is that the GOP has gone beyond conservatism into rabid reactionary politics, and must move away from it in order to continue to survive as a party.
edited 7th Nov '12 2:24:45 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Oh, dont worry, there's plenty left over to be rabidly conservative over. Like regressive tax policy, or private schooling, or gutting "Obama-care", or eliminating Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, or protectionist trade practices, or de-regulating the environment.
And then there's abortion. So like I said, dont start getting all cocky just because Obama won.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.

@Thorn: This is actually reminiscent of how the 18th amendment got overturned. New York got an amendment saying that alcohol was legal, then basically told the government to suck it. That led to more alcohol legalization, and, eventually, the 21st amendment.