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
While my shock troops hunt down Starship (so we can force him into a gay marriage) should we get back to discussing US politics?
edited 2nd Apr '13 12:47:23 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranA couple of things to that. First, while a few rotten apples will come across the border into us... Some rotten apples will go the other way. Second, the people on either side of the border could always communicate. Like, "Hey, USA! This is Mexico! There's this mass murderer who we really want to catch who was last seen near the border. Would you help us out?" "Sure, Mexico! I mean, We don't want him killing anyone in here! Oh, a bank robber we really want to catch was last seen near the border, too! Can you help us with that?" "Sure, USA! We don't want our banks to get robbed either!" Not only would it be good for relations for them to do that, but it would be good for both countries.
To be fair, the last election was decided before all the states tallied their votes... The winner was "projected" to be Obama at 11pm, Romney conceded at about 11:30, and the first state to finish counting votes did so at about midnight(all times EST).
edited 2nd Apr '13 12:54:12 PM by Swish
![]()
![]()
![]()
That only works if the two countries have good relations and compatible judicial systems. If the two countries don't get on then you can have serious problems, say Mexico has a prison overcrowding problem, instead of dealing with it they can just release all their violent criminals across the border. Now that's a worst case scenario, but you need to have good relations with a country and compatible judicial systems (so as to avoid a guy who commits what isn't a crime in his home country just crossing over and committing it in a neighboring one) before you can have open borders. That's why most of Europe has border free travel, because our governments get along (kinda) and because our judicial systems all work together (normally).
![]()
![]()
Not gona disagree with that.
High levels of direct democracy has its drawbacks. The Swiss are probably the best example and they can pull it of logistically because they are rather small, and suffer the drawbacks of everyone having to come round to a position (look at how long it took them to give women the vote).
edited 2nd Apr '13 12:59:37 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran@Silasw: That's one of the many reasons I see full open borders to be something that won't happen for a long time. I mean, this open border stuff would have to be in a treaty between nations which not only opens borders but facilitates communication.
@Starship: Even though I'm a bleeding heart pacifistic environmentalist liberal-pinko-commie-hippie when it comes to foreign policy?
edited 2nd Apr '13 1:01:13 PM by deathpigeon
![]()
Well I can get behind that. I want fully open borders to, but the way I see it coming about is via a one world government. Which makes it a long term project (assuming my shipment of Naquadah continues to be delayed). The reason we allow people convinced of a crime (after servings their sentence) in Scotland (where the judicial system is different) into England is because we accept that even though the system is different, when it says justice has been done, justice has been done. That's the same reasoning behind allowing someone with a criminal record of a crime committed in New York go down to Texas, because the two systems trust that if one says justice has been done, then it has been done. Even if this area would have done it differently.
Switzerland not Sweden, Switzerland only introduced universal women's suffrage in 1970s.
edited 2nd Apr '13 1:14:04 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranDemocracy as we understand it is an old idea but a young practice.
Take the Anglosphere:
Women didn't get the franchise on equal terms with men in the UK until 1924. Until 1950, students, property owners, and shopkeepers could vote twice or even three times. Northern Ireland was much like the Deep South, only discrimination was along religious rather than racial lines, and anti-Catholic gerrymandering was endemic until direct rule from London was imposed in '72. The Troubles only sorted themselves out in the early 2000s, and problems persist.
One could argue that the USA didn't become a full democracy until the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
The theory of democracy is ancient, the practice is a phenomenon of the last half-century, and is still being worked on in the West and beyond.
Agreed. Poor use of language on my part. Have edited (edits in italics). Thanks.
edited 2nd Apr '13 1:18:01 PM by Achaemenid
Schild und Schwert der Partei@Starship: I hate to rain on your parade with a conspiracy theory, but the groups who are funding the Republican Party like the status quo on immigration: they want to make legal immigration almost impossible, so as to drive desperate Mexicans into America illegally, where they can be exploited as cheap labor and simultaneously piss off the angry white guys. Thus, the Republican Party can make noise about enforcing the border when they know full well that it's unenforceable; meanwhile, attacks on employers who employ illegal immigrants never actually go anywhere (the race card is played to shit up discussion if it ever looks like it'll do anything).
The reason the Republicans are starting to "evolve" on the issue is because the wheels are coming off and the Hispanic vote is clearly coming to outweigh the angry-white-guy vote.

I think the biggest secret of this forum is we are all quite weird and nobody wants to admit it.
Yeah Starship and I'm the guy who's gonna hand out abortions like candy, make Christians not allowed to marry, take up all the guns for the government, and censor anybody who disagrees.
edited 2nd Apr '13 12:44:12 PM by Wildcard