TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

Zendervai Since: Oct, 2009
#56852: Jun 24th 2013 at 9:39:22 PM

Oh, that company. I've seen a couple of Echolight's films before. They're really boring. They don't have very good directors and the actors aren't that great either. Saying this as a Christian, most Christian film producers don't tend to be very good. And they all make 'inspirational' films that focus on some miracle and usually really miss the point of the message they're trying to get across.

Santorum taking over the company probably won't do much.

Also, Texas as the center of the "faith-and-family film industry"? Maybe, if most of the audience is there too.

edited 24th Jun '13 9:40:23 PM by Zendervai

ramuf Electric Heart from the Shining Throne Since: Jan, 2013
Electric Heart
#56853: Jun 24th 2013 at 9:40:18 PM

Santorum in charge of a film company? I wonder what sanctimonious and otherwise horrifying crap that company will produce now.

Zendervai Since: Oct, 2009
#56854: Jun 24th 2013 at 9:43:22 PM

These companies exist on a razor blade. They rely on the same buyers, movie after movie, and if the movies change too much, they lose the buyers pretty quickly and they don't tend to get new ones very often.

ramuf Electric Heart from the Shining Throne Since: Jan, 2013
Electric Heart
#56855: Jun 24th 2013 at 9:45:11 PM

I can only wonder, though. If he's a CEO now, does that mean his political aspirations are gone?

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#56856: Jun 24th 2013 at 10:12:21 PM

He'll have to resign if he wants to run again, but that's it.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Pykrete NOT THE BEES from Viridian Forest Since: Sep, 2009
NOT THE BEES
#56857: Jun 24th 2013 at 10:15:36 PM

I...think my mom has an Echolight film laying around. If she doesn't, I'm positive my grandmother does, because she collects Christian films.

They're awful. Watching them, you'd think subtlety and restraint were things you put on a pizza.

edited 24th Jun '13 10:15:49 PM by Pykrete

midgetsnowman Since: Jan, 2010
#56859: Jun 25th 2013 at 7:03:24 AM

Generally, I find anytime you get any media that purports to be the good christian alternative to the mainstream, its mediocre to terrible and is only riding on that coattail because as the south park episode where Cartman made a christian band put it, you can pretty much print anything and get it bought as long as it praises jesus a lot, regardless of if it has any merit at all.

Granted, theres always exceptions..but they tend to be just that. exceptions,

edited 25th Jun '13 7:07:34 AM by midgetsnowman

Wildcard Since: Jun, 2012
#56860: Jun 25th 2013 at 7:18:21 AM

@MS: That's pretty much the problem in a nutshell though. Too many series trying to be the good Christian alternative instead of trying to make a good work on it's own merits that contains Christian themes.

Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#56861: Jun 25th 2013 at 7:19:12 AM

[up]

I find most "Christian broadcasting" tends to be closer to Jack Chick (in quality, not necessarily morals) than Chronicles Of Narnia.

Schild und Schwert der Partei
midgetsnowman Since: Jan, 2010
#56862: Jun 25th 2013 at 7:53:24 AM

[up][up]

Yep. pretty much.

If the work cant stand on any leg but "we lurve jesus" then only evangelicals are likely going to ever buy it.

occono from Ireland. Since: Apr, 2009
#56863: Jun 25th 2013 at 7:59:47 AM

Is this the right topic to discuss SCOTUS striking down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act?

Dumbo
Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#56864: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:05:01 AM

[up]

Absolutely. Here's the story (sorry for HuffPo link).

In essence, section 5, which forces states to preclear changes to their voting laws, is constitutional...but it is unconstitutional to apply it to some states and not others under section 4.

NAACP has said "Today will be remembered as a step backwards in the march towards equal rights."

Agree with them. This is not good. I think the obvious solution would be, in an ideal world, to pass legislation extending it to the whole nation. For the time being, local organizations like SPLC, NAACP, SCLC, and Democratic party organizations will have to work around it.

You're on the frontlines now, Southern Democrats. Best of luck.

edited 25th Jun '13 8:12:11 AM by Achaemenid

Schild und Schwert der Partei
Wildcard Since: Jun, 2012
#56865: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:08:15 AM

What does Section 4 alone of this act do?

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#56866: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:09:42 AM

I think it's the one that forces certain states to seek approval before they can change their voting laws?

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#56867: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:11:22 AM

Uh oh. That's license for states to disenfranchise minority voters.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Wildcard Since: Jun, 2012
#56868: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:11:59 AM

Why would you want to do that and not just try to get their vote?

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#56869: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:13:42 AM

Because when you've spent decades trying to discriminate against them, you wouldn't be entirely off the mark if you were to assume that, given the opportunity, they would not vote for you.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Zendervai Since: Oct, 2009
#56870: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:14:33 AM

Because it's easier to block people who won't vote for you than to try and appeal to them.

The problem is that when the blocked voters are allowed to vote, they certainly won't vote for you.

Wildcard Since: Jun, 2012
#56871: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:15:38 AM

Yeah but a lot of politicians think average people are stupid and will vote for them as long as they phrase their discrimination right. The more disenfranchised they get the more they will hate you and vote for the other party once they move out of state or find another way.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#56872: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:19:07 AM

But those people are subhuman anyway, goes the logic, and so you can't count on them to be smart enough to know that voting for you is in their best interests, even though your platform specifically attempts to harm them by denying them various sorts of rights. Given that, stopping those terrible people from voting is your only real choice.

I mean, if you've built your party identity around racism, then "not being racist" isn't going to fly with your party's voters. As there is no non-racist platform that these voters will accept, you will never appeal to more than a fraction of the constituencies that their racism targets.

edited 25th Jun '13 8:20:34 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#56873: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:19:58 AM

[up][up]

Ah, but that's the beauty of it! Them uppity n*****s can't vote, because they've been disenfranchised! Clever, eh?

edited 25th Jun '13 8:20:10 AM by Achaemenid

Schild und Schwert der Partei
Wildcard Since: Jun, 2012
#56874: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:20:28 AM

I think a quote from Prof Farnsworth would be good right about now:

"I don't want to live on this planet anymore."

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#56875: Jun 25th 2013 at 8:24:26 AM

Because appealing to minorities generally means they have to enact policies that piss off their pre-established base. For all the shit we give Fox News they are right when they say the Democrats have gone out of their way to essentially bribe minorities into voting for them. Where they go wrong is not realizing that they do the same thing yet their chosen demographics are shrinking while the Democrats' are growing.

edited 25th Jun '13 8:26:28 AM by Kostya


Total posts: 417,856
Top