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
Nah, they had their turn, let the 1st Infantry do this, I'm biased because my grandfather served in that unit. Still, isn't the army one of the most homophobic places in our society, and a bastian of right wing extremism, at leas that's what I've heard.
edited 1st Aug '15 3:56:38 PM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.Uh, no. People, as always, are complex animals. The war in Afghanistan had tremendous bipartisan support on account of actually fighting a guilty party. Also consider that there are plenty of people who joined long before that, or who joined for completely different reasons, not all of which are made with particularly good alternatives for basic subsistence (financial), and you don't get a say in where you're deployed.
People who lean left are noticeably more likely to avoid the military in the first place, but the ranks aren't that far skewed from the general demographic.
edited 1st Aug '15 4:31:06 PM by Pykrete
![]()
I think you gravely overestimate the ability of the armed services to politically indoctrinate a recruit, assuming you've not engaged sarcasm mode. When you're in, you're generally not supposed to talk about politics, but there were a bunch of us celebrating in my barracks the first time Obama was elected, and most seemed wise to the general chickenhawk nature of the GOP.
And a lot of folks I knew joined in spite of their reservations about the War on Terror and their belief that the Bush administration was absolutely full of it. Sometimes it was the benefits, sometimes it was tradition.
edited 1st Aug '15 4:52:05 PM by Artificius
"I have no fear, for fear is the little death that kills me over and over. Without fear, I die but once."That's not to say we don't have extremists; one jackass who works next door is infamous for his rants against Muslimsnote , the poornote , and of course homosexualsnote ; and he's a Trump fanboy. But at the same time, my office of eleven people, three of us I know for certain are registered Democrats, and even one of the Republicans is seriously unhappy with the current crop of candidates.
That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - SilaswObama unveils though new climate regulations
I suppose destroying the economy of West Virginia, along with probably ending the US's energy boom and manufacturing Renaissance is the price we must pay to quite literally save the planet. Dam shame it has come to this. Still, Obama is defiantly doing the right thing. Climate change is real and doing nothing about it is madness.
Joe Biden exploring a run for the White House
I don't know much about all of Biden's positions, but he seems like the type of man I would want in office. Moderate, yet committed to the general welfare. And best of all he seems to have great personal integrity, apart from plagiarizing phrases or stuff like that. Screw the gaffes, after Trump, gaffe's are nothing. Also I really respect the man for being the only person in the higher levels of the US government willing to state in public that Saudi Arabia and Turkey were backing terrorists.
edited 2nd Aug '15 2:24:51 PM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.Regarding Biden as a potential presidential candidate, I'm not sure what he brings to the table as president. As VP, he brought experience and connections as a long-time Washington insider, which helped Obama (as a relative newcomer to the national political scene) make his policies into actual law. They also totally used Biden's reputation as gaffe-prone to their advantage. Most of Biden's "gaffes" were no such thing, but rather a way for the Obama administration to get out sentiments that they wanted in the public mind but didn't want to "officially" endorse. Remember Biden telling a predominantly black crowd that Romney would deregulate Wall Street, and once they were unchained they would "put you all back in chains"? The media tittered at the "gaffe" and the "insensitive" oblique slavery reference and oh look Biden's at it again. Yeah, sure, whatever — that was completely deliberate. It's like a reverse dog whistle. It's a Democrat saying "Republicans hate black people" as clearly as possible without actually saying it.
That sort of thing was a fantastic move by Obama, but the side effect is that it's sort of ruined Biden's image as a serious politician. If he were actually president, then people wouldn't be able to write off the stuff he says as "oh, silly gaffe-machine Biden" anymore, and because he's seen as a silly gaffe machine, getting people to take him seriously as a presidential candidate would be an uphill battle in the first place.
A more interesting possibility in my mind would be Biden getting tapped as someone's VP pick again, but he doesn't have much to offer either Clinton or Sanders. Both of them are been in Washington for a long time, so they don't need Biden to wrangle Congress like Obama did, and Bernie's far left enough that he'll just say outright what Biden hinted at with his "gaffes", while Hilary probably doesn't want anyone saying that sort of shit associated with her campaign, as she needs to differentiate herself from Bernie by establishing herself as the moderate, mainstream choice.
That said, I'm not sure what sort of VP pick would be best for either of them. Clinton could use someone younger and more liberal to help fire up the base, but that risks bringing in a Sarah Palin style overreach and shooting down her image as centrist/moderate/mainstream. Sanders could use someone more centrist/moderate/mainstream to help reassure the party establishment that he's not a complete left-wing nutjob, but that risks diluting support from people who like him precisely because he leans so far to the left. Still, I think Bernie would be best off with someone with a solid reputation as an "established" politician while still agreeing with his farther-left policies, and Hilary could benefit from someone younger and more energetic to help get people who aren't impressed with the idea of a Clinton dynasty more excited about her candidacy.
edited 2nd Aug '15 4:15:49 PM by NativeJovian
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.Aren't VP picks decided after the President is picked?
In the event of Sanders getting the nomination, I'd predict a double-down on leftism with someone like Chafee. On the other hand, that would be a serious mistake if Walker or Bush got nominated, I think. Bush has centrist appeal despite his party, while Walker is too good at "polarize, suppress, and conquer" and is generally too dangerous to be playing games with.
By contrast, a young leftist VP would be a good backup for Her Royal Highness' establishment-Democrat routine.

Can they even do that now? I mean Gay marriage was legalized for the entire country.
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.