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

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#97726: Aug 4th 2015 at 9:18:00 PM

If he actually does "well" (in the eyes of those who vote in the primaries) in the debates, the GOP establishment is going to crap their collective pants in terror.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#97727: Aug 4th 2015 at 9:22:17 PM

Even if Trump does become vastly more popular than the other candidates in the base, is the Republican caucus required to make him their candidate over the other choices? I know that primary voting is a thing, but I don't think anyone ever told me if that was legally binding or just considered a good faith thing to do.

Mopman43 Since: Nov, 2013
#97728: Aug 4th 2015 at 9:28:59 PM

I think its sort of like if the electorate decided to go differently from what the vote in the representing state wanted- they could, legally. But it would bring up one hell of a sh*t-storm.

BlueNinja0 The Mod with the Migraine from Taking a left at Albuquerque Since: Dec, 2010 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
The Mod with the Migraine
#97729: Aug 5th 2015 at 1:35:53 AM

"It's wrong to call Trump a fringe candidate"
Sadly, given the positions he has so far espoused, he is far less fringe than other Republicans running.
Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R) signed a bill Monday prohibiting cities across the state from establishing mandatory minimum wage and employee benefits, including vacation or sick leave days.
I seriously expect this will get struck down by the courts.
Cuckold just means a husband with an unfaithful wife.
Well, as someone with access to pornhub, maybe you could do some quick research and see how many of the top X (20,50,100, whatever) cuckhold videos involve "stars" of the same ethnicity?

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw
Deadbeatloser22 from Disappeared by Space Magic (Great Old One) Relationship Status: Tsundere'ing
#97730: Aug 5th 2015 at 2:34:01 AM

Even if Trump does become vastly more popular than the other candidates in the base, is the Republican caucus required to make him their candidate over the other choices?

Technically, no. A good chunk of the delegates at the National Convention aren't theoretically bound by the primary votes, and even some of those that are supposed to vote the way their state's primary told them to can ignore that as well.

In practice, by the time the vote at the National Convention rolls around just about all of the possible candidates have withdrawn from the race anyway.

"Yup. That tasted purple."
Cronosonic (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#97732: Aug 5th 2015 at 3:42:03 AM

I wonder if they'll take this all the way to the Supreme Court? Granted, the court's decision has very tight reasoning, it'd be extremely difficult to really argue against it. Still, good riddance to a bad law.

edited 5th Aug '15 3:42:24 AM by Cronosonic

Deadbeatloser22 from Disappeared by Space Magic (Great Old One) Relationship Status: Tsundere'ing
#97733: Aug 5th 2015 at 3:52:03 AM

BUT CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE TOO SO THEY MUST HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS TO PRIVACY. tongue

"Yup. That tasted purple."
BlueNinja0 The Mod with the Migraine from Taking a left at Albuquerque Since: Dec, 2010 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
The Mod with the Migraine
#97734: Aug 5th 2015 at 5:11:48 AM

A Super PAC for Scott Walker just announced $7mil of ads to support his presidential bid.

A super PAC backing Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said it will spend nearly $7 million on its first major ad buy in Iowa. The buy, which covers television and radio ads, is expected to be finalized Wednesday. It's part of a push to boost Walker's fortunes in early nominating states before the airwaves grow even more crowded, according to a senior official with the group, called the Unintimidated PAC. In the coming weeks, the group also plans to spend seven figures on advertising time in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada.

Of course, this doesn't bother Trump, who was proclaiming that Mexico (and Ford) will pay for a giant wall to separate us.

On Tuesday, Fox's Bill O'Reilly grilled the billionaire businessman on his claim that as president he will get Mexico to pay for a wall on the southern U.S. border to help prevent undocumented immigrants from crossing into the United States. "Bill, they are making a fortune, Mexico is making a fortune off the United States, it's becoming the new China in terms of trade — they're killing us at the border," Trump said after O'Reilly pressed him twice on the same question.

The third time O'Reilly asked, Trump said, "I'm gonna say, 'Mexico, this is not going to continue, you're going to pay for that wall,' and they will pay for the wall. And Bill, it's peanuts, what we're talking about." Trump has been critical of Ford Motor Company for a proposed $2.5 billion Mexican plant and has said under a Trump presidency he would impose a tax on Ford parts imported from there to also subsidize the wall.

Surprisingly, our favorite Repubican hasn't commented on Huntington Park, CA, which appointed two illegal immigrants to city advisory posts, considered unpaid volunteer positions.

Two undocumented immigrants will get to serve on city commissions in Southern California — drawing outrage from some residents. Julian Zatarain and Francisco Medina are longtime residents of Huntington Park, a city of about 58,000 near Los Angeles that is 97% Hispanic or Latino. In appointing them to city commissions, Huntington Park councilman Jhonny Pineda said the two men have a track record of volunteering in the community.

"I am proud to appoint both Julian and Francisco to the Parks and Recreation Commission and Health and Education Commission, respectively," Pineda said on his website. "Huntington Park is a city of opportunity and a city of hope for all individuals regardless of socioeconomic status, race, creed, or in this case, citizenship. Both these gentlemen have accomplished a great deal for the city." Pineda emphasized that the two undocumented commission members would not get paid, as that would be a violation of federal law. They also won't have any power in determining city policy and will serve only advisory roles. He said according to a city ordinance, "Zatarain and Medina are eligible to serve on the city commissions as long as it is solely volunteer work and both individuals do not receive financial benefits from the city."

But the decision infuriated some residents who spoke out at a city council meeting this week. One woman told CNN affiliate KCBS/KCAL that the decision sets a terrible example. "We're sending the wrong message: You can be illegal and you can come and work for the city," she said.

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw
Skycobra51 A suitable case for treatment from The US of A Since: Nov, 2013 Relationship Status: Only knew I loved her when I let her go
A suitable case for treatment
#97735: Aug 5th 2015 at 6:52:05 AM

[up][up][up][up]By that logic, the court trying to stop the pro-life group from releasing undercover videos of Planned Parenthood is also a violation of the first amendment.

[up] Moral of the story, don't give O'Reilly the run around tongue

But really, Mexico and Ford Motors paying for the wall?

Yeah right.

Why not put the unemployed to work on the fence instead like FDR did with his public work programs?

[down] So if someone is against Planned Parenthood they're against womens rights? Even if they disagree with it cause it was founded by a racsist eugenicist who spoke at a KKK rally and was admired by Hitler of all People?

Wow.

Also what's the difference between releasing undercover videos of an Agriculture company and doing the same to Planned Parenthood?

Its the same thing except ones a corporation, therefore its completely justified.

edited 5th Aug '15 7:20:03 AM by Skycobra51

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#97736: Aug 5th 2015 at 6:55:38 AM

[up] If the videos were recorded illegally, then it's not a First Amendment issue. As I understand it, there is some question as to whether the recordings were made without consent in a setting where the parties in question could reasonably expect privacy.

That said, this is not in any way about truth or freedom. It's purely about hatred for women's reproductive rights.

edited 5th Aug '15 6:56:31 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
carbon-mantis Collector Of Fine Oddities from Trumpland Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Married to my murderer
Collector Of Fine Oddities
#97737: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:08:45 AM

If I recall, the law varies state to state on who's consent is required to record conversations and such. It's legal to record a conversation where the other party doesn't know they're being recorded in a majority of the states as long as the one doing the recording is being addressed directly by the other party (without this law, companies that record data for marketing and such would be in deep shit). A quick search shows that the only states that require consent from both parties are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington.

I'd suppose that they could still probably go at them for the slanderous editing, or perhaps get the video ruled to be illegal if they get the establishment where it was recorded in to agree that they didn't authorize the recording on their premises.

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#97739: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:16:35 AM

A quick search shows that the only states that require consent from both parties are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington.
Wait, Florida's an outlier on a political position that I agree with? Huh, how about that.

For the record, pretty much any time I'm on the phone with a call center of any sort (whether it's a sales call, or a help desk/service center type call, or whatever) I get a "this call may be recorded" disclaimer, so that I'm technically informed about it. (Of course, the only alternative to consenting to being recorded is to hang up, which is Hobson's Choice in a nutshell, so...) I just assumed that was a standard thing nationwide. But maybe not?

edited 5th Aug '15 7:20:37 AM by NativeJovian

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#97740: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:20:16 AM

what's the difference between releasing undercover videos of an Agriculture company and doing the same to Planned Parenthood?

Well there's the tiny fact that the Planned Parenthood video is fake and in no way represents what actually happened.

If people are releasing fake videos that have been heavily edited to completely misconstrue what Agriculture Companies are doing then yes that's a problem (or they work for the Agriculture Companies marketing department).

But to answer your other question,

So if someone is against Planned Parenthood they're against womens rights?

Yes.

Oh and can you please respond in new posts instead of with edits that add [down] arrows, people miss edits and it makes it very hard to have a conversation with you.

edited 5th Aug '15 7:21:58 AM 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
Skycobra51 A suitable case for treatment from The US of A Since: Nov, 2013 Relationship Status: Only knew I loved her when I let her go
A suitable case for treatment
#97741: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:20:57 AM

[up][up][up]Oh hell no, I wouldn't let that old crone anywhere near the Whitehouse.

edited 5th Aug '15 7:21:17 AM by Skycobra51

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#97742: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:22:36 AM

[up] Do you have any complaints against her that aren't related to her age "old" or gender "crone"?

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Skycobra51 A suitable case for treatment from The US of A Since: Nov, 2013 Relationship Status: Only knew I loved her when I let her go
A suitable case for treatment
#97743: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:25:57 AM

Too many to get into, and what's the point of listing them? I'd probably be labled anti-women or something. Put it this way, I'd vote for Clinton over her.

edited 5th Aug '15 7:28:34 AM by Skycobra51

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#97745: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:28:20 AM

If they aren't related to her gender why would you be labelled "anti-women" for them? I mean unless they are related to her gender or her fighting for women's rights, in which case yeah you probably woudl be called anti-women for saying anti-women things. Also if you have no interest in expressing your actual opinion why make a post about her in the first place?

edited 5th Aug '15 7:29:15 AM 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
Skycobra51 A suitable case for treatment from The US of A Since: Nov, 2013 Relationship Status: Only knew I loved her when I let her go
A suitable case for treatment
#97746: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:31:20 AM

It was just my thought on the statement, I didn't plan on having to elaborate.

edited 5th Aug '15 7:31:48 AM by Skycobra51

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#97747: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:34:48 AM

So your thought was to throw an insult about her age and gender out there?

Okay then...

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Skycobra51 A suitable case for treatment from The US of A Since: Nov, 2013 Relationship Status: Only knew I loved her when I let her go
A suitable case for treatment
#97748: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:37:48 AM

My brain to mouth filter is sometimes non exsistent.

Sue me.

Not literally though, I only got 50$ to my name.

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.
DrunkenNordmann from Exile Since: May, 2015
#97749: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:41:12 AM

So if someone is against Planned Parenthood they're against womens rights? Even if they disagree with it cause it was founded by a racsist eugenicist who spoke at a KKK rally and was admired by Hitler of all People?

Wow.

A murderer can donate money to a good cause. A bad person can do something positive. Germany's laws against animal cruelty were implemented by the Nazi regime, but you don't see me lobbying against these laws just because of that fact.

So yeah. "Wow".

edited 5th Aug '15 7:42:45 AM by DrunkenNordmann

We learn from history that we do not learn from history
FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#97750: Aug 5th 2015 at 7:41:39 AM

<launches 50 dollar law suit, because troll.>


Total posts: 417,856
Top