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
What does selecting an official language even mean? Until recently I thought it was just like selecting an official bird, completely symbolic and having no effect on how things work in the real world. Also I believe a melting pot is about assimilating somewhat, while some things about your culture become the norm.
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.The campaigns in question tend to be about making all goverment communication in one language, so you need to speak English to do your taxes, apply for welfare, vote or similar, street signs are only done in English and so on.
Yes the melting pot is about assimilating in part, but it's about all bits assimilating into each other, not one bit devouring another. In the end the US today was originally native territory that was colonised largely by the English, French and Spanish, English shouldn't be dominating the other cultures and languages that form a part of the US' history and culture.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranIt was always cool but the Republicans had been smart about it for a while and were content with their dog whistles and the like.
Trump brought open bigotry back to the forefront and the people absolutely adore him for it. Being "honest" is his biggest selling point.
His most popular platform right now is his proposed mass deportation of Mexican immigrants.
edited 3rd Sep '15 5:08:01 AM by LeGarcon
Oh really when?Fortunately for Trump, but unfortunately for us, the views of the "general public" have no bearing on his ability to win the primary.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
He's talking about mass deportation of people who are technically supposed to be deported, namely those who crossed the boarder illegally. He's basically talking about doing what we are already doing on a grander scale. And Trump won't win with the general electorate. Everyone I've talked to hates him and will vote against him.
Edit: Though just to be clear I do not support him or his ideas, or his retorich, and am alarmed in particular by his desire to repeal birthright citizenship, and he is defiantly agitating the far right.
edited 3rd Sep '15 7:19:42 AM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.This is a couple pages old already (man this thread moves fast!), but from what I understand the oppositions to the Iran deal are two-fold: 1) Those in opposition argue that we can't trust Iran with a nuclear program, as they fear they will start developing (and then immediately using) nuclear weapons, and 2) To appease Israel, who has been staunchly anti-Iran, especially in its nuclear program.
Basically they wanted to keep the sanctions going indefinitely unless Iran stopped nuclear production entirely.
edited 3rd Sep '15 7:37:01 AM by speedyboris
![]()
You gotta read between the lines here. No birthright citizenship plus mass deportation means all you have to do to get any immigrant deported is catch them on a day when they left their papers at home.
And technically he's only talking about illegals but everyone knows he isn't. His crusade against illegal immigration has nothing to do with paperwork and everything to do with ethnic cleansing.
Oh really when?It would also likely be used against anyone who was too brown, even if they were legal citizens of the country. There are already places in the Southwest where anyone who even looks like they might be Mexican gets harassed by the cops. One of them loses their wallet and suddenly finds themselves kicked out to a foreign country.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick![]()
Is that even legal, I always had the impression they had to at least go through their files to see if they had given you some papers or something. So they can just pick you up and toss you over the boarder the next day? WTF!!?
edited 3rd Sep '15 7:46:58 AM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.@the subject of US Foreign Policy
What the results are for whom? Can you say foreign policy is succesful if you for example, invade another country, take some natural resource of them and leave it in war and poverty, hoarding the resource that was there?
Your country will inevitably be richer, be in better situation, and has taken advantage of another nation with this "foreign policy" which getting technical, really is a foreign policy.
Is this the sort of foreign policy you wish to advocate for, though?
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesTom Clancy, in one of his books, had a character declare that international relations is mainly one country fucking another. The metaphor is judged apt, despite being somewhat crude.
In the twentieth century, with the global rise of democratic governments and fiat currencies, a new sensibility began to slowly emerge, one based around mutual benefit rather than the crab bucket. It's still fragile, but has great promise... if warmongers like the Republican Party don't fuck it up.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"It is in no way smart or logical to base one's foreign relationships on immediate benefit when the risks of tensions are so high.
Don't like X's policies? Doesn't mean you have to invade them. You can reach their population in another manner. And a country as big as the U.S always has some carrot they can dangle over other nation.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesThat's the one constant about human nature. A number of studies have shown that the overwhelming majority of human beings (probably myself included) are biologically and mentally built to make decisions based on the criteria of short term personal and tribal benefits, and that we're actually very good at making those kinds of evaluations.
The problem is that quality decision making on the level of national and international politics in the modern era basically demands the exact opposite, so finding people qualified to make those decisions properly is dicey. More so when the majority of people who have to elect them will still have thought processes running the other way.
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)

I believe part of the worry is that it will lock certain segments of the population out from support and assistance. So yes it would reduce the administrative costs, but it would largely do that by ensuring that people who don't speak English but need help and support are cut off, not just from support but from the government entirely.
It would hamper the ability of the government to interact with much of the people it is meant to serve.
On top of that there's the more symbolic arguments, English as the official language would discourage the learning of other languages, it would say that the US isn't about being a melting pot but is instead about assimilation. It ignores the importance of other languages and cultural groups to the US's growth. In the end it's a move against language diversity.
Then there's the other issues, what about US territories wher English isn't as common? What about Native American languages? Could this effect the use of sign language by the government?
edited 3rd Sep '15 2:18:44 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