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
All I'm saying is that is pretty fucking suspect when an 18 year old dates a 14 year old or a twenty something dates a high schooler.
I'm not saying go jail them on principle, I'm just saying to keep an eye on them. Most of the time those are predatory relationships. Even if one side doesn't know it.
Oh really when?Children younger than puberty can become sexually aroused. Do we shame them for it or teach them that it's a natural function of their bodies? Anyway, I have to emphasize the off-topic nature of this discussion.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Yes. The D has economic views that are quite far left of anything that any other candidates are espousing, which points out something rather interesting in American politics: Republican candidates are and remain grossly out of touch with the core values of their voters.
Their economic views mainly reflect those of their big sponsors like the Kochs and Sheldon Adelson. The people on the ground care much more about immigration and race than they do about deficits and tax rates on the rich.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Is this where we start making jokes about the Will of D?
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)What's important is that Trump, by expressly disavowing the usual pageant for the approval of rich sponsors, is free to focus his campaign rhetoric on what the Republican voter base actually wants to hear. This gives him incredible power in the marketplace of ideas. In an ironic way, his closest analogue on the left is Bernie Sanders.
The average Republican voter is fine with Social Security and Medicaid and food stamps and whatnot. It's the wealthy who resent these things, because they don't directly benefit. What the voters hate is Social Security, Medicaid, food stamps, etc. going to those people, because they view public benefits, incorrectly, as a zero-sum game that they lose if anyone else gets a share.
This isn't fundamentally racial politics; it's crab-bucket politics. I suppose it's good news for those voters, in a sense: "Hey, guess what? You aren't racists first; you're selfish, ignorant jerks first and racists second."
Sure, there are a few minarchist-libertarian die-hards out there, but they don't represent a statistically significant voice even in primaries.
edited 8th Sep '15 9:32:18 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Fundamentally, yes. Krugman calls them the "hard-hat" crowd — unionized blue-collar whites who support redistribution of wealth towards social programs but deeply resent minorities for stealing their jerbs.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Who wants to bet she proceeds to do exactly that?
"Yup. That tasted purple."![]()
![]()
![]()
They jumped ship back in the sixties, but found themselves embroiled in a party that catered to the interests of the wealthy rather than the poor white man. Republican politics for the past fifty years have been deeply destructive towards the middle and lower classes, be they black or white or brown or whatever. Their leaders have masked this in the trappings of evangelical Christianity and dog-whistle racism, but it's been coming out more and more since Obama's election, with round after round of "ultra-conservative" politicians sent to Washington who fail to accomplish the goals of the base.
In Trump, they finally see someone who's willing to call things like they believe they are, without the veneer of diplomatic speech and political correctness.
edited 8th Sep '15 11:19:33 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The tragic part is that we might be able to reach out to those voters on economic principles if they weren't so obsessed with ethnic warfare. After all, we got the New Deal with their support, when it looked like the wealthy were going to take their ball and run with it for good.
edited 8th Sep '15 11:42:40 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"It's also extremely ironic, since it has long been held that a Democrat would be the one to abandon the pandering to wealthy interests in order to make a populist run for the White House, and Bernie Sanders looked like he might be the one to pull it off. To have a Republican beat him at the game must be incredibly galling.
Not that Trump stands a chance in the general election, mind you, but it's going to be closer than a race with Bush or Walker or Rubio would have been.
edited 8th Sep '15 11:50:26 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

"The functionality of the sexual organs does not justify putting them into service." as a german official once said.
I'll let Nordman explain the details (as I'm on spotty wifi) if you doubt me
"You can reply to this Message!"