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
We might end up with a 1-and-a-half-party scheme if the Republican radicals stand their ground. They're powerful enough to take a massive crap on any party that they join, but defecting to the Democrats is kinda unlikely. It's hard to hijack a party that's actively pro-immigration, pro-sexual liberation, anti-discrimination with a Tea Party defection; the only room the radicals might have to shift sides is if Bernie's populist leftism bears fruit, because as Trump is showing, there's a constituency that's willing to go along with anti-corporate left-wing economics so long as it's only socialist for white people.
Maybe it's not the radicals who defect. Maybe it's the Establishment who go over to the Democrats, which splits into themselves and a new Socialist party, while the radical right sputters and howls?
"The Republican establishment" have a very small voter base as such - they rely on astroturf and on lying to the white male racist vote in most places. I could see the Alaska Republican Party replacing the Alaska Democratic Party as the state's Democratic Party affiliate, but Alaska's really weird - for example, California Republicans, with the exception of Schwarzenegger, are not much more liberal than Mississippi Republicans.
@ probablyinsane: It's probably not just VW (VAG) — if they're engaging in that sort of Loophole Abuse, then there will be others...
Keep Rolling On![]()
![]()
![]()
Volkswagen is being sued by the customers who used eco-friendly as one of their criteria for purchase.
So-called eco-friendly diesels are one of the reasons why the push towards hybrids and electric cars is hampered.
Volkswagen probably also cheated in Europe.
Plants are aliens, and fungi are nanomachines.
Don't know how good those hybrids are, but am OK with taking baby steps. (It's not as if I have a choice...)
And to think that I was making peace with oil being cheap for who knows how long by placing my hopes in cleaner methods to burn fossil fuels. Hah... chances are more investments in cheating.
Plants are aliens, and fungi are nanomachines.Some random nobody joins the Democratic race
, sounding like he wants to out-Bernie Bernie.
Lessig is a Harvard law professor who vaulted into the Democratic race with one goal: To get money out of politics. You can't fix inequality, climate change, health care or the student debt crisis, Lessig argues, until you fix America's broken political system. "Everybody knows the system is broken," he told CNN Money. "Until we solve this problem, we won't be able to address any of those other problems."
He often cites the stat that a mere 400 American families have given half of the 2016 political donations so far. "That's the product of radical inequality," he says.
Donald Trump — the Republican outsider — has also brought up how money rigs the political game. Trump constantly reminds voters that because he's so wealthy, he's funding his own campaign. Thus he doesn't have to beg for money — and make promises to the rich people funding him. Lessig applauds Trump for talking bluntly about how money corrupts, but he thinks there's a big flaw in Trump's plan to fix it.
"Donald Trump's solution to the problem he's identified is to elect billionaires. I think we fought a revolution about that and sent the aristocrats home," says Lessig, adding that he thinks 99% of what Trump says is "crazy." Lessig is running to be the political equivalent of a "one-hit wonder." He thinks being president would be an amazing job, but if elected, he vows to stay in office only long enough to get what he's dubbed the Citizens Equality Act passed. Then he would step aside and let the vice president take over.
He hasn't named a running mate, but he says he would be very happy to team up with Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. So why is he running? He sees himself like Frodo in "The Lord of the Rings." He's got a clear mandate to do one thing. If voters elect him, he will have one task. Other candidates like Sanders have 10 or 15 goals they want to achieve. Campaign finance reform is on the list, but it's too easy for it move aside in favor of other priorities, Lessig claims.
Lessig's Citizens Equality Act aims to restrict how much money businesses and people can give political candidates, to guarantee legal protections to all voters and to end gerrymandering that makes so many Congressional districts "safe seats" for one party or the other. Lessig has views on a lot of other issues from more gun control to favoring a single-payer health care system. But he thinks un-rigging the system will ensure the will of the American people gets done.
"The big difference between me and everybody else is I've said this issue has to be addressed first," he says. The Washington political circles have written him off entirely. He fighting to get into the upcoming Democratic candidate debates on TV. And Lessig points to evidence that he has a real following:
- He's raised over $1.1 million — via a Kickstarter campaign
- 72% of donations are $50 or less
- He has 355,000 Twitter followers — more than Chris Christie.
But in slightly more important political news, people are starting to look at how Fiorina's campaign appears to be colluding with her superPAC
in Iowa.
"I would say most of the organizing work is done on Carly for America," campaign state director Christopher Rants told CNN on Wednesday. On the campaign side, he said, "Our focus has always been to put Carly in front of as many Iowans as possible." That includes holding and advertising public events with Fiorina where the super PAC, which is not allowed to coordinate with the campaign, can freely attend, harvest attendees' names and contact information, and distribute information on the candidate.
Many of the attendees at the Davenport event said they intended to caucus for Fiorina on Feb. 1. With participation in the Republican debates being determined by candidates' standing in national polls, many candidates are not spending as much time in early states like Iowa and are leaving it to their super PA Cs to recruit volunteers and get their message out, said Timothy Hagle, a political science professor at the University of Iowa. Up until the 2016 cycle, campaigns were largely responsible for grassroots organizing. Super PA Cs are now testing the waters and taking on a larger role, particularly in early-voting states.
Asked repeatedly by reporters about her organization and super PAC after the event, Fiorina said her campaign would have the money and the organization it needs to win and that it is not a problem that she is relying so much on her super PAC to provide organization and a political infrastructure for her campaign on the ground here. "We publicize every event on my schedule and anyone can come," she told reporters after Friday's town hall event. "What you see happening is a super PAC is organizing people. We're not coordinating with them. We're not asking them to. I don't know what they're doing, they don't tell us what they're doing."
Hagle said an arrangement like Fiorina's could lead to problems if other candidates challenge what they view as inappropriate coordination between the campaigns and the super PAC. "I think people will challenge it if they see activities that are inappropriate in terms of coordination," he said. "Democrats, believe me, will mention that and try to get an investigation going with the (Federal Election Commission)."
At the Davenport event, Carly for America not only signed up attendees interested in learning more about Fiorina, they were the only ones providing literature about the candidate. Asked how that did not represent an in-kind contribution to the campaign, Fiorina told reporters to ask the super PAC. The super PAC is also taking the lead on grassroots organization. Carly for America state director Mary Earnhardt said the organization is identifying community captains to get involved as active ambassadors for Fiorina, an important organizing tactic that can be key to mobilizing caucus-goers. Volunteers for Carly for America walk in parades, hand out stickers, and speak at events on Fiorina's behalf.
"My team and I are Carly's biggest cheerleaders in the state of Iowa. We spread her message, all the way, central committee meetings and county Republican fundraisers. We go to all sorts of different events and just talk about Carly and why we're supporting Carly. We're just helping to build the buzz," Earnhardt said. Fiorina has a bare-bones campaign staff of two in the first-in-the-nation caucus state, whereas the Carly for America super PAC has eight, according to the campaign and the super PAC's state directors, respectively.
The lines of coordination can often seem blurred and confusing to both voters and reporters. On Wednesday evening in Des Moines, dozens of supporters lined up to see the Carly for America-produced "Citizen Carly" documentary at a local movie theater. They were greeted by her husband Frank Fiorina, who personally thanked each attendee. Most attendees, when asked by CNN, did not know that the event was sponsored by the PAC and not the campaign, and most didn't seem to care. The challenge for super PAC Carly for America is organizing effectively without any communication from the campaign.
Another question for campaigns that rely heavily on volunteers is whether that kind of organization will be adequate to get folks out on caucus night. Fiorina's base of support in Iowa ranges from tried-and-true Iowa activists to first-time caucus-goers. Asked whether Carly for America has been focused on caucus education for those who may not have been politically active before, Earnhardt said, "Oh, it's only September." "I think a lot of people in Iowa know about the caucus, which is fortunate, but absolutely, I mean, we'll help anybody who has questions about it," she said.
Political observers in Iowa note that Rick Santorum won the caucuses last time around without a lot of staff or money — proof that a strong and enthusiastic network of volunteers can pick up the slack if a candidate lacks a large campaign apparatus. This is the very definition of an effective grassroots campaign.
"You can do very well by word of mouth," said Steffen Schmidt, a political science professor at Iowa State University, who believes the focus on Fiorina's ground game in Iowa at this stage of the race is overblown. Schmidt says the former CEO has plenty of time before the Feb. 1 contest to gain the necessary support. "She's in a great spot," Schmidt said. "If you start organizing when you're down at 5%, you're wasting your money."
"You don't set up huge ground organization until you have your message together and are doing well in the polls. Look at what happened to (Scott) Walker," he said, referring to the now-former candidate's outsized Iowa staff.
For now, Fiorina appears to have no plans to change her approach in the Hawkeye State or elsewhere. Her campaign did not directly respond to questions about plans to open offices or to staff up here. "We're going to keep doing what we've been doing. We don't usually participate in process stories," said campaign press secretary Anna Epstein. "We'll continue traveling the country to meet with voters and answer their questions."
The Internet sure has made me liberal. I thought I was more of a centrist, but everything I read these days just keeps pushing me more and more to the left.
Same here. It's weird to remember that back in 2008, I was actually torn between Obama and Mc Cain (up until he picked Palin anyway).
Part of it is that the Republican party dove off a cliff since then and part of it is that I've become a lot more liberal thanks to the internet. And of course reality has a liberal bias.
Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's Play
Stewart and Colbert proved how ridiculously easy it was to get your own SuperPAC. But they never actually ran a real campaign, during which coordinating with a SuperPAC is against campaign finance laws, though I'm not sure exactly how or what loophole it uses. But if Fiorina is getting around those rules, I'm not sure which side will take advantage of it first. It'd be a hell of a note if the Republican 2nd-runner gets disqualified from running because of campaign irregularities. It'd be a bigger hell of a note if she didn't.
![]()
![]()
![]()
Doesn't change the fact that company's always chose money over principle. So when the soon to be largest economy in the world tells them to bend over backwards and take it in the ass, they will bend over and take it.
Edit: Still can't believe our government sucks up to them so much though. For god's sake we can't even come out and call what their bullshit maritime claims are, namely bullshit. Instead we have Obama saying that "some of them might be true!!"
edited 26th Sep '15 10:34:24 AM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.![]()
That's what happens when your foriegn policy basically boils down to appeasement, combined with an isolationist movement at home.
Besides, Obama is already pushed around by Putin, why not throw Mister Ping in there as well.
edited 26th Sep '15 11:02:36 AM by Skycobra51
Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.![]()
No, but bending over backwards for a country that routinely steals your patents, while bullying its neighbors and forging claims on international waters is.
But then why should it matter, its not our problem...
edited 26th Sep '15 11:05:55 AM by Skycobra51
Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.

While not necessarily superior, multi-party systems do tend to be more reflective of what the populace thinks/feels/votes for. Of course, this largely seems to be caused by the voting system that lets more than two parties exist also doesn't have first past the post voting and have other methods.
Interesting though, that you seem to think we'd go to one party. We're not set up that way. In the event that the Republicans truly do fall apart (and frankly that's been predicted for years and the way things are seem to set up more for the parties changing positions again rather than one or the other totally self destructing) there'd be something to fill in the void, because the people wouldn't really have gone anywhere.