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
Putin cannot get the entire Middle East or Ukraine without a full on war escalation. Does he have military power and knowledge? Yes. Does this mean he will? No.
The same argument applies to the United States. The U.S has the military power to pretty much take over all of the Americas. Does this mean they are going to do it...?
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
If Trump is elected President, the Americas had better look to their defenses.
Starting to think we just need a US vs Russia thread, its monopolized I think 4 threads now all at once, all taking about the same basic thing.
Anyway going along with that story I posted, really there should be laws about leaving guns around for everyone to find. Shoot that toddler found a gun just laying around the floor of the car then shot and killed his grandmother.
If it's in a car it should be in a locked portable gun case, on your person, or locked in the glove compartment, god damn that shit is frustrating.
Edit: if Trump is elected it would start WW3.
edited 14th Oct '15 2:18:09 PM by Memers
Grandma was a Putin-sent commie spy and that baby is a true patriotic hero
There now both subjects are united
edited 14th Oct '15 2:19:32 PM by Aszur
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesAnyway, the worst thing we could to with respect to Putin is to challenge him as a military rival. He wants that; it's how he maintains his domestic power. The best thing we can do is let him blunder around and deal with the results of the messes he creates. We cannot be everyone's savior; Europe has to step up in its own defense and, frankly, if the Middle-Eastern nations respect Russia more than the U.S., let 'em go. They'll soon see he's no improvement.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I am not sure Vladimir is as antagonic politically as you make him out to be. He spouts a very nationalistic sort of political campaign and allows fringe elements backed up by the ideology he spouts to mantain this aura of fear and antagonism that is what keeps him in power. And whatever little chaos here and there he can cause politically is fine, more in the lines of trolling than actual intent to invade and make of clay for mother russia.
Compare and contrast Maduro, the Kims, and ISIS: they are the ones who generate fear, chaos, and blame someone else for it, hence drawing the masses with this fear. Historically, people who did this end up with their heads on pikes. Ask Gadaffi or Hussein.
This completely ignoring their nationalistic and religious sentiment, and/or cult of personality involved.
Trump is more like Putin: hyper nationalist and "purist". However the geographical situation of the united states would not allow the fringe elements to act outside, but rather, within. The unrest would not be just at borders, but all over. Trump would not likely be able to go to war simply because of all the political unrest his followers would cause.
edited 14th Oct '15 2:30:12 PM by Aszur
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesThey'd like us more if we hadn't screwed them over at every turn in the guise of helping. Let's not mince words here.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
I have to agree there, we screwed up Iraq so heavily in two wars that they couldn't defend themselves, because we disbanded their army, and we left them hanging. Now they are throwing info publicly to Russia.
Setting Syria aside we should at least have boots on the ground in Iraq, it's our fault they are in this situation without what was once the fourth largest army in the world.
edited 14th Oct '15 2:41:13 PM by Memers
That is wrong in so many ways. It is almost physically painful. They should be calling Ryan a sham, a fraudster, an empty shell that rhetoric comes out of. A political leech, a parasite, a carnival huckster, a snake oil salesman. Anything but a serious politician whose views don't align with theirs.
edited 14th Oct '15 3:30:04 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
They're going to end up destroying themselves if they don't reign in or jettison their crazies.
And this is interesting. Another point in the column for corporate media trying to push a narrative?
http://tinyurl.com/q8dv57f
Yes, it's long been suspected that the national media is shilling for Clinton. Well, "suspected" is a weak word — it's all but splashed in bright headlines on their websites.
Her performance was strong, to be sure — she made no major stumbles and answered all the concerns. But this was Sanders' time at the national podium and he killed it with the people for whom the economy and the environment are the key issues. Especially when he forced Clinton to take a pro-corporate stance; that was the biggest distinction, I felt. His graciousness towards the email scandal only increased his awesomeness.
I wished that he could have spent more time discussing the realities of his democratic socialist stance, but that is an inherent limit of the format.
edited 14th Oct '15 5:28:58 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"How frustrating. At the first story I read saying Hillary "won", I thought that she was going to be out in front.
And then I see things like this
that indicate that they really ARE gunning for her over who viewers are looking at.
Why, because her winning would all benefit them somehow? Or they just aren't aware of the Internet's opinion? Or is it because she's a woman.
You gotta believe me when I scare you away, all that I wish for is that you would stayNational media hates Clinton. That's why they've been insisting that Biden was running even as it's becoming rapidly impossible for him to do so.
On the Ryan thing, it's like the brain disease in the party is just getting worse. It has literally gotten to the point where having governed is a black mark against you, because governing means deviating from dogma at some point.
Couldn't the Democrats just walk off and then the majority of Republicans could vote for a sane speaker?
edited 14th Oct '15 5:42:35 PM by Ogodei
The reason that CNN keeps selling the idea that Hillary won big and that she's a foregone conclusion despite viewer polls clearly showing that Bernie crushed it is because she's a rather pro-corporate candidate, whereas Bernie could be a threat to them. That's why they attempt to discredit his chances by calling him crazy or refusing to cover him at all.
It should also be noted that CNN is owned by one of Hillary's biggest campaign donors.
edited 14th Oct '15 8:21:00 PM by Lennik
That's right, boys. Mondo cool.In other words, the Republicans don't even want to Govern, preferring ideological purity instead?
Keep Rolling On
Resident Bollywood Nerd
![]()
This is for the post of President, who has to govern the entire country?
These are still the guys who're touting Carly Fiorina and the Donald for president because they've run companies (hiding the fact that both haven't exactly been the best, especially Fiorina)?
I just feel at some point they'll just ask that Duck Dynasty guy to run for President to kill all the wetbacks and fags and abortionists or something.

Eh, I think he could have, long enough to shave off east and south Ukraine. But he'd not be able to hold all of it no.
EDIT- But thats for a different thread.
edited 14th Oct '15 2:09:47 PM by FFShinra