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
The better rule is this: Over the six months prior to the election, is the economy improving or getting worse? If it's improving, the incumbent party keeps the White House. If it's declining, then the opposition party takes it.
I would expect a flurry of activity in the Republican half of Congress over the next six to nine months focused around sabotaging the economy or getting us into a major military conflict.
edited 4th Dec '15 10:17:37 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Also, it's only really happened twice so far in recent memory (Bill Clinton (followed one-term Republican George "H-Dubs" Bush, who followed two-term Republican Ronald "Top of the Slippery Slope" Reagan, who followed one-term Democrat Jimmy Carter)-> Dubya -> Obama).
For most of our history, it's been long periods of one party dominating the White House until something happens to change who's dominating.
edited 4th Dec '15 10:23:51 PM by Balmung
Does anyone know Obama's numbers after this attack, or even the general mood of the country. At school me and my friends were discussing refugees after the Paris attacks, and only me and 1 other guy though we should take in any more. I imagine it has gotten even worse after this.
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
Pew's latest is still dated in July.
As to the country's reactions, I doubt that's it's as monolithic as feared. Sure, the bigots online (seriously, has the GOP tried getting someone less blatantly racist to serve as the face of the youth supporting them online) are being their usual selves, but there have been quite a few demonstrations in support of the right of American Muslims to not live in fear. I feel that it's far too soon to tell... except with Trump's supporters.
edited 5th Dec '15 11:02:44 AM by Krieger22
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiotI think Sanders' could take Trump on in the general, if only because Trump will drive plenty of vital demographics to vote against him and may well depress Republican turnout (25% of GOP voters have said they will not vote for Trump if he gets the nomination).
But his chances of beating Clinton are pretty low, she has the better ground game, better contacts, more resources and wider appeal.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Also, frankly, Sanders needs to step up his game and establish himself as something other than a one-trick pony, as Fighteer has said many times. He's got an economic idea - great. We've heard it. Now what the hell else is he doing to establish his brand? What's his foreign policy going to be like? How is he going to deal with inheriting a Middle East in near anarchy? How will he handle Syrian refugees - and immigration in general, for that matter? Does he have further plans for action on climate change? Does he use an iPhone or an Android?
Because, at a time when US public morale is near rock bottom, a successful mission in space would boost both our international image, and our faith in ourselves. It's better than doing what Reagan and Bush 1 did to restore morale after Vietnam,win a few wars.
And it would be a triumph for the entire human species as well, not to mention the fact that in the long term we need to become a multi planetary species to survive. But these arguments are long term,so they don't matter to the electorate, and in any case are better suited for the Space thread.
Let us hope that Elon gets to Mars before the Chinese, and that he doesn't go mad with power once he has a whole planet as his domain
To get presidential about our non-answers and thus tie it back to politics, not because it is easy but because it is hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win.

Yeah, pretty much.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"