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
Heh, Obama himself called them out on that a few weeks ago, saying that their claims to be able to "stand up to Putin and ISIL" seem more than a little hypocritical when they run home crying in the face of some "tough" questions from a debate moderator.
edited 10th Dec '15 7:27:13 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Moving away from Trump for a moment, I heard that Ted Cruz has been making some pretty inane statements regarding climate change lately. What's up with that? Why is this even still an issue in 21st century America?
When you think about it, such toxic positions can be much more damaging, in the long run, than most nonsense Trump might spew.
It is sometimes an appropriate response to reality to go insane.
Cruz is a homophobic, fundamentalist climate-change denier. He's made that abundantly clear, and his current second-place status is only slightly less toxic to the GOP than Trump's first-place status.
However, it's worth noting that not a single Republican candidate who has been out of single digits in the polls has expressed anything other than absolute climate-change denial; it's part of the party's litmus test for viability. Cruz's stupidity in this regard is only notable by degree, not by kind.
edited 10th Dec '15 7:29:22 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
Plus, he's just a thoroughly unpleasant person with zero appeal.
edited 10th Dec '15 7:29:34 AM by speedyboris
I said toxic to the GOP, not to the country as a whole. Cruz would be terrible for the country and the world as President, too, but not in quite the same ways as Trump, and the ways in which he is terrible align more closely with standard GOP doctrine than Trump.
edited 10th Dec '15 7:31:04 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"x5
Certainly but, what I'm afraid of, is that some american (and not only) big polluters might try to stand/hide behind these statements just so they can cop-out from the dreaded environmental regulations.
We can't have that sort of backpedalling from the world's greatest industrial power on a time where even China is trying to cut down its emissions.
edited 10th Dec '15 7:38:20 AM by LogoP
It is sometimes an appropriate response to reality to go insane.
Let's not mince words. If we get a Republican President in 2017, we can kiss any meaningful climate change action goodbye. If we don't at least take the Senate for Democrats (the House is a long-shot thanks to gerrymandering), we can certainly look forward to another administration faced with insurmountable gridlock over the issue.
Cruz becoming President would be awful, to be sure, but only slightly more so than Rubio or Bush or Paul. Mainly, his administration would be notable for a mass rollback of gay rights and possibly the eradication of scientific curricula in schools. Trump, for his part, would be notable for destroying all our international alliances, interning/deporting minorities, and starting multiple wars. Choose your apocalypse; they're on sale this week!
edited 10th Dec '15 7:44:37 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"True, and that's very worrying. The anti-climate change lobby is as sociopathically scary as it is short-sighted.
At least, when it comes to everything else, most damage can be undone if a saner president follows. World climate, not so much...
edited 10th Dec '15 7:46:01 AM by LogoP
It is sometimes an appropriate response to reality to go insane.It'll be the fault of us godless, heathen, barbarian New Yorkers, and equated with Sodom and Gomorrah.
I wish I was joking.
| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |That's a good way of putting it.
“We all exaggerate,” one woman said, adding, “we want someone to take a stand. We want someone to say ‘Yes, here’s what we’re going to do,’ even if it offends everybody.”
There was widespread agreement that the media is biased against Trump and accentuates his provocations while downplaying his attributes. “He’s a great family man,” one man said of the thrice-married Trump.
They know he's full of shit but keep giving him excuses because they see him as decisive and different from all the usual politicians.
It is clear that the entire body of candidates is scared shitless of Trump's voters — of what might happen if he left the party and took them with him.
Trump is saying what a LOT of the GOP candidates and rank and file politicians and so on agree with.
The issue with him isn't what he's saying. It's that they have a very precise way of doing the same thing. Trump just does it with all the finesse and grace of a bull in a china shop.
And also, Trump is tapping into the missing white voters: White Conservative Americans from more rural areas who can't stand overt left liberalism but hate the elitism that Romney stank of. They're basically older, poorer, more rural than most Republicans.
And they love Trump.
(Hilariously these people are also basically the Perot Voters of 1992)
Because a number of liberals tend to be fairly dismissive/arrogant towards this particular underclass, often religious or more socially conservative.
Using "Underclass" because I suspect a number of these earn just enough to live in the places they live.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman@ Trump: Benjamin Netanyahu
has condemned Trump's comments on Muslims, leading to Trump cancelling a trip to Israel.
They start at a major disadvantage — the Democrats are perceived as being the Globalist Elites they rail against.
edited 10th Dec '15 8:53:57 AM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling On

edited 10th Dec '15 7:25:20 AM by speedyboris