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
edited 12th Dec '15 11:19:49 AM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.However, candidates who don't win or at least perform well in these states tend to flame out much later on.
Not necessarily. The primary purpose of the early primary states is to rally around the front runner. But if an unacceptable candidate wins them, they're essentially mulligans.
For example, if Trump or Carson wins Iowa and New Hampshire, and Jeb Bush drops out, then Rubio will become the consensus establishment candidate, and will be well placed to win despite losing both Iowa and NH.
Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's PlayAfter having read that article, I'm kind of... nervous to positive about it? I mean it's a good thing they're limiting the amount of testing (by time which I'm not so sure is a good measure?) and taking a step to decouple success from testing, but this also gives over more power to the states. Some of which are uh... still in favor of "teaching the controversy". Basically this is one of those wait and see things because we can't predict the failures and successes easily.
Also, we talk about policies often here, it's just that currently the elections are the biggest thing happening. And will be for a year, because This time and last time the Republicans have started ridiculously early in their nomination thing.
And I don't understand how Rubio expects to succeed with no ground game.
Yeah, my initial thoughts are definitely similar. There does need to be less testing, but I dread the idea of what may happen states in some states, whether we're talking about what may be taught in the curriculum, (see "teach the controversy" over evolution) how the factors for evaluation may be manipulated for the benefit of the local politicians, the strong chances of there being big achievement gaps from one state to another, (or from one area of a state to another) and who knows what might be chucked because politicians decide it's not really necessary.
No Child Left Behind had to go, but I have a feeling that in another 5-10 years or so we'll be talking about how we're going to try to patch the latest train wreck.
| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |Well, I think Common Core was the federal standard? I didn't really see much of any standards being enforced very well at all, and as a teacher my mom absolutely hated Common Core. She said the way it worked didn't give teachers the freedom to teach in ways that made them "excited to teach". She elaborated that a history teacher, for instance, couldn't teach in a way that illuminated the parts of history they loved (such as art, or military history) and forced them to do it in a rote way that was ultimately uninteresting to both teacher and students. (She's of the opinion that being able to write a syllabus to the teacher's interest helps the teacher get their students interested.)
She also said that the district she teaches in was able to choose not to adopt Common Core because of the way Texas school districts work. And also that she got calls from folks in New York trying to convince her to adopt Common Core. I imagine this will create some wildly varying results of this new act in five to ten years.
Frankly, if there ever was a federal standard it was all the standardized testing, and as I recall we've actually touched on that subject several times. Usually to the consensus that testing is very much an overused standard to measure student success and there needs to be less of it.
edited 12th Dec '15 8:10:19 PM by AceofSpades
This was a low turnout, only 212,000 people voted.
edited 12th Dec '15 8:57:33 PM by tclittle
"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."For all the Chicken Littles out there: 2 new polls
show Trump is now behind in Iowa
. Predictably, Carson's support is collapsing and going to Cruz, who now leads by 10 points in one polls and 5 in the other.
The anti-establishment congressional agitator has made a rapid ascent into the lead in the GOP presidential race here, with a 21 percentage-point leap that smashes records for upsurges in recent Iowa caucuses history.
Donald Trump, now 10 points below Cruz, was in a pique about not being the front-runner even before the Iowa Poll results were announced Saturday evening. He wasted no time in tearing into Cruz — and the poll — during an Iowa stop Friday night.
Ben Carson, another "Washington outsider" candidate, has plunged 15 points from his perch at the front of the pack in October. He's now in third place.
"Big shakeup," said J. Ann Selzer, pollster for The Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics Iowa Poll. "This is a sudden move into a commanding position for Cruz."
Cruz, a Texas U.S. senator famous for defying party leaders and using government shutdown tactics to hold up funding for the Obamacare health care law and abortion provider Planned Parenthood, was the favorite of 10 percent of likely Republican caucusgoers in the last Iowa Poll in October. He's now at 31 percent.
Carson's zenith was 28 percent in the poll two months ago. Trump's highest support was 23 percent back in August, when he led the field by 5 points.
I'm divided between really wanting Trump to cruise on through and go on to the national elections, and being afraid he could win and become the Fuhrer.
But then there's also the Theocracy level Christianity advocated by Cruz and his collection of giggling goons, as he and his sort went to a rally hosted by a Kill The Gays pastor.
So we have either Trump's "To Defeat The Terrorists, We Must Become Nazi Germany" or Cruz's "Millenium Kingdom Plan."
This is funny
. In a weird, unusual Evil Versus Evil short of way.
I've been looking at some pictures
. Its kind of disturbing how our police actually look like the schutzstaffel now. All black, arrayed in neat little lines. You talk badly enough to them? They'll take you to a place
that is not marked as existing and torture you.
They've developed a culture entirely separate from regular American culture, their own buildings, their own barracks, their own little clubs.
They'll cover for each other and help each other get out of being prosecuted for violent crimes.
And given how many of them there are and how militarized the police are, have they become bigger than the Schutzstaffel?
It's a teeny bit unfair for the riot cops. They're supposed to be in black and in neat lines.
Otherwise, you have a point. Is there cases in the US, where the police are neatly in the pocket of local party official (mayor, governor etc.)?
edited 13th Dec '15 1:56:09 AM by TerminusEst
Si Vis Pacem, Para PerkeleWell, I've never heard of riot cops behaving in any way except as basically Schutzstaffel subduers of "partisan dissent".
Yes, there was a case where the local politician and the district attorney had the police in their pocket. Corruption from the top down.
edited 13th Dec '15 2:04:58 AM by NickTheSwing
![]()
![]()
That's like most Police Forces worldwide. They have Riot/SWAT units, Police Stations with detention facilities, armed units, their own Unions etc.
And in fact, some go further — how about senior Police falsely bringing down a member of the Government?
edited 13th Dec '15 2:10:14 AM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling OnOne of them also said this about what he gets to do
Essentially what is said is basically; we are higher up than you. We are better than you civilians. Our honor is our loyalty. Do not even think you can ever call us out or I will kill you.
edited 13th Dec '15 2:16:36 AM by NickTheSwing
x4
I think he might've skipped a few phases before getting to hitting people with something...I can see a worrying mentality. Cops have a very high threshold to using outright violence here. They usually get into trouble if they do use force.
Otherwise the rest of that text is pretty much common sense.
Hmm, a bit off-topic. 'Scuse me.
edited 13th Dec '15 3:06:26 AM by TerminusEst
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele

I brought it up at one point awhile back, but as said, it gets buried by all the "Oh noes Trump is totally going to get elected and the sky will fall" speculation about an election that is still almost a year away.
(Jesus, I just looked back and found my posting. I posted a week ago when Every Child Succeeds was still passing Congress and it's already about 30 pages back.)
edited 12th Dec '15 10:09:19 AM by TheWanderer
| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |