TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#107451: Dec 22nd 2015 at 11:37:55 PM

The label "moderate" is about as useful as "liberal" or "conservative". left, right and centre aren't much better but are at least a little descriptive.

What are the positions that moderates supposedly hold? What makes people not moderate? Because moderation seems to all be about perspective, sitting between to oppositions, however if you move the opposition then the spot of 'moderation' also shifts.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#107452: Dec 23rd 2015 at 12:50:50 AM

I hope nobody minds me going on for a little bit here, but I feel the need to do a brief history lesson in how the definition of the terms moderate, liberal, and conservative have changed over the years in US Politics:

In the 50s a moderate to conservative (as it was being defined at the time) Republican President (Eisenhower) enjoyed immense popularity while engaging in massive spending to build the Interstate Highway System, strengthened protections for Social Security, had a top tax rate of 90%, refused to cut taxes because the income was needed to pay down debt and the budget, (if we're going to compare the government to a household, as conservatives often like to do, then tax income is the same as the money you earn at your job, so cutting it naturally reduces your ability to do things like pay down your credit card debt) created NASA, advocated for better teaching of the sciences in schools, and warned against the military-industrial complex.

In the 60s a Republican Preseidential Candidate (Goldwater) advertised himself as a true conservative alternative to the moderate Republicans of the day and advocated for what was seen as radical and reactionary policies like opposing New Deal programs, deriding labor unions, leaving it up to the states to desegregate or not as they liked, etc. The result was that significant portions of his own party refused to endorse him when he won the primary, nearly 1,200 psychiatrists said that they believed his rantings and beliefs were the signs of mental illness, and he only won 6 states in the general election, as people turned out in droves to vote against such an unhinged extremist. This same unhinged, true conservative extremist would later sharply criticize the religious right for its policy on abortion, essentially accuse ministers like Falwell of being hucksters, lobby for gays to serve openly in the military, and the legalization of marijuana.

In the 70s, a sitting Republican President (Nixon) offered a plan essentially identical to Obamacare as an alternative to the single-payer system his Democratic congress was pushing for. They refused the offer and tried to push for the true liberal alternative of single-payer instead. He also practiced price and wage controls during his time in office, dramatically increased spending on the salaries of government workers, and said of economic policy "We're all Keynesians now".

In the 90s, conservative think tanks opposed to Democratic plans for Health Care reform proposed an alternative that was nearly identical to Obamacare, and that plan was actually used by a Republican state governor in the early 2000s.

Today, Republicans are crawling all over themselves to shut down the government or cut off funding to entire wings of it, oppose abortion in all cases, felate Evangelical Christianity and the military-industrial complex, oppose any changes to the drug war, want to deny all rights to gay people, rig laws to deny labor unions the right to exist and threaten to cut tax breaks to private companies if those companies "allow" their employees to unionize, deride teachers, are the only major party in the world who deny climate change, try to promote "teaching the controversy" about evolution vs creationism in science classes, scream about Obamacare being an unconstitutional power grab while predicting it will be the death of the country and raising multiple baseless lawsuits against it, think that a top tax bracket of 39.6% is too high and that tax cuts will magically pay for themselves and make budget deficits disappear, sneer at government workers and call them leeches, etc.

So yeah, what you consider moderate, liberal, or conservative has very little to do with any kind of set parameters, it has everything to do with the era you're born into and the politics you have experienced. Those labels are subjective and their meaning changes drastically, even from one part of the country to another. The country has been pulled far, far to the right in the last 50 years, especially since Reagan's election in 1980. At least when it comes to economics, what we call a moderate today is a foaming at the mouth crazy conservative in decades past, and today's liberals are yesterday's mainstream conservatives. So I absolutely refuse to buy into the Cult of Centrism and the notion that moderation is what we should aim for, at least not while there's a politically powerful ultra right wing who are always pulling the definition of moderate further rightward and are willing to try to sabotage the country (see government shutdowns and the like, along with all the things we can't do anymore, including pave our fucking roads) rather than lose control of it.

This is not much of a time for moderates.

edited 23rd Dec '15 12:57:09 AM by TheWanderer

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#107453: Dec 23rd 2015 at 4:35:30 AM

[up] I guess you're to the Left of Eisenhower?

The Guardian: US stops British Muslim family from boarding flight to visit Disneyland

A British Muslim family heading for Disneyland was barred from boarding a flight to Los Angeles by US authorities at London’s Gatwick airport amid concerns of an American overreaction to the perceived terrorist threat.

US Department of Homeland Security officials provided no explanation for why the country refused to allow the family of 11 to board the planeeven though they had been granted travel authorization online ahead of their planned 15 December flight.

Senior politicians have been drawn into the case, warning that a growing number of British Muslims are being barred from the US without being told the reason for their exclusion.

Aides to the prime minister, David Cameron, have promised that he will examine the case, which comes as a leading community group in the US has warned that Muslims are being subject to “an unprecedented and dramatic increase” in violent and hostile incidents. Advocates attribute this increase to the recent terror attacks in Paris and the mass shooting in San Bernardino, California.

US Homeland Security officials did not respond to a request for comment on why the family had been stopped from entering the country.

The family planned to visit cousins in southern California and go to Disneyland and Universal Studios, but they were turned away by US officials while at the departure lounge.

A Downing Street spokeswoman said Cameron would consider the issues raised in [MP Stella] Creasy’s letter and respond in due course. The prime minister has already described Trump’s remarks as “stupid, divisive and wrong”.

Mohammad Tariq Mahmood was one of the family members turned away from the flight. He was travelling with his brother and nine of their children. Mahmood told the Guardian that no officials had told them why their entry was barred, but he thinks the reason is “obvious”.

“It’s because of the attacks on America – they think every Muslim poses a threat,” Mahmood said.

He said the children had been counting down the days to the trip for months, and were devastated not to be able to visit their cousins as planned.

He said that the airline told them that they would not be refunded the $13,340 cost of their flights. They were also forced to return everything they bought at the airport’s duty-free shops before being escorted from the airport.

“I have never been more embarrassed in my life. I work here, I have a business here. But we were alienated,” Mahmood said.

Creasy, having “hit a brick wall” in her own attempts to get answers from the American embassy, has asked the prime minister to press US officials for an explanation for the Mahmood family’s exclusion.

She has also asked him to clarify whether the UK monitors the numbers and ethnic or religious background of those who are blocked from travelling, to “help reassure all UK citizens that no discrimination on the grounds of faith is happening at UK airports”.

Two days after the family was stopped from boarding their flight, another British traveller, Ajmal Mansoor, an imam and lecturer based in Bristol, was turned away from boarding a flight to New York.

“USA has the right to issue and revoke visa – I fully understand that,” Mansoor wrote in a Facebook post. “However not forwarding any reasons infuriates ordinary people. It does not win the hearts and minds of people, it turns them off. I am amazed how irrational these processes are but does USA care about what you and I think? I don’t think so!”

The US embassy in London did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

From The BBC article:

Mr Mahmood told the BBC: "We checked in, there were no problems. Just before the final check to get into the lounge we were singled out.

"A man from UK Border Force came and said, 'I'm sorry you can't board this flight. We received a call from Washington DC that we can't allow this family to board the flight'."

Mr Mahmood said he had educated his children "to live in this country peacefully" and had been invited to speak at local schools about Islamophobia.

So, is Trump already having an affect within the US Government? Also cross-posted to the UK Politics Thread.

edited 23rd Dec '15 4:36:18 AM by Greenmantle

Keep Rolling On
tricksterson Never Trust from Behind you with an icepick Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
Never Trust
#107454: Dec 23rd 2015 at 6:22:02 AM

[up][up]You forgot that Nixon also created the Environmental Protection Agency

Trump delenda est
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#107455: Dec 23rd 2015 at 6:48:11 AM

Old, but I only found it yesterday

Just for shits n giggles.

Also, about the whole racial tension slash partisan thing...here is my take on it.

I myself do not believe that Republicans are satan. I do not believe Democrats are lilly white saints. I think all of them are people who have the best intention for others in their own minds.

I am certain at this point that to Republicans, Democrats certainly look like narrow minded people who simply do not seem to get the fact that their single mindedness in certain racial issues can ignore the present law, the current economical flow, and other minor social situations.

I am certain that to Democrats, Republicans certainly look like blinded idiots, if not corrupt, pumped up on jingoistic kool aid puppeteered by military industrial complexes and who are not above letting people die in the name of whatever the fuck they feel like promoting on a whim: Death to muslims. To blacks. To latinos. Whatever the hatred du jour is.

Fact is, I don't give a shit, and you're both insane, single minded and pumped up on kool aid. Fact is, whoever describes themselves a X or Y, without being aware that their policies are BOTH promoting some horrible shit worldwide, some nebulous patriotism outright obvious or not, and some really ill fated longterm plans.

Sure, you can say "Well I am an X, but I don't like this about X but it sure is better than Y!" is fine, but without proper criticism to the faults of X and more than that, focusing simply on how horrible Y is in that aspect does no good other than polarizing people.

I do not advocate centrism either. The "both parties are bad so fuck them!" is quite unpractical because wether we like it or not one of them is going to be in power, and their power is far reaching. It is better to pick the lesser of two evils and work towards making the evils or both even lesser.

Be critical, be informed, and be a bit more analytical of the shit without living to antagonize the others, seriously. It's perfectly great to do it for shits and giggles, politics is a lot like a football match. But if you wanna be taken seriously then the campaign of "Republicans are redneck idiots or espouse their philosophy" every single post does nothing but generate hatred from them.

...That said, if you DO support the republican party, it takes a special amount of willful blindness to ignore just how horrible what they espouse is, was, and could be, by precedent, analysis, and current consequences. And if you DO support the democratic party without thinking you're not being pumped up high in jingoistic speech as much as the republican party, your kool aid breath says otherwise.

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Skycobra51 A suitable case for treatment from The US of A Since: Nov, 2013 Relationship Status: Only knew I loved her when I let her go
A suitable case for treatment
#107456: Dec 23rd 2015 at 6:55:14 AM

[up][up][up][up] So Centrism is a cult? Wow, then I must be crazy for not supporting or siding the Democrats or Republicans.

edited 23rd Dec '15 6:55:43 AM by Skycobra51

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#107457: Dec 23rd 2015 at 6:56:39 AM

[up] Centrism based on "I don't like the specifics of this or that, so I am not siding with either or not doing anything about it" is, indeed, quite Cult-ish in the sense that it turns you into a rabid anti-others fanatic that ends up providing absolutely nothing useful to anything other than bile.

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Skycobra51 A suitable case for treatment from The US of A Since: Nov, 2013 Relationship Status: Only knew I loved her when I let her go
A suitable case for treatment
#107458: Dec 23rd 2015 at 7:00:00 AM

But the thing is, my political views don't align with either party (They're a weird mix of both). Its part of the reason I registered as a Non-Affiliated/Independent voter.

Long story short,

I'm too liberal to be Republican, and too conservative to be Democrat.

edited 23rd Dec '15 7:02:39 AM by Skycobra51

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.
Balmung Since: Oct, 2011
#107459: Dec 23rd 2015 at 7:04:42 AM

I thought the Cult of Centrism was the common media position of taking the two major political parties and applying the Golden Mean Fallacy. It's the assumption that each party is equally extreme and equally willing/unwilling to compromise and that the Real Solution TM lies in the exact middle of the two, if only they'd both stop stonewalling.

[up]At that point, generally the best you can do is pick whichever you find less objectionable at the time and bear in mind that, depending on your state, local democrats may be more conservative than their national average or local republicans may be more liberal than their national average.

edited 23rd Dec '15 7:08:11 AM by Balmung

Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#107460: Dec 23rd 2015 at 7:05:47 AM

Again. It depends on your definition. If all you can say is "I don't agree with them on anything, or enough" is a pretty weak excuse that denotes you haven't actually cared enough to read up on what their policies end up at. Browsing through the funny sounding titles of both left and right side publications does nothing to inform you of anything else other than their politicized opinions. Certainly, many of them are well informed and have pure gold nuggets of information, but if you allow interpretations of others alone to define you, or you define yourself by the opposition to them, then you haven't really thought about them enough to know what you want, or what they offer.

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#107461: Dec 23rd 2015 at 7:06:02 AM

[up][up] That is correct. A genuinely undecided voter is not a Center Cultist. However, it is definitely a sign of Kool-Aid consumption if you subscribe to the fallacy that the two parties must always be equally distant from some hypothetical middle ground.

edited 23rd Dec '15 7:06:29 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#107462: Dec 23rd 2015 at 7:14:28 AM

Yeah the Cult of Centralism is a thing about insisting that they're both equally bad and equally right despite evidence saying otherwise.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Balmung Since: Oct, 2011
#107463: Dec 23rd 2015 at 7:17:18 AM

See also: Stupid Neutral


Relevant to the common media version ("balance" over accuracy and treating both sides as equally extreme):

edited 23rd Dec '15 7:23:33 AM by Balmung

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#107464: Dec 23rd 2015 at 7:24:52 AM

Let's take some examples. Gun control policy is strangely important to a lot of people, because it's such a visible issue in the media. However, in the grand scheme of things there are vastly fewer firearms-related deaths than there are disease-related deaths, or pollution-related deaths.

So, not voting Democrat because you don't like the idea that someone, at some time, might restrict your ability to own a gun, but ignoring the fact that Democrats are the only ones pushing for universal healthcare and climate regulation, is mind-bogglingly stupid.

The assertion that we "can't afford" universal healthcare has been disproven by many, many examples, so sticking to that belief reflects a lack of trust in evidence-based economic theory and makes me regard you as ignorant. And if you remain a climate change denier at this point, you're brain-dead.

edited 23rd Dec '15 7:27:55 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Skycobra51 A suitable case for treatment from The US of A Since: Nov, 2013 Relationship Status: Only knew I loved her when I let her go
A suitable case for treatment
#107465: Dec 23rd 2015 at 8:08:43 AM

[up]Can you put that in a memo and entitle it "Shit I already know."tongue

So if I do adhere to things like Universal Healthcare, Legalization of Marijuana, Gay Marriage and Climate Change or whatever the hell they're calling it now I must vote Democrat.

Even if I believe in tougher immigration laws and locking down the border or alternatively enforcing the laws we already have, Or that Abortions should only be legal in cases of Incest, Rape, or if there's a health risk to the mother or child.

edited 23rd Dec '15 8:27:58 AM by Skycobra51

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#107466: Dec 23rd 2015 at 8:27:23 AM

I'm saying that some of those issues should have higher priority, since they directly affect the survival of the nation and/or the human race. I won't even get started on the silliness of the abortion argument, since Republicans also uniformly oppose women's access to healthcare, mandatory sexual education, mandatory paid parental leave, and other things that provably reduce them, while banning them has the opposite effect.

Also, immigration is not a threat to our nation, at least not in a way that a big border wall would solve. Really, that topic just smells of you paying a visit to the Kool-Aid truck.

edited 23rd Dec '15 8:28:34 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#107467: Dec 23rd 2015 at 8:27:52 AM

Well, the thing is, you can actually do some analysis on these conflicting views.

For instance: If you vote Republican, how many abortions will be prevented? Let's just say 1000 for the sake of argument. Even given the weight of life being equivalent between fetuses and adult humans, when you compare that to the loss of life from a continually malfunctioning health care system, from a lack of a social safety net, etc, the numbers just don't add up in favor of voting for Republicans.

Even if you think abortion is morally wrong and it is a human life, you have to consider the opposing side.

Skycobra51 A suitable case for treatment from The US of A Since: Nov, 2013 Relationship Status: Only knew I loved her when I let her go
A suitable case for treatment
#107468: Dec 23rd 2015 at 8:30:46 AM

[up][up] I don't even like Kool-Aid, I prefer Capri Sun.

But if that's the case, Well then bottoms up.

Plus, Immigration is pretty low on my personal list of Important Shit to take care of. I was trying to make a point.

edited 23rd Dec '15 8:34:09 AM by Skycobra51

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.
TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#107469: Dec 23rd 2015 at 8:31:07 AM

I guess you're to the Left of Eisenhower?

Probably not in all honesty, aside from not being in favor of coups in Central and South America (or Iran) or threatening to use nukes to end conflicts, as Ike did with the Korean War. tongue

In the current US climate I'm pretty far to the left, but I am a child of the 80s and have grown up in the culture of the times, so 90% tax rates and price and wage controls make something in my blood freeze, without any rational thought as to why. Hell, Bernie Sanders has joked on a few occasions that his proposals are not as left as Eisenhower's! wink

I'm just pissed off because I'm living in this current climate, I can see all too well how the path we started on since the Reagan years isn't working, and the things that have worked historically speaking are considered out of bounds, while the things that are wrecking the country aren't. The fact that the "logic" behind a lot of the Republican proposals is so dumb that a child should be able to pick it apart, and yet we are almost forced to kowtow to it as a country frequently leaves me wanting to bang my head against a wall.

edited 23rd Dec '15 8:31:54 AM by TheWanderer

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#107470: Dec 23rd 2015 at 8:33:23 AM

Statistically it is simple. The best way to avoid abortions is to give better sexual health education AND legalizing the abortions. This will reduce the number of abortions significantly more than just delegalizing abortions ever would

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#107471: Dec 23rd 2015 at 8:34:54 AM

Illegal abortions = a lot of dead or crippled mothers, because people will get them no matter what. Legal abortions + sex education and contraceptive access = fewer abortions, because fewer women will have unwanted pregnancies.

The math doesn't lie here.

edited 23rd Dec '15 8:35:37 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Skycobra51 A suitable case for treatment from The US of A Since: Nov, 2013 Relationship Status: Only knew I loved her when I let her go
A suitable case for treatment
#107472: Dec 23rd 2015 at 8:37:43 AM

This has been a PSA from the No-Shit Department.tongue

edited 23rd Dec '15 8:40:48 AM by Skycobra51

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.
Skycobra51 A suitable case for treatment from The US of A Since: Nov, 2013 Relationship Status: Only knew I loved her when I let her go
A suitable case for treatment
#107474: Dec 23rd 2015 at 8:50:23 AM

1. So if Bland were white, she wouldn't have died. Okay sure.

Let's flip it around, and play devils advocate.

If the exact same thing happend and Bland were a white woman, would it have even made headlines?

2. It does seem like the Cartoonist went a bridge too far in that case.

edited 23rd Dec '15 8:54:36 AM by Skycobra51

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#107475: Dec 23rd 2015 at 8:55:35 AM

If the exact same thing happend and Bland were a white woman, would it have even made headlines?

The priority here is not "Who got the headlines"

Is "How about we bring attention to an issue that is causing deaths"

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes

Total posts: 417,856
Top