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
[recognition slowly dawns] But he looks nothing like Littlefinger!
Sanders is a Single-Issue Wonk for the economy, but I can't really fault him for it. Many — arguably most — policy issues are fundamentally economic in nature.
The big question for me is whether Sanders or Clinton would actually be more effective as president. I like Sanders' policies more, but unless he gets a friendly Congress, he won't be able to implement many of them. But Clinton's positions aren't bad, and I think she'd be better at dealing with a hostile Congress than Sanders.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.Even if the economy is important, you have to be capable of handling other stuff.
Like saying that IS is caused by the economy doesn't help much in actually dealing with them now.
Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's PlaySanders and O Malley are both terrible on foreign policy. Worst, it's clear that they regard it as an utter side show, whereas Obama, while not strong their, at least had some sort of vision. These two dismiss it out of hand. O Mally always says some shit about "human intelligence" and Sanders always says his spiel about Abdullah,one suspects he has a serious man crush their. They both dismiss Russia and China out of hand with that same dam "the Cold War is over" mindset that got us into such a precarious position to begin with.
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.TLDR:
- Detroit Water Board decides to be spoiled, pissy assholes and leaves Flint with no good options for the two years before its pipeline is built.
- Flint’s elected leadership and GOP-appointed EFM make a careful, well-deliberated decision to draw water from the Flint River. [Namely, it was fine to use, and easy to treat, so long as you kept the ph right, which leads us to the final point]
- Flint’s water staff – the people in Flint who are the experts on this sort of thing – apparently aren’t up to the task. And the people they count on to oversee and help them …
According to the author, this was more of a case of Hanlon's Razor than malicious greed, black people genocide, or excessive austerity. He certainly goes out of his way in his effort to exonerate the GOP and the Governor. *shrug* I'm mildly skeptical, but I like arguments that deviate from what we've been hearing, if only to break the monotony and have some actual discussion instead of repeating our favourite media sources' editorial lines.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.Basically, he would use the victory as a beacon for grassroots efforts.
![]()
![]()
![]()
,![]()
![]()
I'm cool with that. I'd rather see us get our own house in order than focus on foreign affairs to the detriment of domestic ones. And I actually liked both Sanders' and O'Malley's responses to a question about ISIS — basically, that the US should be working in a support role for the local powers in the region. This is a far better answer, by my thinking, than either "just bomb them and leave" or "invade and fix everything!", given that large scale logistical support is something that the US is uniquely capable of doing (really; we're the only country on the planet that can move large quantities of materiel worldwide both on short notice and for extended periods of time) and lets us keep our hand in world events while not coming across as (or actually being, for that matter) aggressive or imperialistic.
![]()
It's not an either/or thing between "malice" and "stupidity". It's the former allowing for the latter. Basically, no one cares, so there's not enough money to pay for not-stupidity. I can totally believe that everyone involved did the best they could with the situation they had. The problem is that the situation was unsustainably shitty in the first place because no one cares about places like Flint.
That's reasonable. If he can hang on politically long enough to get a friendlier Congress in place (and the first enormous Tea Party wave in the senate is up for reelection during what would be his term, IIRC, so that's not unlikely) then he could do some real good, and in the meantime he'd be channeling gives-no-fucks Obama and doing everything he could on presidential authority.
edited 18th Jan '16 4:37:50 PM by NativeJovian
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.Unfortunately, and no offense, but the US is pretty much the Dumb Muscle of the world. They have great power and influence, but unfortunately usually don't know how to use it properly and do some really stupid things with it. They have done some good before, though, and made some nice things.
I don't think it's that the US is dumb muscle so much as intervening in international incidents is actually really hard, and the US is the only one with the muscle to even try anymore. Back in the gold old days, no one cared about using a light touch — they just invaded and occupied when they wanted something and fuck the locals. And when (or if) they took their troops home and left later? Well, if the region collapses into an anarchic orgy of unrestrained violence, who cares? Not the departing country's problem anymore.
That said, the fact that doing stuff like that is hard is one of the reasons I'd like to see more international coalitions that include local powers, rather than just throwing ordinance at problems and hoping that's good enough.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.The way they've been handling it after the problem came to light seems to have been the nail in the coffin of that issue, though. Their response to it has been craptastic, quite frankly, and I think if they'd actually jumped on the issue and actually tried to get water there in numbers that actually help then Snyder and co. wouldn't be getting quite as much bad press as they currently are.
A hilarious and chilling little bit of speculation
:
"But then, while I had sometimes played the part of far-right troll in my wanderings, I had never adopted the identity of a full-fledged presidential candidate with supporters and a political agenda. I had no practice at the task.
"So you decided to try a small-scale experiment first," Harry said. A sickness rose up in him, because in that moment Harry understood, he saw himself reflected; the next step was just what Harry himself would have done, if he'd had no trace of ethics whatsoever, if he'd been that empty inside. "You created a disposable identity, to learn how the ropes worked, and get your mistakes out of the way."
"Indeed. Before becoming a truly unstoppable Republican, I first created for practice the persona of an arrogant, offensive billionaire, pointlessly rude to all those around him, pursuing a political agenda of naked personal ambition combined with anti-immigrant racism as argued by drunks in backstreet bars." The sick sense of understanding deepened, in the pit of Harry's stomach. "And you called yourself Donald Trump."
Is paranoia THAT rampant in the U.S that anything that any candidate whose policy is not "TOUGH FACE IN FRONT OF ALLIES AND ENEMIES" and does not make a big show of how tough and stringent he is going to be with other nations regarded as a failure in foreign policy?
I know it exists. Just that seeing it here is weird. The sentiment that any slight show of "weakness" (AKA a sentence that does not really carry the implicit threat of bombing something) by a suited up president of the U.S is going to be day the U.S will falter, be bombed, invaded and destroyed or something?
edited 19th Jan '16 6:26:36 AM by Aszur
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesThat paranoia mainly lives on the right, plus select folks who believe themselves part of the chimerical middle. It's the idea that everyone will tear us down the minute we relax our watch, and the world will dissolve into an orgy of war thereafter.
For once, I said it more nicely.
edited 19th Jan '16 6:34:28 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Well. On second thought, my bad. I was thinking "I am stranged at how this would happen in a relatively left leaning forum that is about discussing tropes in fiction"
And then I remember
◊ most works of fiction are literally about America Saves the Day
Hey, I used to geek out on Tom Clancy's novels. Then I grew up.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Nothing wrong with Tom Clancy, except politically.
He did manage to research his way into freaking out the CIA and Navy after all.
That and his scenarios, stripping the politics out of it, have a scary, if broad, tendency to become a thing in real life. Debt Of Honor being the most obvious example.
EDIT- Can no longer read him either though, so Fighteer's point stands.
edited 19th Jan '16 7:18:59 AM by FFShinra
You can't really separate Clancy's politics from his plots, because every single one of his stories ends with red-blooded, patriotic American technology and gumption saving the world, which is screwed up in the first place because of anti-American/anti-freedom (they are synonymous, don't you know) villains, idiotic hippie liberals, or both.
Admittedly, he had no particular love for Right Wing Militia Fanatics, either.
Don't get me wrong: I love the thriller aspects of his stories. But as I got older I began to realize just how biased they are.
edited 19th Jan '16 7:22:34 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Tom Clancys SSN was a scary prediction of what is currently going on between the US and China over disputed Islands. Even predicting Chna's artificial islands and such.
It was the Spratly islands, China / Philippines dispute, though not the Senkaku islands, China / Japan dispute.
edited 19th Jan '16 7:28:42 AM by Memers

Plot Twist: The occupation of the federal building was actually just a ploy to acquire free sex toys.
Leviticus 19:34