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 New Yorker discusses the appalling saga of Flint, Michigan's contaminated water supply.
over here the Black Shirts were just straight up Nazi's, though they got what was coming to them
I don't think Bloomberg would have that much of an impact, tbh, unless Sanders won the nomination, and even then. It would only work if the Democratic candidate was seen as too left-wing, and Sanders has his moderate points as well (mostly on social issues). A candidate who has truly broad, cross-cutting appeal is rare, and is harder to pull off now that the country is more polarized in its politics.
It would still play spoiler in a very close, Bush v Gore style race like Nader did, but to see a Ross Perot style performance where a 3rd party pulls a significant chunk of the popular vote away, and does so in a measure from both sides of the aisle, is much harder to see.
I'm very willing to call Bloomberg's bluff and caucus for Sanders. The story so far seems to be that the next four years are going to be a brick wall of governance on account of the GOP-gerrymandered legislature for any Democratic president, and appear to much of the electorate as a failure for that guy or gal. This brings the risk of a GOP down-ticket surge in 2020 and another 10-year lock on Congress after the census, traded for the possibility of appointing some new Democratic-leaning justices. Between Sanders and Clinton, the former seems more likely to win hypothetical reelection in 2020 after four years of probable gridlock and break that surge.
If Bloomberg runs and shaves off more presumptive right voters than lefties, it's still a net gain for the Democrats, despite his apparent willingness to shear off his nose to spite his face.
If Bloomberg runs and splits the left vote more than the right, he'll feed into the narrative with the progressive base that corporate sellouts are poisoning the democratic process and thus quicken the birth of a proper progressive/left wing party, allowing the Democrats to become truly center-right and leave what's left of the GOP sputtering and fuming as the money jumps ship and dooms them to the tune of one or two more cycles. Further, "President Trump" would probably run the country into Democratic arms in 2020, reversing the direction of the down-ticket flip and giving the Democrats the house and senate. If Bloomberg doesn't run despite his very scary threat to his own party, Sanders still beats Trump and probably any of the other folks in the clown car.
Additionally, the anti-Clinton hate is probably strong enough to make whoever the GOP picks seem reasonable to some, giving us a sort of 2004 Kerry vs Bush scenario. I don't know who would win between her and those guys, and I'm not all that willing to find out.
Tl;dr, either option is risky, but we have no idea who'll be running for the Democratic nomination in 2020 if Clinton (or Sanders, sure) loses this one, and I'm no gambler. Bloomberg's shadow doesn't change my own logic or preference, but he's clearly scared people, even in this forum. That plays into Clinton's hands, making her that much more likely to win the nomination.
edited 24th Jan '16 4:20:23 PM by Artificius
"I have no fear, for fear is the little death that kills me over and over. Without fear, I die but once."What do you mean by that? If we get a true progressive/left wing party, then I think we'd just have Republicans versus two other parties that split the vote of their opponents.
The Republicans are becoming a bad brand, and I could see the money/establishment behind the party scuttling it with the white nationalists and leaving for the Democrats. After that, the Republican party would be dead or dying and no one would court the bigot vote for decades as the Democrats consolidated their position and the new party built infrastructure. They're a poisoned well, and many of the reasonable Republicans can see that. If they were presented with a clear conservative alternative, they'd jump ship with the establishment.
edited 24th Jan '16 4:45:46 PM by Artificius
"I have no fear, for fear is the little death that kills me over and over. Without fear, I die but once."Ugh, FOX is shilling that 13 Hours movie and is excited about some interview with the contractors it's based on.
They're selling the angle that everyone but these mercs abandoned the embassy. But they're playing up proud American aspect of it. Despite the fact that they're mercs who couldn't give two fucks about America.
And that most of the embassy's defenders consisted of non American locals.
edited 24th Jan '16 5:07:51 PM by LeGarcon
Oh really when?You really can't risk the whole "Dems' defeat in 2016 will galvanize the progressive left." The party isn't there yet, frankly. DWS and others would take it as the needed excuse to run further to the center-right, and meanwhile you'd see Ginsburg, at least, replaced by someone who'd make Robert Bork look downright sane, and there goes same-sex marriage and abortion (to start).
Yeah, the people who think that a GOP victory would rally the left in time for 2020 (and damn the costs) are about as crazy and wrong as those who wanted the Nazis to take over Europe because they thought it would trigger a pan European communist uprising.
With the current state of the GOP, and the politicized circus that is the American judiciary, a GOP controlled White House and Congress would probably get the US downgraded into a pseudo democracy ala Russia or Turkey.
edited 24th Jan '16 6:48:11 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Since when did Bloomberg scare anyone in this thread? The only thing I know about him is he was mayor of New York. Plus, rumblings about running at this late date? Well, I sincerely doubt it's going to happen, so he's basically a brief blip on the radar and not anyone I feel concerned about at this point in time. And I didn't see anyone else concerned over him, just speculation about what might happen if he followed through.
I doubt he's much scared anyone in either party with the idea he might run, either.
Extra: I have always found the trend of referring to either party as a brand kind of strange. Probably appropriate, but it's pretty recent and strange to see.
edited 24th Jan '16 7:24:16 PM by AceofSpades
Which he's threatened he'll do specifically in the event of a Sanders nomination a week before the actual primaries begin, the crafty swine.
Again, not at all sure I believe him, but then I don't know much about him apart from his administration's attempts to regulate New York's soda consumption and increase in "stop-and-frisks" among the police.
edited 24th Jan '16 8:23:25 PM by Artificius
"I have no fear, for fear is the little death that kills me over and over. Without fear, I die but once."Whenever things start to turn against Trump, he does something bizarre and outrageous, which against all logic repairs his poll numbers.
Ted Cruz catching up? Wheel out the Trump Youth / the Freedom Kids, and all of a sudden he's in the lead again.
I think Godwin's Law might be dead with Trump doing what he's doing.
Never thought I'd see the rebirth of the Fascists.
![]()
I'd actually argue that fascism never truly died. For example, I'd argue that Islamic extremists are pseudo-fascist.
As for Godwin's Law...I imagine that Trump isn't quite a Nazi By Any Other Name, though he's done alarmingly little to reassure me, and I'd much rather not have him in office to find out.
edited 24th Jan '16 8:56:46 PM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34Sheriff Glenn Palmer said in a statement to The Oregon Live that "the government is going to have to concede something" to end the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.
He said freeing a father-son ranching team from prison "would be a start. Sending the FBI home would be a start." He referred to the FBI's lead role in ending the refuge occupation.
"I just pray to God that cooler heads prevail and that no one gets killed," Palmer said.
The sheriff's endorsement of the militants' demands stunned law enforcement officials, most who would not publicly discuss the matter.
Malheur County Sheriff Brian Wolfe, who has been helping in Burns, said Palmer's position "doesn't help the cause. If anything, it hampers the effort to end this."

At Eschaton. This thread moves faster than me.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele