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
@Nihlus1: I'm not sure that you aren't concern trolling from a right-wing perspective because your ideas are so weird, but I'm really curious what your proposed solution is. You seem to feel that any immigration policy that does not allow an unlimited, unrestricted influx and immediately make them citizens or some such is insufficient. I cannot think of any mainstream liberal who believes this.
Certainly, the idea of knocking down national borders and becoming one big, happy international family has its appeal, but there are important economic reasons why this is impossible to do on any near-term scale, never mind the political ones. Sanders is espousing a cautious approach that creates both a legal status and a pathway to citizenship for those already here while seeking to protect both illegal immigrants and legal workers from exploitation by business interests. I see nothing to dislike there.
On the free trade side, while unrestricted international commerce may ultimately act as an equalizer, it is not an unmitigated good, especially as the United States does not practice free trade. Rather, it heavily subsidizes many of its own industries and provides tacit support for tax evasion via offshoring profits so that they can move into third world countries and supplant their local businesses.
Without strictly enforced minimum wage laws and rules about labor exploitation overseas, the net effect of offshoring jobs is to reduce wages and income for U.S. workers. You may say that those dollars come back to us, and they do, but the nature of the system is such as to trap them in the top end of the income scale. Look at Flint, Michigan. Those auto workers whose jobs were "displaced" have not seen a damn bit of economic benefit.
Really, I don't get what you're trying to do. I'm getting awfully sick of it, though.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Edit: Bleh. ![]()
![]()
Yeah, MSNBC just reported the same thing. One fatality, one injured and taken the hospital. They're keeping tight on who those two are, for the moment. Which is a lot better than many such confrontations have gone, but I wish no one had died at all.
Now I'm wondering if anyone was left behind at the wildlife refuge, if they arrested them at a traffic stop. The news was pretty clear on having arrested Ammon Bundy, though. Maybe without the leader everyone else will lose their gumption for this whole thing.
edited 26th Jan '16 7:27:04 PM by AceofSpades
That may be why they're not releasing details, if it is one of them dead the police will want to avoid releasing that until they have the rest in custody/dispersed, for fear of them remainder going for revenge and attacking the police station or something.
edited 26th Jan '16 7:41:59 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranWithout strictly enforced minimum wage laws and rules about labor exploitation overseas, the net effect of offshoring jobs is to reduce wages and income for U.S. workers. You may say that those dollars come back to us, and they do, but the nature of the system is such as to trap them in the top end of the income scale. Look at Flint, Michigan. Those auto workers whose jobs were "displaced" have not seen a damn bit of economic benefit.
The logical approach would be to combine free trade with progressive taxation and a generous social safety net.
Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's PlayMaybe that was the FBI's idea; let them roam around (as long as they weren't posing an immediate threat doing so) and eventually they'd get themselves into a point where they could be easily apprehended with minimal casualties.
My thought had been to surround the refuge with armored vehicles equipped with speakers which would blast the refuge with loud, terrible music 24/7. That was how they got Manuel Noriega when he tried to take refuge in the Vatican Embassy in Panama.
Would using Justin Bieber be considered a crime against humanity?
edited 26th Jan '16 7:44:46 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.@Victin: You want to know about the U.S. elections. Well, damn, there's a lot there, but I'll do my best to summarize.
Republican Party
The U.S. Republican Party (also known as the "GOP", for "Grand Old Party") notionally represents right-wing social and economic conservatism. Its interests align directly with big business and the super-wealthy, seeking to lower taxes and barriers to free enterprise above all else. However, over the past 30-40 years the party has been hijacked by a deeply religious (evangelical Protestant), deeply racist, populist contingent that seeks to tear down the structures of democratic socialism in order to preserve the privilege of white, Christian males. Because of this, the GOP has split into two warring camps: the establishment, representing the plutocrats, and the "Tea Party", representing racist white Evangelicals.The establishment wants lower taxes on everyone, but especially businesses and the wealthy. They worship a supply-side economic model and reject all alternatives. They support a strong U.S. military presence overseas because it enriches the coffers of their defense contractor buddies. They pay lip service to the evangelical and populist wings while quietly ignoring them while in office. They reject the theory of man-made climate change because their big business butt buddies would be inconvenienced by the reforms required to address it.
The populist wing is made up of various camps, with several shared social values. Among them are an absolute rejection of LGBT rights, the affirmation of white privilege over blacks, the promotion of Protestant Christian values, a complete ban on abortion and female contraception, the rejection of scientific instruction in schools, the expulsion of Hispanic and Muslim immigrants, the unrestricted right to bear personal firearms, and the intense distrust of government in all its forms.
There are a lot of Republican candidates for the 2016 primary election, but the more notable ones include:
- Donald J. Trump: A media mogul and real-estate tycoon who runs a beauty pageant and a reality TV show, he has run for President in the past but never seriously until now. Besides bluster and threats at anyone who challenges him, his platform is based on naked racism, promising to expel all Hispanic and Muslim immigrants from the United States. Naturally, this has made him extremely popular.
- Senator Ted Cruz: The junior Senator from Texas and a hardcore religious wackjob, Cruz is vying for the evangelical vote. His abrasive and confrontational style has earned him the hatred of his peers in Congress and almost everywhere else. Cruz believes in banning abortion; he denies the very idea of man-made global warming, and he wants to impose Biblical law on the nation
. He was a key driver in the attempt to shut down the Federal government in 2013 over raising the debt ceiling.
- Governor Jeb Bush: Son of George H. W. Bush and brother of George W. Bush, themselves both former Presidents, Jeb (or Jeb! as his campaign branding insists) is the former Governor of Florida and heir to a political dynasty that is best known for being a complete failure at governing anything more complex than a shoebox. His campaign has been about name recognition and he has raised staggering amounts of money from well-heeled donors who are getting rather peeved that he's accomplished absolutely nothing in the polls.
- Senator Marco Rubio: The junior Senator from Florida, Marco Rubio enjoys the cachet of being one of the few non-Caucasian candidates, having a Cuban background. His clean-cut image belies a diffident, sycophantic personality who kowtows to anyone who might offer him a chance at political power. Aside from a brief flirtation with a sane immigration policy, his platform is straight Tea Party.
- Ben Carson: A retired neurosurgeon, Carson is the only black candidate in the 2016 Presidential race. Amazingly considering his occupation, he is the champion of the know-nothings, with more non-sequiturs and bizarre statements to his name than any other candidate. He had to be coached extensively to identify any countries in the Middle-East. He's thankfully fallen out of favor.
- Carly Fiorina: Former (fired) CEO of Hewlett-Packard, Fiorina enjoyed a thankfully brief rise in the polls due to her radical anti-abortion platform, holding up a now-discredited exposé of Planned Parenthood, a women's healthcare provider, as proof that the company was harvesting and selling fetal organs on the black market.
- Governor Chris Christie: Current Governor of New Jersey, Christie comes across as a pragmatic, mainstream Republican until you notice that his administration has been marked by intense cronyism and scandal. He's an ignorant bully who has been blatantly neglecting his duty to his state to go on the campaign trail. Several of his administration's high ranking officials are under criminal indictment for a scandal in which they deliberately shut down a major bridge to punish a mayor for failing to support Christie's re-election campaign.
There are a few others but I've covered all the likely ones.
Democratic Party
The U.S. Democratic Party is a truly broad-tent organization, representing everything from organized labor to women's and minority rights to environmental causes. It is, very loosely, founded on the principles of democratic socialism, despite the word "socialist" being toxic in the American political landscape. It has always been a party of the working class, opposed in principle to Republicans' support of big business, although it has plenty of wealthy donors itself. Unlike many "left-wing" parties in Europe and elsewhere, it does not openly court Communists or radical environmentalists.In the 1970s, the Democratic Party hemorrhaged a large contingent of voters from the southern states, who defected to the Republican Party over the civil rights movement. In short, they were mad they had to desegregate and start treating blacks like people, so they bailed. This has been hailed as the beginning of the downfall of the Republicans.
Despite their broad base of support, Democrats are highly unified on their political platform, supporting sensible restrictions on gun ownership, progressive taxation, strong environmental and business regulations, affirmative action to redress systemic racism, an immigration policy that acknowledges that people will try to come to the country seeking opportunity and seeks to integrate them as successfully as possible, and other such things.
The Democratic candidates are:
- Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton: Former Secretary of State under President Obama, former Senator from New York, and wife of former President William Jefferson Clinton (better known as Bill Clinton), Hillary is one of the only two female candidates in the current race. Over the course of her long career in politics, she has stood out as very center-left, seeking a broad, conciliatory approach to governance. She notably voted for the war in Iraq, later regretting that decision; and supported Bill Clinton in enacting the Defense of Marriage Act, a law that curtailed gay rights which she also later reversed position on. Her current platform is one of cautious progressive change, building on the successes of Barack Obama.
- Senator Bernie Sanders: The senior Senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders was until recently a declared independent. His entire career has been dedicated to a strong socialist agenda, most particularly in economic areas. He advocates nationalized healthcare, a complete curtailing of large political donations, the dissolution of the largest financial institutions, significant increases in taxation to address wealth inequality, and a radical plan to address climate change. He has set records for individual contributions in the campaign and has rejected all big money donors.
- Governor Martin O'Malley: Former Governor of Maryland, O'Malley is something of an also-ran in this race. His biggest claim is his staunch opposition to the National Rifle Association (NRA), a radical pro-gun lobby. He also presided over a time of deep racial strife in the city of Baltimore, notable for the excessive use of force by police against blacks, and this has tarnished his image somewhat.
Hope this helps.
edited 26th Jan '16 8:32:10 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Man, the even-handedness of that is just too much!
He buys into a long debunked fallacy, and it's what he bases his entire economic policy on.
Sanders is basically saying the vast improvements to the lives of third world peasants, as well as the improvements to the lives of Americans via lower prices, aren't worth as much as the possibility of a moderate reduction in the living standards of western factory workers who have the opportunity to retrain into other jobs. The effects of free trade are really not much different from the effects of a technological advance. It increases overall productivity, displaces some workers, and results in a net benefit to human society.
I will repeat that, contrary to your claim of Argentina being "a third world country" back when Perón took power, in 1950 Argentina had the fifth highest per capita GDP in the world; it was about half the US's, and higher than several western European nations. Economists thought it would grow into a South American superpower. Then they showed us what happens when you reject free trade and embrace autarky, while Australia showed us the opposite. These countries were both resource-export oriented economies with modest industrialization, both were populated largely by descendants of European colonists, and both came out of WWII in a relatively strong position (Argentina more so, beating out Australia in GDP per capita partly due to not fighting in the war). Which would you rather live in now?
What inspired me to compile all this information in the first place is my little sister, who will be of voting age in a few months, not knowing anything about Sanders' stance towards free trade, instead being taken in by his insane $15 minimum wage plan. That scared me. Several people in this thread not knowing where Sanders' support base is (read: middle class white liberals, and unionists) was cause for further alarm.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
edited 26th Jan '16 8:52:23 PM by Nihlus1
Sanders has specifically declared his intent to emulate the social models of the Nordic countries, so again I think you're just pulling shit out of your ass.
Just because Perón was a shit doesn't mean that anyone who calls himself a democratic socialist must also be a shit.
edited 26th Jan '16 8:24:58 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Sanders is the one who is pulling shit out of his ass. He says he wants to emulate the Nordic countries yet has repeatedly proposed the exact opposite of their economic policies. This is not the first time he's mistaken the Nordic system for the opposite.
Because he's full of shit.
Do I have to quote the Danish government again on their trade policy?
Although international trade policy may be conducted bilaterally and regionally, Denmark and the EU remain fundamentally and clearly committed to multilateral negotiations. Thereby, the WTO - the World Trade Organization - is the primary focus of Denmark’s and EU’s trade policy. The WTO system creates an international legal system with legitimacy, and it provides the necessary guarantees for all actors in the global economy. It ensures the involvement of, and consideration for, developing countries. Furthermore it is important for Denmark that the WTO agreements can be enforced through WTO’s dispute settlement system. The alternative to WTO’s regulation of international economy is that “might is right”. Likewise, it is important for Denmark to continuously search for flexibility in agriculture and other important areas of negotiation.
Trade and development
Denmark is among the most active trade liberal and development friendly Member States of the European Union
Man, that sounds so much like "the WTO is an abomination and we should never have entered".
edited 26th Jan '16 8:36:08 PM by Nihlus1
edited 26th Jan '16 8:29:18 PM by Joesolo
I'm baaaaaaackI mean, what about Mc Cain? He at least used to be somewhat agreeable.
Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?I mean, Mc Cain spoke out against the "enhanced interrogation" crap (makes sense he would, he suffered through it in 'Nam). I appreciate him being a voice of reason in that case.
Wait, I thought Kaisch was homophobic or said some weird stuff about abortion or something?
edited 26th Jan '16 8:31:54 PM by AdricDePsycho
Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?In terms of presidential nominees, Kasich has given the impression of being relatively sane, though no one has really cared enough to bother following up on his positions.
In its entirety, sure, but then it starts becoming a question of how closely are they following the party line, and then you can run into the issue of Republicans-In-Name-Only.
edited 26th Jan '16 8:32:29 PM by Eschaton
Rubio seems pretty sane to me.
But, to be fair that's coming from a Republican, with similar views as him.
edited 26th Jan '16 8:36:56 PM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34

@ Nihlus1
That'd be Clinton.
Thanks
@ Victin
Maybe try Canada instead?
There's that. The need for moving to the US after college is that, if I were working on a video game, there ought to be a need to work with the voice actors on the script.