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

RavenWilder Since: Apr, 2009
#109726: Jan 27th 2016 at 1:49:39 AM

Or they know they don't have a candidate that can beat Clinton in the general, so want Sanders to get the nom instead.

FieldMarshalFry Field Marshal of Cracked from World Internet War 1 Since: Oct, 2015 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
Field Marshal of Cracked
#109727: Jan 27th 2016 at 1:50:23 AM

what, a candidate who supports everything the Republican establishment opposes? they'd get on better with Hillary

advancing the front into TV Tropes
Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#109728: Jan 27th 2016 at 1:52:29 AM

@Nihlus

Keep making waves, this thread needs it.

Schild und Schwert der Partei
Nihlus1 Since: Jul, 2015
#109729: Jan 27th 2016 at 1:57:18 AM

[up]Are you being sarcastic? I can't tell... I'll oblige either way....smile

Because I certainly don't believe that the restraint which has been shown so far would have been shown for any number of other groups. If Black Lives Matter went about demanding change with rifles and demanding people to take up arms against the government and police, I have no doubt they would have been shut down hard within a day or two.
It's like some people live in a world where Waco never happened.

Sanders is clearly supportive of fair and comprehensive immigration reform.

His rationale for opposing *poor* reform is to avoid making it easier for corporations to displace American jobs with workers treated like slaves.

No, his rationale is that there aren't enough jobs to go around. He has stated this clearly. Many times.

Nothing you quoted actually debunks his stated belief in the lump of labor fallacy. He supports amnesty for immigrants already here (like most of the US population), but opposes further immigration because he thinks Americans need those jobs. He has been nothing if not consistent on that point.

But you can understand why some people aren't jumping on board with Sanders being anti-immigration, because obviously he's not campaigning like someone who is anti-immigration.
I can see why some people wouldn't know he's anti-immigration, but I do not see the logic in denying it after he outright says in plain English that he thinks that there aren't enough jobs to go around for immigrants to be entering. He's been basing his entire campaign on the lump of labor fallacy, which is also how he gets to his conclusions about guest worker programs, H1-B visas, and free trade, so the anti-immigration stance is perfectly consistent with his platform.

Same thing applies to calling him a nativist. Like mentioned earlier, a American politician acting in the interests of Americans first isn't all that surprising, but how they do it is still important. Now you can argue that his plans for helping Americans will not actually benefit Americans (or non-Americans), and I think that's all quite interesting and worthy of discussion, but careful with your rhetoric, because semantics are a bitch.
I don't see how he's not a nativist, though? He opposes immigration, H1-B visas, guest worker programs, regular trade with China, NAFTA, and the World Trade Organization. He is literally opposed to every single foreign trade agreement ever negotiated by the United States.

SANDERS: I voted against NAFTA, CAFTA, PNTR with China. I think they have been a disaster for the American worker. A lot of corporations that shut down here move abroad. Working people understand that after NAFTA, CAFTA, PNTR with China we have lost millions of decent paying jobs. Since 2001, 60,000 factories in America have been shut down. We're in a race to the bottom, where our wages are going down. Is all of that attributable to trade? No. Is a lot of it? Yes. TPP was written by corporate America and the pharmaceutical industry and Wall Street. That's what this trade agreement is about. I do not want American workers to competing against people in Vietnam who make 56 cents an hour for a minimum wage.

Q: So basically, there's never been a single trade agreement this country's negotiated that you've been comfortable with?

SANDERS: That's correct.

("every single trade agreement" includes the agreement establishing the WTO, which he voted against giving Congressional approval)

I repeat: he thinks the US should withdraw from the WTO and end permanent normal trade relations with China. Surely the reasons why these are bad ideas are self-explanatory?

edited 27th Jan '16 2:06:35 AM by Nihlus1

Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#109730: Jan 27th 2016 at 2:02:31 AM

Are you being sarcastic? I can't tell...

Perfectly sincere. It's good that there's finally an actual debate. We've been jerking ourselves raw about how awful the Republicans are for the last three years.

edited 27th Jan '16 2:20:08 AM by Achaemenid

Schild und Schwert der Partei
TerminusEst from the Land of Winter and Stars Since: Feb, 2010
#109731: Jan 27th 2016 at 2:05:50 AM

[up][up]

I'm not quite sure if Bernie understands what social democracy is...

Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
Nihlus1 Since: Jul, 2015
#109732: Jan 27th 2016 at 2:22:22 AM

[up][up]Ah. Thank you.smile Though I am not a Republican, I just oppose ideas that I think are actively harmful from both extremes of the right and left. I probably lean more to the left than the right on most issues actually. This is because I am a Communist pro-asiatic pro-immigration partisan who worships B. Clinton, known rapist.

[I'm sorry, I was just looking for an excuse to quote/paraphrase that hilarious copy-pasta]

[up]Sanders also thinks that Denmark is a socialist economy (Denmark says: "What? No.") and that his anti-free trade, anti-WTO policies are like their's...

edited 27th Jan '16 2:26:32 AM by Nihlus1

Eschaton Since: Jul, 2010
#109733: Jan 27th 2016 at 2:22:55 AM

[up][up][up]Well, when they make it so easy...

Heck, the attacks in this thread are more competent than the ad that was just posted.tongue

edited 27th Jan '16 2:23:19 AM by Eschaton

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#109734: Jan 27th 2016 at 4:06:02 AM

@Nihlus: I have a question. If Sanders' policy prescription (which is, indeed, immigration reform to allow more legal immigrants in and give illegals protection) is broadly correct, does it matter whether he actually understands economics?

His campaign explicitly supports immigration reform in favor of these things, so any countersource is arguing with exactly what Sanders says. (You can argue that he's flip-flopping, but not that he's not saying what he's saying.)

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#109735: Jan 27th 2016 at 4:59:29 AM

Regarding that "attack" ad in Ohio that was mentioned earlier, apparently it's borrowing from Claire McCaskill's playbook from 2014 where she ran a pro-Todd Akin ad in order to get him nominated as her general election opponent, painting him as "too conservative" so that red meat voters would rush to support him.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Medinoc from France (Before Recorded History)
#109736: Jan 27th 2016 at 5:33:57 AM

So it's a "choose your opponent" tactic like in 2007 France, where all Sarkozy-aligned TV suddenly started promoting Royal when it looked like Bayroux may reach the second turn (and win it)?

"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."
BonsaiForest Since: Jan, 2001
#109737: Jan 27th 2016 at 5:36:55 AM

[up][up]Brilliant move. [lol] The base are not ones for voting tactically!

NoName999 Since: May, 2011
#109738: Jan 27th 2016 at 5:42:10 AM

Except doesn't polls show that Sanders would be a tougher opponent for the GOP than Clinton?

Medinoc from France (Before Recorded History)
#109739: Jan 27th 2016 at 5:44:53 AM

They probably count on him being a socialist scarecrow... Or what's-his-name making good on his thread of running independent if Sanders gets nominated.

Or both.

"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."
NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#109740: Jan 27th 2016 at 6:03:07 AM

The fact that tactical voting is necessary is bullshit. This is why first-past-the-post voting is crap. (Though, perhaps ironically, I'm like the only guy on the internet who doesn't have a problem with the electoral college.)

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#109741: Jan 27th 2016 at 7:04:05 AM

Sanders has a higher score against GOP candidates largely because he has not been tested at a national level in the same way as Clinton has. He hasn't weathered eight-plus years of personal attacks, muckraking, and Congressional investigations specifically aimed at poisoning his future electability.

The risk of nominating Sanders is that the Republican machine would go all-out in destroying him and might find avenues of attack that haven't come out yet.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#109742: Jan 27th 2016 at 7:08:35 AM

Both Sanders and Trump needed to run for governor before coming to the presidency. The former because then we'd have an idea about the costs, and the latter because we'd see the effects of his political dealmaking ability.

Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#109743: Jan 27th 2016 at 7:15:32 AM

Perfectly sincere. It's good that there's finally an actual debate. We've been jerking ourselves raw about how awful the Republicans are for the last three years.

I have been trying to give different perspectives for a long while about immigration and othersubjects from a third world country!

Senpai, why won't you notice me?

Ugh, the whole sending them dildos thing was absolutely fucking stupid. If people wanted to spend money to be spiteful to the Bundy militia, they could have just donated that money to the Malheur reserve.

Y'all Qaeda was making an emotional argument. They get an emotional response. Logic doesn't come into place here at all, and furthermore, it would have achieved nothing. Also, is one even able to donate to a government institution such as a reserve?

But yeah this is like that gay book about Trump. Guy hates stuff, he gets compared and likened to that he hates the most for the lulz, people complain about it being the incorrect way of reaching him. Sure is, but it certainly is an efficient way of making a point.

edited 27th Jan '16 7:18:20 AM by Aszur

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
SolipsistOwl Since: Jan, 2016
#109744: Jan 27th 2016 at 8:02:25 AM

[up][up][up]Literally every mainstream media article and interview has pointed out that Sanders is a socialist. Pundits ask him nearly every appearance "Can a socialist win?"

I'm fairly certain the majority of Sanders' support is already aware of his socialist tendencies and don't care.

Trump has also beat on Sanders no less than Bush in his rallies and on social media—just yesterday someone threw a tomato at him after he called Sanders a 'communist.'

Rand Paul has held an "anti-Sanders" fundraiser.

And a Wall Street Super Pac has pledged to spend over $600,000 in attack ads in Iowa this week.

So, it seems like the GOP is well aware of Sanders' electability.

Also, according to a Jan. 21 - 24 poll conducted by CNN/ORC, Sanders now slightly leads Clinton in net favorability among non-white voters, 34+ to 26+:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2697606-rel3a-Democrats-2016-2.html#document/p1

edited 27th Jan '16 8:17:27 AM by SolipsistOwl

ironballs16 Since: Jul, 2009 Relationship Status: Owner of a lonely heart
#109745: Jan 27th 2016 at 8:17:49 AM

So apparently Trump is throwing a hissy-fit and saying he won't attend the Republican debate tomorrow unless Megyn Kelly isn't the moderator. Here's to hoping that this particular antic makes support for the asshole drop.

"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#109746: Jan 27th 2016 at 8:35:14 AM

Trump?

Childish tantrums?

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Deadbeatloser22 from Disappeared by Space Magic (Great Old One) Relationship Status: Tsundere'ing
#109748: Jan 27th 2016 at 8:49:27 AM

What's the context to today's "toys out of the pram" moment?

"Yup. That tasted purple."
ironballs16 Since: Jul, 2009 Relationship Status: Owner of a lonely heart
#109749: Jan 27th 2016 at 8:50:59 AM

[up]

Megyn Kelly would be moderating again, and he didn't like how she "attacked" him last time.

"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"
FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#109750: Jan 27th 2016 at 8:52:28 AM

Megyn Kelly is the only one at Fox who doesn't softball the GOP nominees. Cavuto was practically shilling during the FBN debate.

Hope they don't buckle. I know she won't, but Ailes might...

edited 27th Jan '16 8:53:05 AM by FFShinra


Total posts: 417,856
Top