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

SolipsistOwl Since: Jan, 2016
#110776: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:20:31 PM

If Clinton can't blunt Sanders in New Hampshire, it's over—he will become the new frontrunner heading into Nevada:

But in recent days, Sanders has won over some of Clinton’s most stalwart supporters in the state. Erin Bilbray, a member of the Democratic National Committee from Nevada who was so loyal to Clinton in 2008 that she refused to support Obama at the convention, has endorsed the Vermont senator.

Bilbray said in October she was planning to support Clinton. But she changed her mind after a friend dragged her to an organizing meeting hosted by the Sanders campaign.

"I started getting more and more excited as I was watching his volunteers, how organized they were, how in the trenches they were," she said. "His supporters here are passionate. The situation with super PA Cs and unregulated money is the biggest concern for the future of democracy in this country and Bernie is the only candidate addressing it."

Sanders cracks Clinton's Nevada firewall

edited 2nd Feb '16 2:23:49 PM by SolipsistOwl

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
#110777: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:25:21 PM

Him being the frontrunner into Nevada is not it being over.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
SolipsistOwl Since: Jan, 2016
#110778: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:31:39 PM

[up]Of course the race wouldn't be over—I meant "it's over" in the sense the media can no longer question whether Sanders is viable. We cannot constantly move the goal-posts on which states are actually 'important,' then we'll never be able to gauge momentum.

edited 2nd Feb '16 2:41:41 PM by SolipsistOwl

Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#110779: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:33:50 PM

If Clinton can't blunt Sanders in New Hampshire, it's over.

It ain't over 'till its over. Sanders has 18 days to overcome an enormous poll lag among black voters before he runs right into a black-majority Democratic caucus at South Carolina.

Can he do this? Potentially. Clinton's support among black Americans slumpsed after she lost Iowa to Barack Obama in 2008. But by the same token, Bill lost the first *five* primaries in 1992 (Iowa, New Hampshire, Maine, SoDak, and Colorado) before sweeping the South.

As for what states are important: South Carolina and New Hampshire. If Bernie can eat into Hillary's lead in SC, and then win another Southern state, then its wide open. Of course, if Hillary eats into Bernie's lead in NH, then we'll have another Clinton 'comeback kid'

edited 2nd Feb '16 2:37:58 PM by Achaemenid

Schild und Schwert der Partei
SolipsistOwl Since: Jan, 2016
#110780: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:37:26 PM

Sanders won 34 percent of non-white voters in Iowa (9 percent of the Democratic electorate).

I think he'll do fine heading into Nevada and South Carolina.

http://www.cbsnews.com/elections/2016/primaries/democrat/iowa/exit/

Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#110781: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:38:36 PM

[up]

Is another way of saying Hillary won 58% of them.

edited 2nd Feb '16 2:39:26 PM by Achaemenid

Schild und Schwert der Partei
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#110782: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:41:51 PM

It's hard to call "winning the second state after winning the first state" a "comeback".

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Nihlus1 Since: Jul, 2015
#110783: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:43:08 PM

[up][up]Heh.grin

The problem is that Iowa has like the 3rd largest population of young, white liberals in the U.S. It's a 92% white state with a median age a couple years below the US average and a population sympathetic to the left. It's a demographic that's catered almost exclusively to him. If he couldn't carry a convincing win here, where else is he going to drum up support?

There are a handful of New England states sure, but the further south you go the more moderate the Democrats get... and the more numerous the non-Democrats get. Then you have states which have massive minority populations, like Florida and South Carolina, and Sanders' support among those demographics is non-existent (partly because black voters love Clinton, and partly because Latino voters are not stupid, and know Sanders' stance on immigration). What should have happened in a idealistic scenario, is that Sanders should've swept Iowa and used the momentum to build up support elsewhere. What happened instead was that in an environment tailored almost exclusively to him, he didn't even manage to tie.

edited 2nd Feb '16 2:43:54 PM by Nihlus1

Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#110784: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:43:30 PM

[up][up]

Hillary has no chance in New Hampshire. Neither did Bill. But the big story in 1992 was Bill doing well in a state he was never going to win. Even though Paul Tsongas won in New Hampshire, Bill still managed to do better than anyone expected, coming second. His campaign framed that as a spectacular comeback (he also lost Iowa) - 'the comeback kid'. My point is that if we see HRC do better than expected in a state like New Hampshire, with its primarily white, strongly liberal base, it would suggest her Southern firewall will hold.

Bernie needs to expand his support among whites and do much better among nonwhites. A strong HRC showing in NH would suggest he was failing to do so.

edited 2nd Feb '16 2:45:51 PM by Achaemenid

Schild und Schwert der Partei
NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#110785: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:43:34 PM

"It is a common mistake to assert that the society of Starship Troopers only recognizes military service as a condition for earning the franchise. Any form of public service counts, as I recall."

Not only that, but anyone who can understand the oath of service will be allowed in and given a job to serve their term, even if its "counting the fuzz on caterpillars." The ability to earn your citizenship is open to everyone except the mentally incompetent.

This is all true — however, it is mentioned that even non-military service is (intentionally) dangerous. The point is that you have to be willing to risk your life in service of your country. (IIRC, the implication re: "counting fuzz" is that some of the caterpillars may be poisonous.) There are ways to risk your life for your country outside of the military (field testing equipment like space suits is mentioned, I believe), but risking your life is the point of federal service in the Starship Troopers verse.

If you don't risk your life, you can't vote. By design.

edited 2nd Feb '16 2:44:14 PM by NativeJovian

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
SolipsistOwl Since: Jan, 2016
#110786: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:44:41 PM

[up][up][up][up][up]O'Malley received 6% of non-white caucusers and 3% of white caucusers. Since Sanders is the second choice of most O'Malley supporters, that narrows the gap.

Polls are not immutable. There's trend lines. Sanders started with non-whites at 2%. There's been progress.

edited 2nd Feb '16 2:45:22 PM by SolipsistOwl

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#110787: Feb 2nd 2016 at 2:52:12 PM

[up][up]Part of me still instinctively thinks "that's tough but fair". Another part of me wants to ask "So commuting to my government job by car should be enough?"

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#110788: Feb 2nd 2016 at 3:02:55 PM

[up][up]

Were those the polls conducted before he even announced his candidacy?

Schild und Schwert der Partei
NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#110789: Feb 2nd 2016 at 3:12:58 PM

[up][up]It's also worth noting that, even In-Universe, they don't claim that this is the only way, or even the best way, to form a government. The justification for why they do things that way is that when governments around the world started to collapse for various reasons, groups of veterans stepped up to replace them, and only let other veterans into their in-group, because they didn't trust anyone but other veterans. Things eventually calmed down, but they kept the "veterans only" policy because, hey, it's worked so far, why change it?

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#110790: Feb 2nd 2016 at 3:28:44 PM

I think Sanders would be better served in Nevada than South Carolina. I mean, South Carolina is a good test on how he reaches across ethnic groups, but I think Nevada is easier for him to take.

BonsaiForest Since: Jan, 2001
#110791: Feb 2nd 2016 at 3:44:28 PM

My mom thinks that Rubio will eventually win the Republican nomination. She said that she thinks Republicans will realize what a nasty, rotten person Cruz is, and they're losing interest in Trump.

I wanted someone unelectable to win, damn it. I hope she's wrong.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#110792: Feb 2nd 2016 at 3:47:30 PM

Rubio holds the coveted "just mild-mannered enough to hide how much of an asshole I am" slot in the GOP primary. His danger is that he might be able to stand up to the Democratic candidate and win mainstream support.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Eschaton Since: Jul, 2010
#110793: Feb 2nd 2016 at 3:51:08 PM

Rubio might still fit the bill, because although he's establishment, he's certainly not moderate.

To me he just looks like a (comparatively) more effective package of the right-wing ideas held by other candidates, and that lost the last two elections. But maybe the third times's the charm.

edited 2nd Feb '16 3:51:48 PM by Eschaton

FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#110794: Feb 2nd 2016 at 3:53:44 PM

the guy is an empty suit. He has no ideology, he just goes with the tide of the moment.

And the worst criticism of him, from a GOP point of view, is that he's a Republican Obama. As soon as that connection is made in earnest in the media, he'll sink like a stone.

He also has to make top three in NH to even have a chance of breaking out.

BonsaiForest Since: Jan, 2001
#110795: Feb 2nd 2016 at 3:58:35 PM

What do you mean by "Republican Obama"?

FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#110796: Feb 2nd 2016 at 4:04:20 PM

Freshman senator, minority, plays on his youth/generational change. It's only a casual similarity, but this is the GOP base we're talking about...

SolipsistOwl Since: Jan, 2016
#110797: Feb 2nd 2016 at 4:06:04 PM

People used to throw the "Republican Obama" label towards Bobby Jindal as well.

FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#110798: Feb 2nd 2016 at 4:09:00 PM

I know Cruz has already started using it for Rubio (despite being no better himself), but whether others do or he doubles down remains to be seen.

Establishment wants him because he can do as Fighteer says...but not if he can't withstand scrutiny. Which he cannot, due to his record and his similarities to Obama. Fox spiked him last debate and they will continue to do so, probably more so now.

Nihlus1 Since: Jul, 2015
#110799: Feb 2nd 2016 at 4:18:52 PM

Rubio wants to "rip up" all recent deals with Iran, "boot out" Russia from Ukraine, "carpet bomb" Syria to get rid of ISIL, and bomb the shit out of Assad's SAA in addition to ISIL. Which will, on top of his other proposals, probably cause war with Iran. And that's just his foreign policy.

He's crazier than Trump or Sanders. Maybe not crazier than Cruz though.

edited 2nd Feb '16 4:19:55 PM by Nihlus1

FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#110800: Feb 2nd 2016 at 4:20:19 PM

I thought it was Cruz who said carpet bomb?

That said, yes, Rubio's foreign policy is utter nonsense.


Total posts: 417,856
Top