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
And you can't rely on one source to back up your claims. Try another.
Are there any other source to back what Vox claims, or are they just parroting what Vox said?
Good luck with that.
You like free trade. Do you like the TPP? This isn't hard. I am asking a sincere question.
George W. Bush joining Jeb Bush in South Carolina.
Jeb's bringing out the big guns.
Any group who acts like morons ironically will eventually find itself swamped by morons who think themselves to be in good company.Those polls are mostly from 2015, and the only one from 2016 says Sanders shot up to 43% vs Hillary's 47%
, so you should probably wait until a more current poll is published? I mean, trends matter, and there aren't enough polls in there to measure accurately.
(Edited last part to make it less dickish)
Edited again: link is too long, changed it to a shortened version. Here's the original in case you don't trust shortened links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016#Nevada
edited 10th Feb '16 3:05:54 PM by IFwanderer
1 2 We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be. -KVedited 10th Feb '16 2:57:08 PM by Nihlus1
Oh god that's...that's...that's...brilliant...
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesFor the sake of the entire thread, please do not devolve into childish paraphraising.
With that out of the way, I shall answer all of these at once.
Sources can be unreliable. Why Vox, specifically? Why didn't Sanders' policy director talk to anyone else and why hasn't anyone vetted Vox's claim? It's what happens in the American media (and Russian media for that matter, we aren't much better) - someone says they got a citation, and everyone else doesn't bother to fact check. I need to know it's not just Vox and that their claims hold up to scrutiny.
Oh look, someone else asked you on TPP. If you find my question so distasteful, you can pretend you're answering them.
![]()
I have not formed a complete opinion on it. The arguments I usually see made it against ("it'll let corporations sue nations" and "race to the bottom") are very weak and rely on taking things out of context, but that doesn't mean there's not a lot of problems with the agreement that I may not be aware of due to not studying it in as much detail as I probably should.
![]()
edited 10th Feb '16 3:14:56 PM by Nihlus1
Positive statements need proof, not negative. You are the one who used the 99% economists claim when talking about free trade, the same thing can be applied here.
It is your accusation that every other economist who has analyzed the plan must have been on Sanders payroll, that is far unlikelier and needs mountains of proof. One economist with ties to Clintons saying something no other economist or even outlet has backed up since is far more suspiscious.
I wonder if the damage to Rubio is being overstated. It's quite possible it's not, being made a laughing stock is hard to come back from for a politician, but even still, only about 3,000 votes separated Rubio in 5th place in NH from Cruz in 3rd, and they got the same number of delegates, and only 1 behind 2nd place Kasich. So while this is a blow for Rubio, I doubt it's going to sink his campaign entirely... as long as he doesn't blow his reaction to it. If he reacts well and gives people some good stuff to talk about, he'll be right back into the thick of it as a candidate for people who turned off by the hardcore rightness and unlikability of Cruz.
Although speaking of Cruz, he probably performed better than expected in NH. His core of support is among hardcore bible thumpers and the ultra right wing types who don't just want to chip away at government, but want to take a sledgehammer to everything even associated with government. Well NH tends towards libertarianism, it's generally a much more modest and mild brand than, say, the Oregon militia. That Cruz still did this well is a bit of an eyebrow raiser and confirms that he's probably going to be in this race until the very end. Whoever the last 2 or 3 candidates standing are, Cruz will be there.
| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |Rubio promised it would never again happen. Such an absolute statement from a politician begs to be proven wrong by someone like Trump or Cruz.
I have little faith the man can do it even if he hadn't made such a bold statement. All of his buzz was either after Iowa or just before the campaigning was hijacked by Trump. Rubio kept getting lost in the crowd. Crowd is now dwindled down, sure, but there are still enough larger than life personalities left that it's going to be an uphill battle.
Yeah, he emailed me promising it wouldn't happen again. It does sound quite like tempting fate to me. I hope he can recover, though; he's the guy I want to vote for.
Leviticus 19:34Kasich knows its not possible to pass the Conservative acid test considering how he governs pragmatically, so he doesn't try (whatever his rhetoric might suggest). He instead campaigns on the platform of being competant and someone who could win the general.
![]()
Er...why? Guy's a bit of an empty suit, is he not?

This isn't the last we will see of Carson he is likely to end up as Trump's VP
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes