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
Posting here because of the political commentary with it, but KKK members stabbed two protesters during their "White Pride rally."
Emphasis mine.
Anaheim police expected about 20 members of the notorious terrorist group to rally at Pearson Park. The theme of the event was to be “white lives matter too,” which really should be interpreted as “only white Christian male lives matter.” The KKK have a long history in Southern California, once controlling four of five city council seats in 1924 and once had as many as 300 members patrolling the streets in their trademark hoods and robes.
Emboldened by the naked ethno-nationalism of the Donald Trump campaign, white supremacy groups have seized on the introduction of bigotry into mainstream politics and have grown alarmingly bold with their public appearances. David Duke, a former KKK “grand wizard,” recently announced that not voting for Trump was treason to white heritage; online, white supremacy and neo-Nazi groups have reveled in Trump’s hateful rhetoric. William Daniel Johnson of the American Freedom Party wrote that “[Trump] has made it ok to talk about these incredible concerns of European Americans today, because I think European Americans know they are the only group that can’t defend their own essential interests and their point of view. He espouses is the closest thing to white nationalism that we have seen since the jingoistic era of Theodore Roosevelt.”
It is absolutely shocking to see this kind of violence and shows just what kind of a threat that a Trump presidency represents to unity and cohesion of American society. 20% of Trump’s supporters believe that the slaves shouldn’t have been freed following the end of the Civil War and believe that whites are a “superior race”. The undercurrent of racism that the Republican Party has cultivated for decades finally has the confidence to show its face in public; this kind of violence is a disgusting affront to the values of tolerance and diversity that made our nation great, and we must show the world that this is not what our nation represents when we go to the polls this November.
Bah, why did the author have to bring the Lion into this? I never read that TR was particularly racist, and they're making Trump seem presidential by the comparison. Still, not surprised the Klan is getting bold.
edited 27th Feb '16 5:34:11 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."That there's any overlap between Trump and Sanders supporters is just mind boggling to me, because they are so so different. In, you know, things like basic decency and integrity and such. I get that they both have anti-establishment over tones, but that alone doesn't explain anything to me, because again, very different men there.
I mean Jesus, people say he's too rich to be bought, but Trump's been doing the buying previously and I'm not sure how that's not occurring to people.
![]()
Dead heroes can't complain if their image is resurrected for a purpose they'd oppose.
The overlap is among a particular subspecies of young Millenial male who frequents Reddit and other hives of scum and villainy. I would say that they comprise a hate group, except that I'm not allowed to talk about the hate group that a lot of them are probably actually part of. So instead, I'll call them Bernie Bros, and I think they're supporting Sanders because he's white, cismale, more-or-less agnostic (atheists don't have a lot of support in the current party of white cismales) and because his opponent is Hillary Clinton and "the status quo." They don't particularly care that he doesn't want anything to do with him.
edited 27th Feb '16 5:41:38 PM by Ramidel
Probably. Some people just want to watch the establishment burn. Or should I say...Bern?
Um...as for overlap: Aside from being anti-establishment, I'd argue Trump is fairly leftist. However, he's also a bigot and can make more progress by passing off his ideas as Republican, even though they aren't. From what I understand, his primary demographic is poor rural folk who are socially conservative (and occasionally xenophobic as well). Basically, Trump wants to keep Obama's welfare state, but wants to keep it out of the hands of foreigners and "foreigners" (IE, non-white people).
edited 27th Feb '16 5:46:38 PM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34I'm really not sure Trump, at his core, has solid policies or positions beyond generic xenophobia and blind populism. In the half-year since he's entered politics, he's managed to make Clinton's long career look remarkably self-consistent. Even Jimmy Carter said he's less opposed to a Trump presidency than a Cruz one because of how "malliable" Trump is.
I once saw an interesting "difficult choice" meme, the choices being "police are racists out to kill blacks" and "guns are useless to fight off criminals, let the police deal with them".
How are those contradictory?
Not that I agree with the first one personally. Police don't deliberately go out to kill people. It's just the consequence of a minority of immoral and apathetic officers run amok.
Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's PlaySo Warren Buffet is firing shots at the entire election
, specifically the negativity of the candidates.
"As a result of this negative drumbeat, many Americans now believe that their children will not live as well as they themselves do. That view is dead wrong: The babies being born in America today are the luckiest crop in history," Buffett added.
Buffett, who has publicly supported Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton for president, did not mention any candidate by name. But the Oracle of Omaha has often gone out of his way to suggest that the U.S. economy is in better shape than people give it credit for. He said that even if the economy continues to muddle along at a somewhat subpar 2% growth rate, that is enough to deliver "astounding gains" for all Americans.
Buffett acknowledged the growing problem of income inequality, conceding that even though "the pie to be shared by the next generation will be far larger than today's, how it will be divided will remain fiercely contentious." But he quickly added that the wealth divide between the rich and poor has been an issue that has "forever been with us — and will forever continue." As he usually does in his Berkshire letters, Buffett chose to focus on the positive.
"Even members of the "losing" sides will almost certainly enjoy — as they should — far more goods and services in the future than they have in the past," he said.
Buffett also suggested that Social Security will continue to be there for Americans — despite dire predictions about the Social Security trust fund running out of money sometime between 2033 and 2037. "America's golden goose of commerce and innovation will continue to lay more and larger eggs. America's social security promises will be honored and perhaps made more generous. And, yes, America's kids will live far better than their parents did," he wrote.
Of course, it's easy to be this bullish when your net worth is more than $62 billion. But Buffett is correct to point out that betting against the U.S. economy and stock market over the long haul has historically been a losing proposition. That's why he thinks the presidential contenders need to be less alarmist on the campaign trail. "Today's politicians need not shed tears for tomorrow's children," he wrote.
@Storyyeller: Well, I mean, it's not a great argument, but the logic is that if Police Are Useless (or in this case, racist), then citizens should respond by arming themselves so that they don't require their aid as often.
That reminds me of something close to the inverse that I've pointed out-some libertarians declare they hate police "militarization", while declaring that all citizens should own a machine gun. (I was arguing that, under the second amendment, police are technically citizens and should allowed to own and use paramilitary-style weapons like everyone else).
edited 27th Feb '16 6:34:19 PM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34Well, I'll admit that I prefer Bernie over Hillary, and will likely vote for him in the primaries given the chance, but I'll definitely support Hillary in the general if she wins; the alternative would be a Republican, and I don't want that at all. Besides, Bernie and Hillary voted the same way over 90% of the time. Hillary's probably closer to Bernie than any other candidate in this race.
Granted, I might not vote for her in the 2020 primaries if a more progressive alternative is available; but that's four years from now. By that point, Hillary may well have shifted to the left on many things.
As for Bernie's revolution, I should hope he has plans to continue it past his presidential campaign should he fail.
edited 27th Feb '16 6:29:42 PM by MysteryMan23
For me, I'll vote for anyone who isn't Sanders or Trump. I just really hope they aren't both nominated.
Leviticus 19:34You do realise that the mods are smart enough to tell when someone is talking about a banned topic while pretending to not do so right? Banned topics are banned, not "banned unless you want to take a passage aggressive (uniformed) shot at a group and then pretend you're not violating the ban".
Dear fucking God, some people can't leave the topic alone can they? They just have to resort to being passive aggressive about it because it's banned.
Oh and before anyone says anything, there's nothing passive about the aggression I'm displaying right now.
edited 27th Feb '16 6:32:38 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.” ~ Cyran
Stop holding back, bunny, tell us how you really feel.
edited 27th Feb '16 6:40:17 PM by BlueNinja0
That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw![]()
Oh, sorry. I wrote the response first, and then thought "Oh, what was that person's name again?", and then looked up and saw your name, not reading the post. Oops.
edited 27th Feb '16 6:33:43 PM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34

Regarding Sanders voters shifting to Trump: That subset of Sanders supporters is a small minority whose tech-savviness and sheer experience in throwing vitriol without consequence gives them an oversized, unwanted voice. Their votes are highly unlikely to be consequential in the general.