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
Basically Trump as long as this is a plurality race is going to win by Cruz and Rubio and Kasich and Carson splitting the Tea Party and Movement Conservative votes.
And there's no sign Cruz or Rubio is going to drop out to let the other win. Mexican Standoff. Cruz and Rubio have no reason to see the other's political rival win. Cruz can't drop until it becomes obvious because he'd just become another empty suit in the eyes of the Hardcore GO Pers he represent. Rubio has no reason to fold to Cruz's radicalism and betray Movement Conservatism.
Oops.
The judge cites several cases where someone was originally filming or photographing something unrelated to police activity, but either caught it within frame or switched focus. He argues these cases do not justify first amendment protections.
The circumstances that would limit a citizen's videotaping rights under this case are complex and unusual, and free-speech advocates are expressing concerns.
"According to Kearney’s logic, standing silently and recording the police is not sufficiently expressive to warrant First Amendment protection," wrote Adam Bates for Cato Institute via Newsweek. "The reasoning behind this distinction is bizarre and is out of step with rulings in several federal circuits that recording police in public is constitutionally protected without regard for whether the recorder is attempting to make a statement or issue a challenge to law enforcement."
edited 28th Feb '16 12:28:48 AM by SolipsistOwl
Oh, I'm afraid that the firewall is quite op-e-rational.
◊
edited 28th Feb '16 1:54:39 AM by Achaemenid
Schild und Schwert der ParteiHow much greater of a time commitment is caucusing than primarying? Until recently, I thought Nebraska Democrats did primaries, and they did until recently (changed to caucses in 2008), and I was all ready to a primary (which I understand is basialy just filling and submitting a ballot), rather than caucus (which I'm not entirely sure what it entails).
Hey, ~Ramidel, regarding this post
. Just because people didn't take the bait doesn't mean it's okay to passively bait them. We can note that Reddit-crawling young folks tend to be blindly reactionary without bringing banned topics up.
Dammit, we keep having that over here too, people start fights with the reactionaries instead of letting them start the fight, thus meaning that the racist assholes gain sympathy.
edited 28th Feb '16 7:15:03 AM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranFollowing the endorsement we've all talked about, Trump tries to claim that he
knows nothing about white supremacists. Maybe for VP he'll pick Jon Snow. Emphasis and potholes mine.
"I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists," he said. "So I don't know. I don't know — did he endorse me, or what's going on? Because I know nothing about David Duke; I know nothing about white supremacists." The Anti-Defamation League had called on Trump to repudiate the support of Duke, the former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, and other white supremacist groups.
Asked if he'd broadly distance himself from those groups, Trump demurred, saying he knew nothing about their support for his bid for the Republican presidential nomination. "I have to look at the group. I mean, I don't know what group you're talking about," Trump said. "You wouldn't want me to condemn a group that I know nothing about. I'd have to look. If you would send me a list of the groups, I will do research on them and certainly I would disavow if I thought there was something wrong. You may have groups in there that are totally fine — it would be very unfair. So give me a list of the groups and I'll let you know."
Tapper responded: "OK. I'm just talking about David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan here, but —" And Trump said: "Honestly, I don't know David Duke. I don't believe I've ever met him. I'm pretty sure I didn't meet him. And I just don't know anything about him."
Trump's comments came two days before 12 states — largely Southern — vote on Super Tuesday. If he defeats Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio in most or all of those states, Trump could become a near-lock for the Republican nomination.
He detailed what he'd look for in a vice presidential nominee, saying he'd want someone with "a little bit of an inside track" to getting legislation approved by Congress — an indication Trump could pick a current politician. "Conceptually, I like the idea of a political person to go along with my abilities," he said.
Trump also said he has no plans to release his tax returns, despite pressure from Cruz and Rubio, because IRS audits are ongoing. He said he has been audited "almost every year for 10 or 12 years." "Maybe it's because I'm very conservative, maybe it's because I'm tea party. ... I don't know what it is, but I have been singled out," Trump said. "Until the audit is completed, obviously I'm not giving my papers."
He did say, though, that his campaign is likely to release a list of his charitable contributions "sometime in the next week."
Trump "knows nothing about white supremacists"... yeah, right. I believe that like I believe Trump doesn't know how much money he has.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I can't help but feel a little disgust and concern when I stop to think about the fact that this is what Donald Trump thinks will get him elected , is being proven right as far as Republicans go, and what that says about us as a country.
Granted, there's hope aplenty in that he should have little to no chance in the General Election, but still...
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), who currently serves as a vice chairwoman of the DNC, announced her endorsement in an interview with NBC's “Meet the Press” that aired Sunday morning.
"I think it’s most important for us, as we look at our choices as to who our next commander in chief will be, is to recognize the necessity to have a commander in chief who has foresight, who exercises good judgment, who looks beyond the consequences, looks at the consequences of the actions they're looking to take, before they take those actions, so we don't continue to find ourselves in these failures that have resulted in chaos in the Middle East and so much loss of life," Gabbard said.
Gabbard is the fourth member of Congress to endorse Sanders in his battle against Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton. She is his most high-profile congressional endorsement to date.
The Hawaii Democrat's tenure at the DNC has not been without controversy. In October, she complained she was “disinvited” from a debate after she urged the party to hold more debates. Sanders later offered her a seat with his campaign.
If the DNC is excommunicating members who back Sanders, the Democratic Party apparatus is deeply sick. Of course, we've known that for a while, what with the party's abject cowardice in backing Obamacare in 2012. Are they trying to lose elections over ideological purity? That's supposed to be what Republicans do, not Democrats!
/sigh
edited 28th Feb '16 8:54:08 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I think she left of her own accord, as Sanders is technically an independent Senator and a sitting member of the DNC should probably be supporting a Democrat. To compare this to what happens in a parliamentary system; this sounds like a Cabinet member standing down because they disagree with the Prime Minister and can't reconcile their views. So they step down, but stay in the party, so they can follow their conscience at the cost of influence.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.No, no, she was frozen out back when she wanted more debates. The DNC is unabashedly shilling for Clinton and is using all the dirty tricks at its disposal. It's become the progressive movement's albatross.
edited 28th Feb '16 8:57:56 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Ah, so this was a longer process. And it is troubling (though understandable, from a political point of view) how the DNC is doing all that it can to ensure that their favorite candidate gets the nod. But then again I think the entire primary process is a joke that only serves to make your elections last two years and bring out the most toxic elements of the political spectrum into the spotlight. Compared to that; party bosses deciding who gets in sounds fine. But as it stands now, the party bosses are being major hypocrites in pretending that this is a fair race.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

@Protagonist: Trump did, with 32 and a half percent to Cruz and Rubio's 22 and change. Which apparently nets him all fifty delegates.
Bush managed to beat out Carson and Kasich despite not actually running anymore, so good on him I guess.