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
Mind running the reasoning for that by me? Because the leftists/socialists would, generally speaking, be those most in-favor of Unions having equal (if not greater) influence on business practices than the executives of the companies they work for - and Reagan was the one to break their back when he summarily fired Air Traffic Controllers when they went on strike back in '81
.
Which is Harsher in Hindsight given that, roughly 30 years later, people figured out that this same profession was being overworked to a hazardous degree
, something they'd been pushing to fix by striking in '81.
Not worked up, just trying to puzzle out the underlying logic he used to get to that conclusion.
edited 6th Mar '16 7:32:30 PM by ironballs16
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"I'm in agreement there, to an extent. The US population is much more left of center than people think, this is a fact that both sides have known for quite some time, but it has virtually zero effect on actual policy because of lobbyists.
Saw roughly half (the second half) of the debate. Both Clinton and Sanders seemed to do pretty well in the parts I saw, though Hilary seemed to pause a bit more than the she should and Sanders answered a lot of questions with economy-related answers when I don't think economy related answers were called for.
![]()
![]()
![]()
They, especially the more socialist elements, moved to far of the left than the Middle class was comfortable with. At a time of increasing crime they railed against the police. At a time when the US was being pummeled abroad by the Soviets they called for further concessions. And to make matters worse they got themselves associated with all sorts of violent groups, and generally were perceived to be "unpatriotic." They were right about many, if not most of these things being needed to address poverty. The problem is that the poor were not the majority of voters in this country, the middle class were. And they no longer viewed "left wing" priorities to be in their best interests. So when Reagan came along they turned out to vote for him. and undid nearly everything those progressives worked for.
Of course that's just my reading of the situation, I wasn't their and I am no expert on politics or sociology. And I apologize for being blunt, and perhaps offensive. And I would also like to add now that the winds appear to be shifting in the opposite direction, the middle class now believes it's best interests lie with supporting more left wing politics, as a result of years being screwed over by the wealthy.
edited 6th Mar '16 7:44:39 PM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.@Jack: Indeed, I think that's mostly accurate. The middle class is seeing their eroding power and is afraid, so they're drawn back by leftist politics in the hope of regaining it. This is part of the reason why, I think, you see so many radical conservatives (it's sad that that it's come to that, but true), it's direct reaction to this. Blame Barry Goldwater for the radical turn in conservatism.
Really I think that the left and right, once you cut away the bullshit (admittedly no easy task), agree on a lot more than they think they do.
edited 6th Mar '16 8:07:52 PM by CassidyTheDevil
That's true. You see a lot of oxymorons these days. They're everywhere.
My hypothesis: Horseshoe theory is on the right track, but I think it's worth noting how readily the left and right are willing to switch seats, and like musical chairs it's actually difficult to tell who is which if you look at the broader picture.
They're much more closely intertwined in philosophy than they might first appear.
edited 6th Mar '16 8:22:21 PM by CassidyTheDevil
Americans should think twice before moving to Cape Breton.
https://capebreton.lokol.me/21-cape-breton-tips-for-american-immigrants
RE: Radical conservatism
Radical conservatism isn't that much of an oxymoron, since method and ideology don't have to go hand in hand. For instance, someone who believes that a coup d'etat or revolution is needed in order to prevent progress and preserve conservative values, could easily be described as a radical conservative without stretching the language at all.
One could fairly easily dub Jefferson Davis and the rest of the Confederate leadership radical conservatives, given their willingness to step outside the political system and wage a revolution/civil war in order to maintain the economic and social status quo. In a more modern context, regimes like those of Augusto Pinochet and the National Reorganization Process could be labeled radically conservative, as both attempted to restructure political society among new (militarized) lines in the name of preserving conservative social values. There's a case to be made too that fascism, as an ideology, incorporates radical politics with conservative or even reactionary social and cultural values.
edited 6th Mar '16 9:01:07 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
![]()
Good, good. Help them repopulate the island (or at least bring in some tourist monies). Ignore the fact that you are wondering straight into an economic dead weight of an island where the only viable revenue sources are golf courses, admittedly nice hiking trailers, one decent university and maybe some tech business. The entire island could very well be turned into one giant tourist trap/retirement home and that's probably its best case scenario.
edited 6th Mar '16 10:25:01 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Win Or Lose, Bernie Sanders Has Changed America
.
I just hope that the Bernie supporters don't lose so much excitement/gain a ton of spite that they don't vote at all in November (if he loses the nomination). Or that Clinton supporters don't see Bernie as too left-wing, so they stay home.
edited 7th Mar '16 7:13:50 AM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.![]()
Considering crushing Bernie supporter enthusiasm is something Clinton campaign aims towards to begin with, via its so-called "political realism" and "pragmatism", staying home is going to be an inevitable response on some level from a number of Sanders voters.
And though I can't vote, the more I watch Clinton and her supporters go, the more spite I acquire for them.
Ahahahha...
to him.
![]()
![]()
That is a real concern. Since people consider the current republican crop to be mostly unelectable (or at least the ones that have any chance of getting the nomination), there is a very real possibility that Democrats are already less likely to vote in the general. After al, it's a foregone conclusion, is it not? Why bother taking off from work if you'll get yours either way? If a large chunk then decides to stay home for any other reason, then the Republican nominee actually has a real shot at the prize.
![]()
Feel the Bern!
edited 7th Mar '16 7:25:39 AM by Kayeka
This, on the other hand, isn't especially radical...
edited 7th Mar '16 7:46:44 AM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

Damit I missed it. How's it?
@ Socialists and leftists: Their own actions alienated the middle class, who let's not forget were and are the largest group in America, and were until recently the overall majority. They have nothing to blame for their collapse but their own stupidity.
edited 6th Mar '16 6:15:29 PM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.