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
Wikipedia collects Clinton's positions on foreign policy.
The more I read, the more my feelings tend towards "what an utter asshole".
Clinton is all but inevitable at this point.
On the upside: People whose evaluation of the real world is based on things beyond reddit posts are well aware of the fact Clinton is hardly going to ruin the country, and Sanders has, without a doubt, presented himself as an inevitable force in politics.
After Hillary, we might see Sanders as a president.
Unless my constituents are into it, but I still use safe words.
edited 16th Mar '16 1:30:01 PM by Aszur
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesI am not aware of any Constitutional or legislative cap on the age of a presidential candidate.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
I saw that used against Ron Paul, last time I remember. (as if there weren't enough things against that... urgh. I don't like him.)
Even if it isn't true, there's certain logic to it. You don't want your president to die of a stroke the moment he's elected.
edited 16th Mar '16 1:34:17 PM by Luminosity
Clinton's positions on foreign policy are pretty much the average ones of most U.S politicians. Bernie's positions on foreign policy are more like a gigantic shrug. On the other extreme, we got Trump's positions which are a gigantic middle finger.
I can say both stump the trump's but can't really say either is better for each other.
I mean, seriously. Do you literally expect that because of a single president the U.S will suddenly do a 180 turn on its foreign policies? They are always the same
Bomb enemies and sell guns. The only thing that changes between parties is how much focus is placed on each.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesActually I'm pretty sure that we have no legal restriction on the upper limit of age of candidates. Granted, it's a practical concern that people will probably bring up, but there's no legal restrictions on Sanders running again in 2020 if he really wants to. There's just the minimum age requirement.
Keep in mind that Hillary will probably run in 2020, unless she becomes a complete sellout it's not likely Sanders will challenge her again until 2024.
Or maybe that far in the future we'll have rejuvenating medicine, that would render the age issue moot.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman![]()
![]()
Alan Keyes
. Because perennial means perennial, dammit!
So, onto a more sincere question: does this mean that Western Illinois University will be wrong for the first time?
EDIT:
edited 16th Mar '16 1:48:00 PM by SciFiSlasher
"Somehow the hated have to walk a tightrope, while those who hate do not."Sanders is a big name thanks to these elections, and depending on how the republican party debacle goes, he might just be able to run as independent in the future
Regardless of his win or loss in these primaries, Sanders has started something, I would dare to wager.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesI can't see Trump making it through the primary in 2020.
Part of the strength of his campaign is the idea that he might actually win the Republicans the White House. That he's bold and original and calls it like it is. Certain elements of the Republican party basically see him as their Obama, ready to sidestep all the political bullshit and be a breath of fresh air in Washington.
George W. Bush hasn't faded from people's memories and the Tea Party actually shut down the government not so long ago. Republican PR is just shit right now. Their chances of winning this election were never very good, but then here comes this guy who's innovative and different and "he's saying what everybody's thinking".
Trump was a mistake that the party is desperately trying to stuff back into the bottle to no avail. If Clinton takes the Presidency, he'll lose the only argument anybody outside of the hatemongers ever really had for him to begin with: his charismatic electability. Once it's proven that he's not electable, they're never going to make the mistake of supporting him again.
edited 16th Mar '16 1:53:34 PM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Let's face it: without some kind of crazy turnaround, Clinton will get the Democratic nomination. Trump will get the Republican nomination, unless the RNC pulls an unprecedented coup against its voters.
If Trump goes up against Clinton, then the country will face an existential test this fall. No matter what you think about Clinton personally, at worst she represents the status quo, which, while not ideal, is not going to tear our country apart.
If you're someone like Luminosity, who doesn't care about our internal politics and just wants a candidate who is going to ignore Russia so that Putin doesn't have an external enemy to scapegoat in order to sustain his power, well, sorry. You're SOL, even if that theory holds water, which it doesn't.
If you're someone like SolipsistOwl, who thinks that Clinton is some kind of international war criminal, well... okay, stay home. Please just leave the rest of us be.
If you're anyone else, then staying home is as good as letting the trailer park living, wife-beating, meth-addicted, know-nothing, Here Comes Honey Boo Boo-watching, racist white fuckoffs decide who our next President will be.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Can you quit strawmanning me, please? Just once. You know full well it's not just that.

We've gone through about... half the primary states? I'd have to look it up to be sure. Unless Clinton falls into a black hole, her lead in delegates is all but insurmountable.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"