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
Either one of them will be in intensely hot water from losing NY, so I'd say it's desperate ground for both of them.
Moving away from NY, the Wyoming caucuses are two days from now! Of course, there's no polling data to look for them, so who knows how that will go other than people on the ground there?
GM: AGOG S4 & F/WC RP; Co-GM: TABA, SOTR, UUA RP; Sub-GM: TTS RP. I have brought peace, freedom, justice, and security to my new Empire.Why are people so eager to ascribe desperation to politicians every time they get a little snippy or over react to something? Like. Sometimes you just overreact in the moment (which I think is what happened with Sanders) without actually being desperate. In fact both of them seem to currently be quite confident in themselves, as far as I can tell. Is it just because they're starting to take stronger shots at each other? That happens in elections. Missteps and all. Doesn't mean that either is currently "desperate".
Which is why we need to get judges and DAs the hell away from the ballot box and give them civil service protection. They are supposed to judge based on the law; a trial isn't supposed to be democracy in action. This isn't Athens.
I realize that people might have an issue with someone not receiving the "appropriate punishment" for crimes, but that's why we need to insulate judges from public accountability to a degree (the people who watchdog the legal system should be the trained attorneys involved - in short, the justice system needs a functional Internal Affairs).
![]()
![]()
That's a fair point, but at the same time, each of them really, really wants to win NY, because A) Sanders needs it for the nomination, and B) Clinton losing in NY after talking up her stint as a Senator there would look incredibly bad for her and would almost certainly shake up the current, inevitability-laced narrative. Additionally, the attacks on the part of Clinton and her campaign are becoming somewhat more varied and explicit after WI's results (i.e. the recent "I Don't Know If He's Really A Democrat" coming from the candidate's own lips rather than a surrogate, etc.), which indicates to me that they're trying new lines of attack because the old lines of attack weren't working - and by extension, that they need and want said lines of attack to work, meaning that at least inner Camp Clinton does indeed perceive increased urgency, synonymous with increased desperation.
edited 7th Apr '16 8:47:21 PM by darksidevoid
GM: AGOG S4 & F/WC RP; Co-GM: TABA, SOTR, UUA RP; Sub-GM: TTS RP. I have brought peace, freedom, justice, and security to my new Empire.@Ramidel: Mind you, minor is a legal concept, it does not necessarily entail that minors cannot be dangerous people. Children Are Innocent is a trope of fiction, after all.
The idea that the US has a habit of waaaaay overusing criminal law and law enforcement as a solution for social issues is probably true, though.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman- Sanders does great with caucuses.
- Sanders does great with states with low black population.
- Sanders does great in the Mountain State region.
Wyoming fills all 3 requirements.
edited 8th Apr '16 1:28:52 PM by Demonic_Braeburn
Any group who acts like morons ironically will eventually find itself swamped by morons who think themselves to be in good company.Yeah, yeah, kill all the suspense, why don't you?
I knew that. I was just trying to make it somehow exciting... but it's Wyoming, so of course that's impossible.
In other news, the most recent Commiefornia poll
now has Sanders just six points behind Clinton.
@Septimus: Oh aye. And as I said, it's possible that a 13-year-old might be an unrepentant and unfixable sociopath - but I'd argue that said unfixability cannot, at that age, be inferred from a first offense. So if we as a society are going to presume diminished moral responsibility in minors (which is a good idea), then we should tighten the rules on when a minor can be fed to adult court.
(Especially because the "crime" that will really get a minor turned over to adult court is being black. Hence my desire to provide some nondiscretionary protections for all juveniles.)
Wonder if that should also happen to minority adults because the racial bias in sentencing is rampant.
Otherwise I wonder what the next primaries are likely to result in, and what the opinions on Garland's judicial philosophy are.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanThe problem with this idea is: Who decides what the requirements are? The government? Absolutely not. Because then it becomes a privilege, instead of a right. And privileges can be rescinded, just because some politician is against it. It would be like saying, "You have the right to freedom of speech, as long as you pass our screening process."
edited 8th Apr '16 3:14:48 AM by pwiegle
This Space Intentionally Left Blank.yes it should be the government, who else would decide? the NRA? "are you Republican?" "yes" "here's your gun" "are you a Republican" "no" "fuck off commie scum!" it may have been a right when it took dozens of men standing in a line to reliably hit someone, but in the age of accurate, automatic weapons it damn well should be a privileged
advancing the front into TV TropesThe only reason gun ownership is a "right" is because of the Second Amendment. Driving a car, to continue my analogy, is a privilege. And if you want to go down a really dumb rabbit hole on the meaning of the Second Amendment, "a well-regulated militia" implies that yeah, the right to bear arms can be regulated in the public interest.
Regardless, the solution to your problem is what's called a "shall-issue" license - that is, a license where the authorities must issue it to you if you meet the objective requirements (as automobile licenses effectively are). Black guy in Mississippi? Sorry, the authorities have no power to keep a gun out of your hands so long as you are not a convicted violent felon (the fact that black people are far more likely to be convicted violent felons is a separate injustice) and have attended mandatory training.
Yeah, I don't think that anyone has conflated mandatory gun licensing with political suitability tests. "Take this training, pass this test, and also be someone that we like." That doesn't happen with cars, does it?
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

A nearly 9000% increase in spill magnitude over what they'd previously claimed. How utterly typical.
GM: AGOG S4 & F/WC RP; Co-GM: TABA, SOTR, UUA RP; Sub-GM: TTS RP. I have brought peace, freedom, justice, and security to my new Empire.