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
Obama chose Garland as a good Supreme Court Justice. He's not playing silly games with the Senate. However, those very properties — of being a highly qualified candidate who isn't excessively liberal and who has been unanimously approved before — makes him the perfect troll nominee. Obama wins this thing every possible way, but it's only happening because Senate Republicans decided to be so colossally stupid to begin with.
edited 16th May '16 11:31:57 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"It mystifies me that the Republicans don't just take the olive branch Obama's extending to them. Their behaviour would make a certain amount of sense if there was some hope of a judge nominated by, say, Bush or Rubio, but by now their "best" case scenario is having a supreme justice nominated by fuckin' Trump. Why even bother at this point? A fanatic truly does double his effort while forgetting his aim.
The summary rejection of everything Obama does has become a Sunk Cost Fallacy at this point.
However, if there were a time to relax that stance, it's now, since all but one incumbent Congressman has won their primary. There is no longer a risk of being Tea Partied out for being too soft on Democrats, at least for this election.
edited 16th May '16 11:38:11 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Right now, Senate Republicans live in fear of losing the 2016 election due to the combination of: a popular, successful outgoing President; the lack of a major crisis to drive voters to "throw out the bums"; a charismatic presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee with significant name-recognition value; and now the nomination of a clown as the Republican candidate.
Literally anything they do to cross the aisle could be seen as a sell-out to the voters that they desperately need to turn out for them, whilst also holding their noses and trying to pretend they don't know anything about that Trump guy.
edited 16th May '16 11:51:09 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Whatever. Regardless, the unifying attribute of this Republican Congress is that it considers Obama's presidency to be fundamentally illegitimate and thus will not pay him the courtesy of even negotiating with him. Republicans have been conducting de-legitimizing attacks against Hillary Clinton for far longer than against Obama, since she was at first seen as the "pants-wearer" behind her husband's administration and a potential threat to be the Democratic presidential nominee from very nearly the start of his first term.
In short, Republicans are scared shitless of Hillary and have been running against her in principle for something like twenty-four years. Any concession to Democrats at this point destroys that narrative.
edited 16th May '16 12:03:59 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Qualified would have been the better adjective, Fighteer. As the others say, "charismatic" is not Hil.
Honestly I don't think anything new is gonna happen this cycle until the respective conventions. Thats when everything gets officially turned over to the general (which is currently more of a thing for Dems since Sanders is still in the race, though with the GOP it sets in stone the current reality). As the election gets closer and people understand how it will play out ultimately (the polls are far too close between Hil and Trump that no one is gonna take a bet on the winner just yet), that will determine how nice they act toward Obama.
edited 16th May '16 12:07:20 PM by FFShinra
Yeah, everything I've seen points to her being awkward on the campaign trail, but a lot more composed and comfortable when she's actually doing the job.
Which, to me, is a good thing. Yeah, it makes the actual elections more difficult, but someone who is absolutely perfect for the campaign might well be a terrible fit for the job. It's like job interviews. You could be incredible at the job, but suck at interviews or vice versa. With Clinton, we know what she's like in an elected position and it's a lot more positive than a lot of people make it out to be.
That is, basically, what I meant. Her charisma is based around being effective in office: good at building relationships, working with teams, delivering results. Maybe call it competence instead.
The media doesn't want a competent candidate; it wants a candidate that generates pithy clips that can be replayed endlessly on the evening news and talk show circuits. Before he fell among the other Tributes, Marco Rubio made a point that the most play he ever got on national TV was when he accused Trump of having a small penis. Never mind the policy statements.
edited 16th May '16 12:19:21 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The Republican strategy makes perfect sense if you think about it from a "staying in office" perspective rather then a "slow down liberalism" perspective. If the Republicans approve anyone then they loose the base and risk primaries or simply having the base stay home on election day. If they approve none then loose the senate and have the Dems approve someone then the Republican senators can tell the base that they tried.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran

edited 16th May '16 11:26:17 AM by FieldMarshalFry
advancing the front into TV Tropes