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
@Jovian and Fighteer: I'm not sure how willing Clinton will be to call Trump out on policy; the big GOP donors are on the verge of jumping ship over Trump, and with that kind of money at her disposal she might be confident she can just bury Trump with ad money without having to run on a platform that would make the GOP donors decide Trump is actually the better option of the two.
edited 19th May '16 1:15:25 PM by CaptainCapsase
Cross posted from the Gun Thread.
The Pink Pistols group wins in DC over a police requirement that would restrict access to firearms by LGBT gun owners or purchasers.
No I'm not? I'm saying that Clinton might think that she'll just be able to bury Trump with ad money and not have to worry about debates and the like, since a lot of GOP donors appear willing to jump ship or are planning on sitting this election out.
That might very well be true, depending on how well the GOP manages to pull together.
edited 19th May '16 1:47:06 PM by CaptainCapsase
I'm sure that law meant well, but forcing people to pre-emptively prove a future self-defense claim seems like a really convoluted method of gun control. End result: the only people who get to carry a gun are the ones planning to shirk the law anyway.
I can see why this would be a rather alarming outcome for the LGBT community. I wholeheartedly agree with the judge's decision.
edited 19th May '16 1:56:21 PM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Why would Clinton make a policy shift that would alienate her base in order to pick up big money donors, when we've seen in the past the having a ton of money is far from the be-all end-all of elections? (Republicans outspent Democrats something like 4-to-1 in 2008 and still got slaughtered, for instance.) Even if you assume that Clinton is a soulless political shill who will do anything to get elected (which isn't a given, but just for the sake of argument), it's a stupid move in a purely tactical sense.
The benefit of being able to run a massive ad campaign is to get your base excited and motivate them to vote for you. Alienating your base in order to secure your base is the definition of self-defeating.
edited 19th May '16 2:11:55 PM by NativeJovian
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.Clinton could spend $2 billion on this election but if her policies shift to the right to attract a hypothetical group of disaffected Republicans, she could easily lose the election by alienating Democratic voters. I don't see that happening.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I think that if anything, Clinton's support on the right will come from renegade Republicans. Unfortunately, Faux News has decided to endorse Trump, so they won't be running Koch-sponsored ads saying "Vote for the enemy: It's important."
Clinton herself will be appealing to...everyone except the Trump set. She's strong on foreign policy, so that might win Republicans but not a lot - but while she's not particularly liked, she's known and (grudgingly) respected across the spectrum and Sanders has forced her to stake out some actual leftist territory like expanding Obamacare and a federal living wage.
edited 19th May '16 4:37:27 PM by Ramidel
Clinton and/or her allies will chase the wrong pony, thinking themselves clever.
edited 19th May '16 5:07:35 PM by PotatoesRock
She has me convinced! #Never Trump
Though I'm not sure if I would call Trump technically more Republican than me. I don't think he represents Republican values well.
edited 19th May '16 5:16:02 PM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34"Amid shouts of 'shame,' House GOP defeats gay rights measure"
.
edited 19th May '16 5:20:05 PM by KarkatTheDalek
Oh God! Natural light!
Ok, to be fair, I am here. And, semantically speaking the Republican Party is a party not an ideology-they change policies and interests.
Having said that, I'd use someone like W. Bush or Rubio as not-very-good but passable examples. Go back a bit further you might use Reagan as an example, but he'd be more moderate by today's standards. And of course, there's Lincoln.
edited 19th May '16 5:29:51 PM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34

edited 19th May '16 12:39:53 PM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling On