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
Nobody's keeping you here, mate. Also, recommendation for life: thick skin. It's useful.
(Wash Post) The ‘big price’ Paul Ryan has paid for supporting Donald Trump
Ryan is only backing Trump because he believes Trump will sign off on the Ryan House Agenda. And it's not going so well, that whole support thing.
I find it somewhat noteworthy that the Trump coverage lately has entirely revolved around the Trump University scam and his comments about Curiel. For a while it seemed like the GOP was warming up to him, and some people were speculating he may become more "presidential". I am guessing these people (and Ryan) were deluding themselves into thinking Trump could somehow become a good candidate.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanYeah, there has been this notion that, once nominated, Trump would "pivot" and start acting like a Presidential candidate instead of a schoolyard bully. Which was obviously ludicrous, but the establishment will do anything it can to convince itself that it has a respectable candidate.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Fixing himself so doggedly to it is the exact opposite of Clinton's approach to her email issue, where she tries to deflect where she can, admitting she made a mistake without admitting anything close to wrongdoing. Trump makes it front and center and casts the forces moving against him as enemies. Imagine what they would say about Clinton if she had gone after Trey Gowdy half as heard as Trump is going after this Curiel guy.
It would be hilarious if she insisted Gowdy recuse himself because he's a man casting judgment on a woman.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Sean Hannity might actually explode on air.
Let's also be frank about something: In all likelihood Trump is going to put his foot in his mouth sooner or later. Clinton has figured out how to attack the guy as his ego is so ridiculously fragile he can't take serious challenges and has gone off twice now to ads hitting him from the Clinton campaign.
I think it's really only a matter of time until he says something sexist as all hell that his base may love but won't play well with the rest of the country.
edited 7th Jun '16 6:59:43 AM by Lightysnake
"A matter of time"? Which rock have you been living under?
The question is: will any horrifically sexist or racist statement from Trump sufficiently alienate the right-wing media that they stop fawning over him? It's already started with the Curiel mess, and we have five months to go before the general election!
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I think it's been noted that Clinton has two big advantages in her ability to attack Trump. The first is that Clinton can directly attack his policies (or lack thereof) in a way the Republicans couldn't in the primaries without being hypocrites or alternating the base.
The other is that Trump has repeatedly floundered when attacking female opposition. Made me think if the Evil Can Not Comprehend Good trope in that he has an understanding that insulting women is viewed as wrong, but is unable to fathom why that is so, and he gets consistently tripped up as a result.
Also re: e judge thing, there's a Discworld quote, I think from Thud that describes the law as one size fits all. If i can find the exact one I'll post it.
edited 7th Jun '16 7:04:38 AM by sgamer82
Trump couldn't be "Presidential" if his life depended on it. He's already promised a pivot in that regard and it lasted about five minutes.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
He's already considered a RINO by many, which is why satisfaction rates with him are so low.
edited 7th Jun '16 7:10:59 AM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34Thought we'd all get a good laugh out of these comments from comic writer Dan Jurgens.
Interviewer: Though I'm Canadian, I follow American politics quite closely. Maybe it's due to the extreme media exposure that he generates, but does it make sense that I am getting a Donald Trump-like vibe from Lex Luthor in this issue?
Jurgens: Well, if you're picking up on that because Luthor appears to follow his own dictates, listens to no one and seems bent on trying to convince the world he's deserving of a loftier stance than anything ever truly earned, who am I to argue? [Laughs]
@SNES
When people in this forum start telling Sanders supporters to kill themselves, you can claim we're as bad as the Bernie Bros. I've had friends who've been subjected to death threats over support for Clinton and I'm in goddamn Canada. As to the notion that "Bernie Bro" is a veiled insult and they don't exist, I'm gonna quote an article I liked on the subject: "If you mention the Bernie Bros online, fifty people fitting the profile pop up with abusive comments informing you that they don’t exist."
@Ambar: Actual death threats or the usual Internet Tough Guy routine that has, to the best of my knowledge, never actually been followed through with?
edited 7th Jun '16 7:32:29 AM by CaptainCapsase
![]()
Nice, though not the one I was thinking of. The quote was made by Vimes in response to Carrot's questioning the wisdom of pairing dwarf and troll watchmen when racial tension was high, so definitely Thud. Vimes basically pointed out the obvious folly in having a race policed solely be members of that race, if I'm remembering it right..
edited 7th Jun '16 7:38:00 AM by sgamer82
Thought I'd link to Rachel Maddow's conversation with Clinton
from last night.
By the way, if Sanders doesn't concede within the next couple days, the "Clinton didn't concede until late either" comparisons will be over. She conceded 8 years ago today.
@Caspase
You realize that based on the criteria you just set no one can be sure anything is an actual death threat until they've been shot at, right?
edited 7th Jun '16 7:51:17 AM by AmbarSonofDeshar

What does Hippocrates have to do with any of this?
"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."