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
Trump has turned the new Republican Party into high school. It will be cruel, clique-y and ruled by insult kings like himself and Ann Coulter, whose headline description of Cruz ("Tracy Flick With a Dick") will always resonate with Trump voters more than a thousand George Will columns. —- The "new GOP" seems doomed to swing back and forth between its nationalist message and its leader's tubercular psyche. It isn't a party, it's a mood.
This article is really fucking good, it pretty much show the issue with republicans
Did you feel the party will change after this circus of elections?
"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"![]()
I would actually argue the problem with the GOP isn't that it didn't learn its lesson from 2012-the problem, in fact, is that it did learn its "lesson". It's lost touch with its own ideology (while further embittering itself against the democrats) and had a massive identity crisis, allowing Trump to step in and take it over.
edited 10th Jun '16 12:00:37 AM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34@ The Rolling Stones Article
: I think Shinra made a suggestion/insight that the Democrats are facing their own stability issues, like two or three months ago. Basically that the Democrats shouldn't be crowing at the GOP breaking down but instead worrying WHY these more left-wing candidates keep popping up here and there and why their constituents seem mad.
@ Sanders Representing Something New: Probably not. He's pretty much tapping into the Progressives, White Liberals and the Millenials. You know. The majority of Warren's power base. Both of them are politicians who are the faces of a portion of the party that is basically infuriated with the post 2008 economic conditions that have put a squeeze on young people economically and bankrupted older workers/seniors and cost middle class families their homes.
The key difference is Warren seems more politically adept than Sanders at the 'long game', so to speak.
Until economic conditions improve expect more Sanders types to keep appearing. He happened. Warren happened. Bill De Blasio happened. They're probably not going away.
@ Trump and the Clintons being friends: They were. Until Trump went full Birther.
Into more Trump. Maybe the next guys will be more politically Savvy than Trump, but there's no way his candidacy doesn't have repercussions on the party's operations for the future.
"Guys, we need to stop chasing the Tea Party / Nativist Pony. If we don't do something about compromise or getting in bed with minorities, we're hosed, and chasing the Missing White Vote is a death sentence for our long term health."
And Trump jumped in and chased the Missing White Vote.
edited 10th Jun '16 12:14:44 AM by PotatoesRock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSWHQVlHBXc
I was visibly uncomfortable watching this video. From reasonable to batshit in less than a year.
Well, you see why Trump supporters think that he is telling it as it is.
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiot@Potatoes Rock: Which is largely the issue. The Republican Party's white racist section is strong enough that they can and will derail any attempt to switch polarity, and strong enough to force Democrats to remain one party, but not strong enough to win a Presidential election. So the GOP is a zombie party right now.
What the Democrats need to do now is fire Schultz and put in someone who will get the downticket organization moving and seize the competitive House and Senate seats.
What'll happen is that eventually the GOP ages into irrelevance and dies off, and we'll get a short "Era of Good Feelings" where there's just a Democratic Party, and then A New Challenger Appears and we're back to two-party.
It's possible that we'll see a three-party system if the Deep South still has Republican holdouts in a generation (at which point there'll be a Democratic national party challenged by Republicans in one part and by the Sanderistas on the West Coast and the Northeast).
Sanders helped show that there's support for socialism in strange places in the US electorate, though when you look at the map of who won by county, his victories are actually largely rural, which paints a slightly different picture (that a lot of his supporters were like the West Virginia Democrats, who were just voting for him to spite Clinton and who will be voting for Trump in the fall).
Lot is an overstatement, the polling shows that 15% of Sanders supporters vote for Trump come November, and that's polling from before Clinton got a 51% of pledged delegates and befo re Sanders drops out after DC.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranSanders showed that there is, in fact, a significant leftist movement in the US, which I see as a good thing if only because it shows that Democratic voters aren't all moderate centrists who will jump ship back to the GOP if the Democrats actually propose leftist policies instead of being the GOP-lite. That's to his credit, and I think you can legitimately say that he's pulled Hillary to the left, which I also see as a good thing.
Just because he lost doesn't means that Sanders' campaign was a failure. He's had a real effect on the Democratic party, and he's helped make some things clear about the Democratic base that will only make the party stronger going forward.
That said, it's possible to push that too far. If he keeps acting like he's been acting in the primary once the general election starts (it already has in a lot of ways, but after the official nomination at the latest), then he's going to be harmful rather than helpful. At some point he's going to need to stop treating Hillary as an opponent and start treating her as an ally against Trump. He's said he's going to do that, but it hasn't actually happened yet.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.The Republican Party will likely still be a name that gets used, even if it changes its ideals.
Personally, I'd hope the GOP changes its "marketing strategy" and starts supporting something closer to my particular brand of rightist ideology-though that's probably wishful thinking.
edited 10th Jun '16 6:24:42 AM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34I think in the long run, potentially yes, he's had impact. (and Warren definitely will in the long run as well.)
I just don't trust the party top brass to follow suit this election cycle.
edited 10th Jun '16 7:38:01 AM by PotatoesRock
That strikes me as kneejerk cynicism. Why the hell would Hillary swerve right? There aren't any votes to pick up there, whereas there are a bunch of Sanders supporters to her left whose support of her is shaky. If she tries to back away from things she's said during the primary — like hiking the minimum wage, for instance — they're going to turn on her.
There's no reason to suspect that Hillary will shift right in the general except "I don't like her, therefore she'll do something I don't like".
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.![]()
Uh, as someone who is supporting Hil, I can tell you she has reason to do so. And its not a bad thing either. She's trying to become president of the entire US, not just the Democratic Party. Thats, frankly, Trump's problem. He only answers to his xenophobic base and has no room to grow. She does.
She does need to win some Bernie supporters, true, but if one reads her policy papers, she's going in Bernie's direction (if not degree) on everything except foreign policy, so its just a question of making that clear to Bernie supporters who may not know the details of her platform or if they do know said details, why that is beneficial to them as a voter.
Getting some people on the right isn't the end all be all of the world.
edited 10th Jun '16 8:12:17 AM by FFShinra
We shouldn't think of the right as a monolithic bloc of racist assholes. That's an extreme fallacy; worse, it's one that guarantees we'll have political division forever. The right, just like the left, covers a wide spectrum of political belief. Donald Trump's greatest failing is that he only speaks to a few extreme parts of that spectrum. A President needs to be bigger than that; needs to be able to speak to and work with as wide a range of people as possible.
edited 10th Jun '16 8:27:05 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

That's why you don't read the comment sections. It's like they find the worst specimens of humanity to post there.
edited 9th Jun '16 10:27:22 PM by hamza678
Now known as Cyber Controller