TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#126701: Jun 16th 2016 at 1:34:10 PM

"getting things done" is also kind of iffy given a level of obstructionism that's kept us without a 9th Supreme Court Justice for four months now

TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#126702: Jun 16th 2016 at 1:36:21 PM

Perian you seem to have a misinterpretation of how corruption on Capitol Hill works. Most corporations when they want to buy influence they don't contribute to campaigns (that's pointless long term), they buy out lobbyists because...as it turns out...changing government policy is really, really difficult, no matter how much idiots like TYT think it's a direct quid-pro-quo.

New Survey coming this weekend!
Perian Since: Jun, 2016
#126703: Jun 16th 2016 at 1:36:47 PM

[up][up][up] Of course, assuming that he gets a less hostile congress and things like that.

The problem is when people are dependent on big money donors to get elected. If Clinton is too hard on the fossil fuel sector, they'll simply back the Republican donor the next election. Why do you think there's so much controversy over big money in politics, and people saying that this is a serious issue? Even Clinton herself (or at least, a past version of herself), would agree with that:

Big surprise: A flood of money from rich people, corporations, special interests has poured into our politics. The idea, I believe, that money is speech turns our Constitution upside down … the Supreme Court has given the wealthiest Americans even greater power to affect what happens in our democracy.

[up] This would be in contrast with these big money donors donating so much to the Clinton campaign.

edited 16th Jun '16 1:40:02 PM by Perian

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#126704: Jun 16th 2016 at 1:39:19 PM

Clinton would, I suspect, be as happy as any other politician not to have to suck up to big donors in exchange for the money she needs to run a viable campaign. Ask any politician about the time they waste fundraising. The problem is that, as long as the Supreme Court, via its Citizens United decision, holds that "money = speech" and "corporations are people", deep pockets are a simple necessity of winning.

edited 16th Jun '16 1:39:38 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#126705: Jun 16th 2016 at 1:44:02 PM

[up] Clinton hasn't made it a secret. She despises campaigning with a passion, and the mainstream media.

New Survey coming this weekend!
Perian Since: Jun, 2016
#126706: Jun 16th 2016 at 2:15:45 PM

[up][up] See, that's an argument I could get behind. Nevertheless, Bernie Sanders has shown that these big donations are not necessary for performing well, at least in a primary (of course, we don't know what would have happened in a general election). But of course, even if he was able to pull of this feat in the GE as well, making all candidates let their campaign depend on individual donations would be a terrible idea.

Clinton has flip-flopped so much on the issue that I don't know if she will ever address it. Overturning the Citizens United decision (and yes, I know that she has said that she's going to do that) will likely not be enough, but it will be a step in the good direction at least. This is exactly why people are so enthralled with the idea of a 'Sanders revolution', not because they want a violent overthrow of the system, but because they want to make the system more fair. And people simply don't trust Clinton with the issue, seeing that she's so dependent on these donors and even currently claims that they're no problem (I've also read that the current system of political donations has really taken off under the Clintons, but don't know my sources anymore and maybe I'm misremembering them, so feel free to prove me wrong on this one).

This is also interesting: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/15/jimmy-carter-calls-for-return-to-publicly-financed-elections/. Apparently political campaigns were publicly financed in the past (didn't know this). You can still receive public money, as long as you agree not to accept private donations.

And now I'm going to sleep tongue

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#126707: Jun 16th 2016 at 2:20:24 PM

Yes, believe it or not, Obama was the first candidate to reject public funding so he could raise a larger war chest from donations. It was big news at the time, since he expected to have to compete with Romney, who would have effectively unlimited funding thanks to Citizens United.

That said, don't tell me that all the time Sanders spent soliciting cash from small donors was any less onerous and degrading than sucking up to big ticket donors (and Clinton had no shortage of small donors, either). Sure, it's nice when everyone's mailing you $25 checks, but there must be a better way. A return to publicly funded campaigns would be such a way, and I'd eat my hat if Clinton didn't support it, but Citizens United must be overturned before it'd be even remotely possible.

edited 16th Jun '16 2:20:52 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
ILoveDogs Since: May, 2010
#126708: Jun 16th 2016 at 3:29:30 PM

Clinton's VP shortlist has been leaked. Warren, Kaine, Brown, Castro, Perez, Booker, Becerra, Garcetti, and (Tim) Ryan.

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#126709: Jun 16th 2016 at 3:37:34 PM

Who is Garcetti?

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
smokeycut Since: Mar, 2013
#126710: Jun 16th 2016 at 3:40:36 PM

Welp, people on tumblr are spreading around the thing about the media and Hillary as proof that people need to write in Bernie's name on the ballot in November. Ugh, I'm really worried his people are going to hand Trump the election.

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#126711: Jun 16th 2016 at 3:41:29 PM

Warren has it if she wants it. The question is whether she wants it.

(I think Fox' Argument From Sexism was a rather dumb one. Yes, the country is ready for a two-woman ticket, especially against Trump.)

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#126712: Jun 16th 2016 at 3:44:17 PM

[up][up]Oh, dumb shit on Tumblr, what a surprise.

smokeycut Since: Mar, 2013
#126713: Jun 16th 2016 at 3:45:28 PM

It's a hotspot for Bernie supporters, so it's a good way to judge how they'll be voting. Unfortunately, it looks like many of them will throw the election.

AdricDePsycho Rock on, Gold Dust Woman from Never Going Back Again Since: Oct, 2014 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
Rock on, Gold Dust Woman
#126714: Jun 16th 2016 at 3:47:29 PM

It's too early to call. I'm guaranteeing that by November, people will be supporting Hillary.

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#126715: Jun 16th 2016 at 3:48:04 PM

9 out of 10 of them wouldn't have voted anyway if Sanders weren't running, so they are self-selecting for political irrelevance.

edited 16th Jun '16 3:50:43 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#126716: Jun 16th 2016 at 3:53:23 PM

[up]X3 It's a hotspot for angry Internet people calling themselves Bernie supporters, the no indication that they are actually representative of Bernie supporters generally, or that they themselves are genuine Bernie supports or even old enough to vote.

The percentage of Bernie (or Clinton) voters that are posting shit on social media is tiny, don't take the idiots as representative.

edited 16th Jun '16 3:54:15 PM by Silasw

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Hodor2 Since: Jan, 2015
#126717: Jun 16th 2016 at 3:55:53 PM

I'm seeing it a lot on Twitter too, but yeah, I do think it's almost certainly not a representative sample size. Also, I tend to figure that anyone talking about Clinton being off the ballot because she is indicted is likely a Trump supporter pretending to be a Sanders supporter (although you know, Horseshoe Effect and all).

Protagonist506 from Oregon Since: Dec, 2013 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
#126718: Jun 16th 2016 at 3:57:46 PM

An even more accurate statement is that it's a hotspot for far-left nutjobs. These are the types of people who are mostly likely to think in terms of "Bernie or Bust".

Leviticus 19:34
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#126719: Jun 16th 2016 at 4:01:19 PM

Indeed. The far left has its share of nutjobs, just like the far right, and Bernie's campaign (like Trump's) brought them out of the woodwork. They don't participate in the political process other than to throw their shit, like monkeys, at the most convenient targets, so they can generally be ignored.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#126720: Jun 16th 2016 at 4:37:59 PM

[up] That's the kind of attitude that causes people to give up on the democratic process, which was incidentally a big part of why the baby boomers became so conservative in old age.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#126721: Jun 16th 2016 at 4:45:05 PM

These people have no interest in the democratic process, otherwise they would participate even if they weren't going to get their way every time. Remember, we put the Republicans' extremists in power in 2010, and our political system ground to a halt. I have no desire to repeat that, only from the left.

edited 16th Jun '16 4:45:27 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Hodor2 Since: Jan, 2015
#126722: Jun 16th 2016 at 4:52:58 PM

Well, I don't think there is a danger of putting liberal extremists in power because as you say, they have no interest in participation.

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#126723: Jun 16th 2016 at 4:54:42 PM

[up] Moreover, there's no such thing a liberal extremist in the current US political system. By the standards of the rest of the developed world, the US is extremely right-wing dominated, and even the furthest left elected officials are at most center-left.

Furthermore, given how extreme the current GOP is, a continued deadlock is the only option; if anything meaningful gets through congress during Clinton's time in office, it will be because she caved to the GOP in the hopes of currying political capital to use on her own policy priorities, barring of course an unprecedented meltdown from Trump giving the democrats the House.

On another topic, I don't think it's necessarily fair to characterize Sanders as anti-trade; his opposition to NAFTA and the TPP is more on the grounds of the pro-corporate stipulations included in those deals and/or the rampant human rights violations perpetrated by other signators to such treaties.

edited 16th Jun '16 5:07:38 PM by CaptainCapsase

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#126724: Jun 16th 2016 at 4:55:44 PM

"they are self-selecting for political irrelevance.sey are self-selecting for political irrelevance".

Dude, enough with the smugness already!

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#126725: Jun 16th 2016 at 5:35:29 PM

[up] Why? It's not like these people can be coerced to join the political process through honeyed words. They distrust all that stuff, remember? I support Hillary so I'm a shill of the system, and therefore an enemy.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Total posts: 417,856
Top