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
Oh, there's no question that the GOP sells climate change denial as its party line, and conspires to shut down any of its members that break from the doctrine.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The article looks reasonable. (And we're back to the whole "threat of getting primaried" business and the fact that the Koch Bros probably had a lot to do with the astroturfing of the Tea Party).
...that doesn't mean I don't think that stupidity and willful ignorance aren't a factor in other things though. (A lot of them happen to link to religion.)
The particular issue there is that, unlike with the Democrats, the problem isn't with the party apparat - as we can see, the GOP organization has recently become something of an Ineffectual Sympathetic Villain. Instead, the GOP has been hijacked by extremely skilled wielders of money-as-speech who are quite capable of ignoring reality and forcing anyone who wants the (R) tag on their name to 1984 their brains into compliance or get primaried (and even the ones who should be immune to this shit, like McCain and Murkowski, have stuck with the party line).
![]()
I am. He's an ubertroll.
It's important to remember that he's a comedy writer in the same vein as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. He's writing to rile people up and make good clickbait.
edited 22nd Jun '16 5:35:27 PM by Ramidel
Russia's Culture Minister calls Netflix a US-backed brainwashing meachine.
- What her biggest donors are likely willing to support. (i.e. Socially Liberal Wall Street Moguls)
- She can do via Executive Orders.
- She can squeak by Congress.
- The courts declare legal
Congress has basically frozen because the lack of Earmarks and Riders, along with hyper partisanship.
So Hillary would basically be restricted by what she can do vis-a-vis existing law, and the Supreme and Federal Courts.
And Wall Street has basically said "If you even so much as actually take on a Pro-Finance Reform Democrat as your VP choice, we will become your worst enemies or let your enemies drown you." to her.
So any actual meaningful financial reform/Trust enforcement is unlikely to happen, and most of her progress, if any will rely on things like the courts agreeing LGBT members of society are protected under the 1960s Civil Rights Act.
And yes, essentially, Congress needs to be allowed to bribe and capture each other. In its most innocent form, that bribery would be like, a Republican willing to support an Autism Bill, but only if he can get some of his off-hours friends among the Democrats to support an earmark pork that say, lets for a huge injection of funds to Autism related school programs in his state.
edited 22nd Jun '16 6:08:41 PM by PotatoesRock
Donald Trump’s problems are making it too easy for Democrats to ignore their own
And yet look below the surface, and you’ll find that liberal Democrats face existential problems — none more glaring than a fundamental question of identity. The question that must preoccupy the party if it earns a third consecutive presidential term is simple but uneasily answered: What do liberal Democrats stand for?
The thing is that Hillary Clinton is in the perfect position to call Wall Street's bluff with just one sentence...
"Then go support Donald Trump."
Wizard Needs Food BadlyWhich would be a point if the GOP's Fundraising Machine didn't decide to also sit this one in terms of the presidency.
As A Sidenote: I don't actually think Warren should be Vice-President since she would have less power as Vice-President than she currently has as a Senator.
edited 22nd Jun '16 7:04:52 PM by GameGuruGG
Wizard Needs Food Badly![]()
What GOP fundraising machine? Trump's campaign is a logistical disaster and the Dems are screwed in the House anyway. Apart from the Senate, which should be able to raise enough cash anyway, the Dems have an organizational edge (where they have a chance).
If Hillary's resources vanished into thin air, the GOP might make a second look and go "Time to pony up, we might as well get something done and try and bury her in attack ads..."
Point is, Wall Street has a carrot and a stick over Hillary and most of the Democrat elite.
Meaningful finance/bank reform is impossible until Wall Street's stick becomes unusable.
And unusable basically requires an economic meltdown.
edited 22nd Jun '16 7:16:23 PM by PotatoesRock
Then this country is doomed to either a slow death or a fast one, because people like Sanders and Trump are going to continue to appear and eventually one of them will become President.
Wizard Needs Food Badlyedited 22nd Jun '16 7:55:14 PM by Demonic_Braeburn
Any group who acts like morons ironically will eventually find itself swamped by morons who think themselves to be in good company.![]()
![]()
Trump is the Fast Death. Sanders... Well, I would've preferred Sanders, but Clinton won the nomination.
edited 22nd Jun '16 8:07:28 PM by GameGuruGG
Wizard Needs Food BadlyThat's an oversimplification, and isn't even accurate. His policies on climate change, immigration, campaign finance, LGBT rights, the criminal justice system, net neutrality, civil liberties as a whole, etc., are all great, and saying he won't push as hard or even harder than Clinton on these issues is a bold-faced lie.
And a dovish attitude and mediocre gun record doesn't negate the fact he'd try to do more for socioeconomic inequality and injustice than Clinton or any US President in history.

tl;dr: Republicans who've tried to break off from the party line on climate change have quickly been shut down by a lack of funding from the fossil fuel lobby, among other groups involved in climate change denial. Recently (Jul 2015), there was some defections from the climate change denial block, and the congressmen who owe their positions to those interests have abruptly gone quiet about climate change. It's probably an overstatement to assume they personally believe or don't believe in climate change, but their publicly stated opinion will follow the money as long as it keeps them in office.
edited 22nd Jun '16 5:19:59 PM by CaptainCapsase