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
Ramidel, no. NO. Stop saying things like that. First off, Texas can't legally secede, I've already pointed that out. Second, if you feel compelled to apologize for something then you probably shouldn't say it. THIRD, the "secessionists" aren't even a significant minority of the population. The vast majority of Texans are fine being part of the United States, regardless of how they may complain about the federal government. We're not going to have a referendum on secession, because that's not how the US government works. Congress WOULDN'T give it to them, because that's a huge fucking headache none of them want to deal with. I'm having to restrain myself from stronger language here.
I fucking hate it that every time secession comes up people want to just shit on Texas or some other southern state, and treat the whole idea of secession as if it has significant support. It doesn't.
Yes, it's part of a highly racist part of the country, and they've done some worrisome stuff. But most people generally aren't into the whole secession thing because there's not exactly a compelling reason to do so. Sovereign citizens and the like are a minority with an outsized reputation and volume.
@Protag: While I do believe my state could make a go of it, we'd still be far weaker than we are as part of the United States. We don't contain all of NASA; important parts are over in Florida. We also have the advantage of our own power grid, but also the conservatism is stupidly strong here, in the sense that Republicans have an unhealthy strangehold and are frequently trying to defund education. (Also, small towns can't do their own zoning. Yay for hypocrisy.)
So yeah, we can survive on our own. But that doesn't mean we'll thrive.
edited 24th Jun '16 7:57:17 PM by AceofSpades
Democrats adopt $15 minimum wage in platform draft.
edited 24th Jun '16 10:54:21 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.Forgive me for asking a question that is full of cynicism, but it's in my system right, so I'll it: If the Holocaust is what it took to reduce anti-semitism to at least stereotypes that are thankfully double-edged, then what will it take to reduce racism against anyone who isn't white to double-edged stereotypes for the US?
Antisemitism is alive and well, it just relocated to places like the Palestinian Authority.
On empty crossroads, seek the eclipse -- for when Sol and Lua align, the lost shall find their way home.![]()
and
And we fear African-Americans and Americans of Middle Eastern descent instead of fearing of Jews getting lynched like how it was pre-World War II?
Insult, provoke, repeat: how Donald Trump became America's Hugo Chávez
He's reaffirmed what he said he was going to do: fight all the way to the convention in order to secure a "strong" (read, leftward) democratic platform for the general election. He is dedicated to defeating Trump in as overwhelming a way as possible, and he seems to believe a leftward platform would guarantee Hillary more votes. He's not endorsing Hillary yet, as part of that leverage he's seeking. He was very polite about it and not shrill at all. Also, Colbert asked him what he had to say to any Sanderists who would vote Trump: "nothing, my supporters are smart enough not to vote for a bigot."
Certainly, for a "political zombie", he's got much to say and much to do yet, and his movement is a fair bit more precise and momentous than a "shamble".
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.I watched his whole appearance. He's still a broken record, repeating the same things ad nauseam. Not that that's a terrible thing necessarily, but it does turn me off a bit. He's clearly fighting for his principles to have a place in the Democratic platform, which I can at least respect, and he told his supporters not to vote for Trump, which is good. So, basically standard Bernie.
edited 25th Jun '16 6:26:04 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Repeating the same things over and over is a tactically useful tool, psychologically, as people remember them. So it's not enttirely a bad idea if you're trying to make key points and hammer them into people's heads for the long run.
The exodus continues: Yet another top Bushie, Henry Paulson, backs Clinton over Trump
(Former CEO of Goldman Sachs)
Ditto. If the goal is to defeat Trump, gathering more moderate votes would be to her benefit. The leftist votes she might possibly lose by moving toward the center come from a very small fringe element, and losing them probably wouldn't make that much of a difference.
The "leftist fringe" generally prides itself in not voting for mainstream candidates, and thereby renders itself impotent in politics.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"No, but most of them will vote for Hillary, so they aren't who we're talking about. Those who won't...
edited 25th Jun '16 7:04:40 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Not necessarily. Rejecting a candidate just means you reject that particular combination of policies. Certain ideas (regardless of objective merit) might be popular with the public, just not enough to overtake the things they didn't like (in my case, his foreign policy). Therefore, its not completely unreasonable for the victor to take one or two of their former rival's positions.
Not unreasonable that they don't do it though as well.

But "I told you so!" smugness is invaluable.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.