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
And the GOP will then retake the senate and the house come midterm elections, putting us right back where we started, and ensuring the absurd gerrymandering stays in place.
Especially since another global recession is looming. Knowing that, the GOP will most likely block legislative efforts to preemptive my arrests the issue, banking on the bad economy to favor them over the incumbent party. Which it probably will as long as the majority of votes continue to be cast by Generation X and the Baby Boomers.
We're in a rather vicious political feedback loop right now, similar to the one that lead up to the American civil war, and the death knell of many other presidential democracies.
edited 29th Jun '16 8:43:49 AM by CaptainCapsase
@Silasw- That's the thing though. Yes, he's undoubtedly endorsed her in "all but name" and has indicate that he would support her and that (quite correctly to be sure) his supporters would as well.
However, since AFAIK every other second placer actually endorses the winner, "in all but name" seems like a deliberate slap in the face.
Sanders is a liberal socialist who toned down his rhetoric to the point where it's politically viable the the United States; while he voted with he democrats on 95% of the issues, I'd say he agrees far less with the de facto principles of the party (post 2008 neoliberalism) and their long term agenda.
edited 29th Jun '16 8:50:31 AM by CaptainCapsase
![]()
![]()
The simple facts of the Obama and (hopefully) Clinton presidencies stand against that doomsaying.
Look, it's pretty basic. Throughout history, "opposition" groups uniformly preach the end of civilization (fire and brimstone, the rivers and seas boiling, cats and dogs living together, mass hysteria!) every time the consensus does not swing their way. They are wrong almost all of the time, except when they happen to get it right, whereupon they claim vindication, much as a broken clock is very proud of itself every 12 hours. (Worth noting: this applies to all parts of the political spectrum.)
Aside from the cosmic deadline of global warming (which is a serious threat, obviously), there is little new about our current political woes: fractured, often complacent progressives challenging entrenched business interests with reactionary right-wing forces blocking every attempt at fixing the system. Every now and then this reaches a crisis point, bad stuff happens, progress lurches forward, and then we go back to the status quo. There is nothing about our situation to suggest that the apocalypse waits around the corner, any more than it did the last dozen times this happened.
Heck, even climate change won't end civilization overnight; eventually reality will become too much for the deniers to ignore and we'll lurch toward a solution to that as well.
edited 29th Jun '16 8:53:01 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
What I'm talking about isn't the apocalypse, it's a potential political crisis. The truly apocalyptic crises aren't going to become apparent until midway through the 21st century.
It replies in the sense that Sanders is perfectly right to be withholding an official endorsement. Clinton doesn't need it for one, and secondly the Democratic Party has no intention of actually following through with progressive reform unless profressives force them to do it.
edited 29th Jun '16 9:01:31 AM by CaptainCapsase
Not really. If you think that there's a crisis on the Democrats' side, you aren't really paying attention. There's certainly a looming catastrophe on the Republican side, but it's most likely going to resolve itself via the party shrinking badly as it sheds its more moderate members, then trying to reinvent itself over the next four years to remain relevant in Presidential politics.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I can't say I'm surprised by this revelation.
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiotI think he's more talking about the Euro or China finally coming home to roost and causing an economic earthquake. At which point Americans typical vote in the incumbent party if things aren't fixed.
And Republicans will do nothing to help once Wall Street and co. start going under, or they'll do just *barely* enough to stop it, but allow mass shock-waves to continue and discredit the Democrats and Obama's legacy, and brush Trump under the rug.
As to the doomsaying on American Politics being unstable, that has been brought up before, in serious writing
, and it does look like it's likely to continue, as long as the current economic anemia continues across the globe, brought on by Neo Liberalism. And Presidental Democracies that divorce the Executive from the Legislative are prone to the kind of political paralysis we've experienced since 2010.
edited 29th Jun '16 9:03:54 AM by PotatoesRock
This was what I was talking about when I said looming recession, yes.
@Fighteer: If the GOP collapses, a schism within the democrats is inevitable unless the party stages a "soft" coup and turns the US into a de facto one party state by enacting legislation that would severely disadvantage any new opposition party.
Moreover, I would argue that the democrats do have a looming crisis: the total lack of any upcoming young party leaders who are even remotely palatable to younger Americans. Assuming military/low tech industrial interests defect to the democrats, that kind of arrangement is going to exasperate tensions within the party.
edited 29th Jun '16 9:24:04 AM by CaptainCapsase
You know, I always find it curious how, with the exact same humans, skills, material resources, and infrastructure, the world can grind to catastrophe due to money flow alone. It's almost like magic.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.Part of the issue is how bloated the financial industry has become. Don't get me wrong, there are indeed legitimate functions of the stock market, but it's absolute dominance in developed economies it has achieved over the course of the neoliberal era has brought things to the point where even serious, respected economists are questioning whether it truly provides greater benefits than it does costs.
In politicial news relevant to me personally, Zephyr Teachout won the primary for one of the congressional districts neighboring me
. If that name sounds familiar, she attempted to primary Cuomo in 2014 and lost, unfortunately. She also endorsed and was endorsed by Bernie Sanders.
edited 29th Jun '16 9:37:18 AM by CaptainCapsase
You won't find disagreement from me; the stock market has metastasized into a self-aggrandizing monstrosity that sucks in all the energy from the economy to no observable benefit.
Since we are talking about economic crisis, here is an interesting article from Bloomberg.
The article states that the Western World's middle classes are rejecting globalization and becoming more isolationist because they have seen no improvement in their incomes from globalization. Because of this stark rejection of globalization, immigration, and free markets and the results of the Brexit vote, Wall Street and the Banks are... well to put it simply, spooked beyond all belief! Spooked enough that some of Wall Street and the Banks are actually suggesting crazy things like wealth redistribution and a reinvention of capitalism to stem the tide of isolationist sentiment.
Wizard Needs Food Badly
Indeed. That said, I expect very little significant movement until at least two decades in the US. The GOP, I expect, will continue obstructing until they eventually lose enough of he government long enough for districts to be redrawn in a more "equitable" fashion (hahahahahahaha) and that means the democrats take their place as the Conservative party of the US and progressives schism off as a new left wing opposition party.
edited 29th Jun '16 11:02:39 AM by CaptainCapsase
Sure and if he stick to it being in name only then yes, but my understanding is that he's expected to officially endorse her eventually after some bargaining.
X3 Hope you guys apreciate the UK's selfless sacrifice to show the elites of the world that they need to improve.
edited 29th Jun '16 10:56:36 AM 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

edited 29th Jun '16 8:35:40 AM by CaptainCapsase