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

GameGuruGG Vampire Hunter from Castlevania (Before Recorded History)
Vampire Hunter
#129451: Jul 9th 2016 at 3:42:15 PM

[up] To be fair, the alternative if Clinton was indicted and couldn't run for President anymore would have been to choose a Democrat who didn't even run in the primaries. While Sanders may not have been the most ideal candidate for the Democrat voting base, he ran in the primaries and was the second-place candidate. An indictment of Clinton would have been a lose-lose situation for the Democrats, but Sanders as the nominee would have been the better choice than someone who didn't run in the Democratic primaries.

That being said, Clinton was never going to be indicted, but when the Republican candidate is Donald Trump, the Democrats need to have every contingency accounted for. Whatever happens with the Democrats, good or bad, someone like Donald Trump cannot become President of the United States.

Wizard Needs Food Badly
RavenWilder Since: Apr, 2009
#129452: Jul 9th 2016 at 3:53:39 PM

Wasn't there some guy named O'Malley who was in the race for a little while?

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#129453: Jul 9th 2016 at 3:55:52 PM

I think he dropped out after Iowa.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
GameGuruGG Vampire Hunter from Castlevania (Before Recorded History)
Vampire Hunter
#129454: Jul 9th 2016 at 4:02:14 PM

Yeah, no one cares about Martin O'Malley. At least, Sanders won primaries. =P

Wizard Needs Food Badly
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#129455: Jul 9th 2016 at 5:28:22 PM

Viewers of The Wire care! [lol]

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#129456: Jul 9th 2016 at 6:07:36 PM

If Clinton was indicted, she'd just keep running. Once she makes President it's kind of hard to put her away. (Hell, there have even been candidates who ran from jail.)

edited 9th Jul '16 6:08:18 PM by Ramidel

nightwyrm_zero Since: Apr, 2010
#129457: Jul 9th 2016 at 6:31:19 PM

Is there anything in US law that says a convict can't be POTUS?

Ekuran Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
#129458: Jul 9th 2016 at 6:32:26 PM

[up][up][up]Don't think anyone wants Littlefinger on the Iron Throne as President.

[up]Pretty sure they can't vote in most states, at least.

edited 9th Jul '16 6:33:54 PM by Ekuran

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#129459: Jul 9th 2016 at 7:16:23 PM

I was talking about this with my friends earlier. There is no law barring a person who is under criminal indictment, or even has been convicted of a crime, from running for President, winning an election, or taking office. There is a hypothetical world in which Hillary Clinton could be indicted for security violations, win in November, and then be immune to that prosecution until/unless impeached and convicted in Congress.

edited 9th Jul '16 7:16:57 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Falrinn Since: Dec, 2014
#129460: Jul 9th 2016 at 7:17:59 PM

[up][up][up] I believe the only way a person can become disqualified to become President (as opposed to never being qualified in the first place) is losing their citizenship, which is pretty difficult to do without voluntarily renouncing it. I believe there are a handful of odd cases like serving in a foreign military, but they are few and far between.

Honestly I prefer it this way. Since in most Presidential elections you either have the sitting President or someone who has been at least implicitly endorsed (an in this case, explicitly endorsed) by the sitting President in the race, it should not be easy for anyone to become legally disqualified.

[up][up] If by convict you mean prisoner then they yes, can't vote in most states. However most states allow people who are on probation or parole to vote. About a dozen or so restrict people on probation or parole, and there a couple of oddball states that allow all convicts to vote (even from the inside of a prison cell) or bar convicts from voting beyond their sentence. I know in Virginia a felon's voting rights can only be restored by direct order from the governor, but I believe that's a unique situation.

edited 9th Jul '16 7:19:17 PM by Falrinn

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#129461: Jul 9th 2016 at 7:54:03 PM

[up][up] IIRC, given congress acts as the jury in impeachment proceedings against a President, if the GOP retained the senate, Clinton might very well have ended up being impeached if she'd been indicted unless her Vice President was even less desirable for the GOP to have in office (Sanders or Warren).

edited 9th Jul '16 7:56:55 PM by CaptainCapsase

megarockman from The Sixth Borough (Experienced Trainee)
#129462: Jul 9th 2016 at 8:02:18 PM

2/3 is required for a conviction, though - could Republicans get 67 seats in an election that Clinton wins the presidency?

The damned queen and the relentless knight.
HallowHawk Since: Feb, 2013
#129463: Jul 9th 2016 at 8:14:08 PM

[up][up][up][up] What about how Call Of Duty Black Ops 2 had David Petraeus being Secretary of Defense in 2025?

[nja]

edited 9th Jul '16 8:14:25 PM by HallowHawk

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#129464: Jul 9th 2016 at 8:14:17 PM

[up][up]Probably not.

[up][up][up]Or they could immediately trump up charges against the VP and try to stage a coup against the White House and install the Speaker. I mean, it would almost certainly lead to mass protests and probably civil unrest...

edited 9th Jul '16 8:14:59 PM by Rationalinsanity

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#129465: Jul 9th 2016 at 8:18:42 PM

There's another hypothetical world in which Hillary Clinton, having not been indicted, and cleared of all potential charges, takes office in February and immediately faces articles of impeachment drafted by a hostile Republican House of Representatives. In theory, they could do this for her entire term: tie up the proceedings of Congress with an infinite series of impeachments.

edited 9th Jul '16 8:19:32 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#129466: Jul 9th 2016 at 8:28:10 PM

One would hope that would result in the decimation of the GOP in the mid-terms but....

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
ironballs16 Since: Jul, 2009 Relationship Status: Owner of a lonely heart
#129467: Jul 9th 2016 at 8:53:56 PM

So if civil unrest wasn't bad enough, relations between the US and Russia are starting to break down.

First, we've got allegations of widespread harassment from Russian agents towards US diplomats in Europe in what's being dubbed a "gray war".

Second, both the US and Russia expelled two diplomats from the opposing country, the US in retaliation for an attack on a diplomat by a Russian police officer (gif in the link), and Russia did so in retaliation for the retaliation. Fucking hell, it's like I'm playing World of Warcraft again, with "reported!" "reported for reporting!" "Reported for reporting a report!" ad nauseum.

"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#129468: Jul 9th 2016 at 8:56:26 PM

They've been broken down for a while. Most of the goodwill we had built up evaporated with South Ossetian War and now this business in Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea. The Cold War has been very much back on.

edited 9th Jul '16 9:00:36 PM by LeGarcon

Oh really when?
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#129469: Jul 9th 2016 at 8:57:29 PM

So I guess Russia considers the Vienna Convention to be a suggestion now?

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#129470: Jul 9th 2016 at 10:00:14 PM

[up][up] The US more or less set this crisis in motion by violating an agreement with Russia ( thanks HW) not to expand NATO beyond Germany back in the 90's; that put a nail in any hopes of peaceful relations between the US and Russia.

edited 9th Jul '16 10:00:49 PM by CaptainCapsase

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#129471: Jul 9th 2016 at 10:17:01 PM

Reports of shots fired at the San Antonio police HQ, but no reports of causalities.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/10/us/san-antonio-police-headquarters-shooting/index.html?adkey=bn

[down]Fixed.

edited 9th Jul '16 10:33:10 PM by Rationalinsanity

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
AdricDePsycho Rock on, Gold Dust Woman from Never Going Back Again Since: Oct, 2014 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
Rock on, Gold Dust Woman
#129472: Jul 9th 2016 at 10:24:53 PM

San Francisco or San Antonio?

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?
TerminusEst from the Land of Winter and Stars Since: Feb, 2010
#129473: Jul 9th 2016 at 10:39:52 PM

[up]x3

I'm fairly certain that's a myth. There is no formal agreement between the two countries, and never was.

edited 9th Jul '16 10:45:02 PM by TerminusEst

Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#129474: Jul 10th 2016 at 12:32:27 AM

I'd like to think that issues with Russia are more a result of Putin's crappy human rights record and his "make Russia great again" hawkishness. :P

unknowing from somewhere.. Since: Mar, 2014
#129475: Jul 10th 2016 at 12:36:28 AM

[up]is there any moment in history where Russia didnt have crappy human right record before? I mean there asumption that Russia have one form of evil empire or another in all is life

"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"

Total posts: 417,856
Top