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
Yeeeeaaah, I know of General Flynn. I'd watched his testimony on CSPAN vis a vis Syria loooong before he became famous as a talking head. He still worked for Obama then, but his language and demeanor made it clear how much he loathed him for basically not being an Islamophobe. I still remember him saying no one should call it Daesh or ISIS (despite the fact that ISIS is how it is known in pop culture and Daesh is even more widespread outside of English and even among military personnel who served in theater) and call it Islamic State instead...specifically to underline how Muslim it was.
Well, that's silly because both "Daesh", "ISIS" and "ISIL" contain the phrase "Islamic State".
On empty crossroads, seek the eclipse -- for when Sol and Lua align, the lost shall find their way home.It's entirely consistent with Trump's policy of aligning himself with anyone who shares his doctrine of hate towards anything that isn't White Male America. You might call that his signature offering, which has remained consistent despite his contradictory statements on other subjects.
It's an interesting realization. All this waffling on foreign affairs and domestic economic policy and whatnot.. it's Trump trolling us. He doesn't have any policies on these issues because he doesn't care about them. It's just balls thrown at the media so they'll chase them around like trained dogs and be distracted from the core message of hate. Trump is a white nationalist.
edited 11th Jul '16 8:29:03 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"In more presidential race news, the majority (56% with a MOE of <5%) of Americans disapprove of the decision by the FBI not to recommend charges for Hillary Clinton according to an opinion Poll conducted by ABC/The Washington Post
. His was concentrated, but not exclusive to Republicans, with 35% of democrats and 60% of independents stating disapproval of the decision.
Now, since polls have Clinton handily beating Trump, it doesn't matter nearly as much as it might have in another matchup, but despite the consensus of legal scholars, public perceptions matter in a democracy from time to time. The democrats should count their blessings and start praying for a boom economy, because I seriously doubt Clinton would be able to beat a competent GOP candidate under present circumstances.
edited 11th Jul '16 8:35:19 AM by CaptainCapsase
Well, hopefully, enough of the conservative wing of the Supreme Court retires and the Senate is reclaimed. Perhaps some decent reforms can be forced down America's throat by a liberal dominated judiciary before the four years are up.
"a competent GOP candidate."
More mythical than the Loch Ness Monster.
edited 11th Jul '16 8:46:48 AM by CrimsonZephyr
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."
Or Trump comes back for round 2 after being dicked at the convention, and wins in a landslide of increasingly rarified and enraged Republican voters, and manages to poll below about 25%. Subsequently with enough democrats in the house for the notion of a Trump presidency to be unthinkable, a third party manages to pull off a major victory in congress and puts up a decent showing in the presidential election, finally putting the grand old party out of its misery. That would be a dream come true if it were the Greens, and disappointing but better than the monstrosity that is the modern GOP if it were the libertarians.
Competent in the sense of electable. Kaisich or Jeb Bush would probably be more than capable of beating Clinton in this election if they could get around the fact that there's no way for them to be on top of the ticket without doing something that would spark violence at th convention and massively depress turnout in the election.
edited 11th Jul '16 9:04:32 AM by CaptainCapsase
Kasich and Bush managed to prove that the Republican electorate has no patience for a Reasonable Authority Figure, however much a sham that description might have been in both cases (albeit for different reasons). Kasich was the most moderate of the bunch and he got his ass handed to him.
It's not a case of, "If not Trump, then maybe a good candidate." The GOP has sufficiently inflamed its base that they would vote for anything but another Romney or Bush. They've been teased enough with the scraps of red meat tossed to them and now they want blood.
Someone like Trump was all but inevitable. This isn't a situation where there's a "reasonable Republican party" out there waiting patiently for the tide of nationalism and racism to subside.
edited 11th Jul '16 8:58:49 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
If the GOP had seen the writing on the walls and rallied behind someone early (and managed to whittle things down to Trump versus one other candidate rather than splitting the vote in early primaries), they might have managed to get Rubio of Kaisich.
Note that both of them would be disastrous presidents; we'd end up invading Iran of course, rather than just playing passive aggressive and actually going through with an effort to deescelate tensions, the minimal progress towards addressing climate change would be erased, and welfare would be under attack constantly.
edited 11th Jul '16 9:03:23 AM by CaptainCapsase
That's good if you aren't an establishment Republican. (i.e. Protagonist, and I don't mean this as a personal attack) If Trump can't pull it off this cycle, subsequent madmen aren't going to fare any better, and in all likelihood they'll do considerably worse. With a dwindling electorate (it's almost exclusively old and white and poor or very rich and based on certain economic sectors), the party will eventually cease to be relevant in American politics.
![]()
There's another, deeper seeded reason why these sentiments are on the rise after all the progress that was made over the course of the past half century. Beyond the hardcore Neo-Nazis, most of these people are looking for someone to blame for the numerous problems facing their demographic. Were they see their lot in life to noticeably improve under a leader claiming immigrants and blacks and so on are not in fact responsible for their problems (by alleviating them), I suspect you'd be able to win over a fair number of them. Probably most of them.
edited 11th Jul '16 9:16:30 AM by CaptainCapsase
That's unknowable at this point, and it's entirely possible the GOP ends up pulling itself together and joins the 21st century in terms of racial issues, whereafter the democrats will be forced to seriously compete for the votes of minorities.
The best case scenario IMO is the power vacuum that would be left behind by the GOP's demise being filled by a left wing party, i.e. the Greens, though considering how well the libertarian party is doing right now, it might go back to being center versus center right as opposed to center versus reactionary extremist right.
In the former scenario, pretty much all of the desperately needed legislation regarding social justice issues would be passed unanimously, and we could potentially see serious action to address climate change if the energy lobby insists on staying aboard the sinking ship that is the GOP in this scenario. Such efforts needs to begin happening soon if we are to avoid a cataclysm.
We're that to come to pass, I'd be willing at last to express a tentative optimism for the future of our species.
edited 11th Jul '16 9:25:58 AM by CaptainCapsase
I find that a bit hard to believe that a Romney-like figure couldn't win. Nearly all (maybe one exception) of my conservative acquaintances and conservative talk shows I listen to hate Trump's guts (what passes for pro-Trump sentiment is "I hate Trump, but I hate Hillary even more"). Keep in mind that Trump has a historically low approval rating among the Republican party.
I doubt American politics are going to shift leftwards very soon, for the simple reason that's there's still a market for rightist ideals. Hillary is also usually viewed by many (particularly the right) as the living embodiment of "everything wrong with politics".
Most likely, if the Republican Party fell, it'd be replaced by the Libertarian Party. The Libertarians have a good chance of filling that void, since they're anti-establishment and socially liberal. This would amount to a sort of changing of roles between the right and left in America: We'd have establishment leftists challenged by anti-authoritarian rightists. In fact, I'd say this is already happening.
edited 11th Jul '16 9:33:27 AM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34Libertarians tend to grossly overestimate their support among the general populace. It's the ideology of a few deadly serious nutballs and a lot of naive college students.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Right now, that's the case, but I get a feeling they're going to grow. Anti-establishment rhetoric is becoming increasingly more common, I've noticed (in fact, I would argue that's a good part of what led to Trump's continued relevance-"he's the not the establishment")
Disenchantment with the establishment does not axiomatically lead to, "Toss out government and let individuals decide for themselves — it's a free for all in the free market, caveat emptor!" What you get is a lot of bandwagon voters hopping into the Libertarian Party's camp because they see the posters over the door and think, "They're sticking it to the man; I'm in!"
I watched some of the footage of their convention... those people make me deeply uncomfortable because they appear to believe in the Chaotic Stupid model of society. It's a fundamentally broken concept; you can't run a nation of 300 million that way.
edited 11th Jul '16 9:41:32 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"@Protagonist: Millenials favor democrats 60:40, and that figure has been growing substantially as the representatives of America's right have spent their entire adult lives seemingly doing everything in their power to engender a violent hatred of the right among youth voters, and unless Ronald Reagen rises from his grave (metaphorically), there's little prospect of going back at this point, and things get worse for the right the younger your sample is.
When looking at electoral maps, it's even more dire; if millenials were the dominant voting block, the GOP would have a few Midwestern states and some southern states; everything else would be untenable for them, relegating them to a dwindling regional party based in rural white states.
edited 11th Jul '16 10:02:24 AM by CaptainCapsase

Flynn seems to be the type that sees everything through a security lense. His time in JSOC and DIA really haven't done him any favours. If the article is correct, then it seems that fighting against Obama's Syria policy has effectively made him go bonkers.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele