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
The hardcore crowd is going to turn on Bernie for being a shill for the system, but those people are probably the ones who were never going to vote (at least, not for a mainstream candidate) in the first place. The people who supported Bernie for his policies rather than as an "outsider" candidate have largely already moved on to supporting Clinton anyway. Bernie throwing in with Clinton is a good move and will probably get a handful more votes for Clinton, but it's not going to be a game-changer at this point.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.![]()
I doubt it. She's a runner up candidate to a lot of people from a party most people don't even know/care about.
![]()
![]()
Hasn't that always been the consensus? It seems the percentage of "Bernie of Bust" has been going down as things get closer, which isn't surprising.
edited 11th Jul '16 12:57:44 PM by LSBK
Turkey, in my limited understanding (mostly by way of Anthony Bourdain), actively went out of its way to oppress its local Kurds and other minorities. Simply identifying as a Kurd was criminal; the government wanted them to assimilate.
That much is changing: last year the Kurdish party won a majority in the parliamentary election but were unable to form a coalition government and the president called for new elections. The president and his nationalist party are trying to change the constitution so that he could have power for life, while at the same time passing laws that would push Turkey further toward the fundamentalist side, away from its history of secularism (but possibly only as political point-scoring, not because he's devout).
edited 11th Jul '16 1:11:21 PM by Elle
I'd image that's because they're the only ones who haven't accepted the results.
I remember early on for both Clinton and Sanders supporters the general sentiment was "I prefer [insert candidate] but the other one is fine too." And that type of person probably isn't likely to keep going on about Bernie now, I'd imagine.
Right... the "Bernie or Bust" voices are most of what's left of the people who regularly talk about him. Mainly I hear less about Bernie and more about "crooked Hillary". Lots of people buy that narrative, which is painful to listen to and very difficult to contradict because it involves proving a negative. "Both of our candidates suck," is much more common now than, "Bernie was robbed!"
edited 11th Jul '16 1:13:03 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
I know of one on an image board that bleats incessantly about how Clinton stole the election, how Sanders can still pull off a victory, etc. Even though I support Sanders' ideas, I still know when the writing's on the wall.
And regarding the X-phobia thing, Cracked has a pretty good article where they interviewed a former internment camp prisoner
, Kiyo Sato (who was 18 at the time), and there's this gem from Army Gen. John DeWitt, emphasis mine to underscore the Insane Troll Logic that was in full force back then, and is trying to make a comeback now.
edited 11th Jul '16 1:13:09 PM by ironballs16
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"You can use that reasoning for literally anything. Like, "Canada could nuke Washington D.C. any day now. It hasn't happened yet because they're just biding their time."
That makes almost exactly the same amount of sense.
And anyway, that idea you see popping up sometimes of people mass immigrating before a war specifically to help their home country doesn't actually happen. You might get the occasional individual, but the logistics are insane and no country would be stupid enough to send off all of their mindlessly patriotic people, because those would be the only people who would even consider going through with it.
![]()
Replace Japanese with Muslims and you have our right wing today. The main difference is that there have been attacks, although they are all, so far, of the homegrown insurgent variety and thus exactly those people who are most likely to be converted to violence because of the hate against them.
You do occasionally see rumors of mass migrations intended to create disruption in a target society, but those usually presage attempts at vote rigging rather than militarized violence. Crimea is a prime example of that. We also did it to some Pacific territories, as I recall, including Hawaii. Send a bunch of migrants, nationalize 'em, then have 'em vote for annexation. Voila.
edited 11th Jul '16 1:19:54 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Indeed — there's a reason the Flag of Hawaii
contains that of a foreign nation...
Eh. 9/11 was the ostensible justification for all the hate, but it was not similar to Pearl Harbor in any other significant way. It's a gross mistake to compare territorial warfare to terrorism.
edited 11th Jul '16 1:28:08 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
His stance on the matter has not seemed that coherent to me; it's more of a "dey tooked our jerbs and raped our womens" thing than a "they're here to annex the U.S. for Mexico" thing.
It seems more about cultural warfare than about territorial integrity.
edited 11th Jul '16 1:32:56 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Wait, what? I haven't been paying attention to Trump, but did he seriously imply that Mexico was going to invade the US? I just sort of naturally assumed that, assuming they were actually sending us their criminals, it would be because they don't want to have criminals in their own country. That would have made the tiniest bit of sense, at least.
"Two deputies, shooter, dead in shooting at Michigan courthouse: sheriff" - http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0ZR2D8
They're going to keep happening.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

So, there are now rumblings about Sanders endorsing Clinton tomorrow in New Hampshire.