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
Republicans hate the environment and have a vested interest in keeping coal plants running. For a lot of areas coal is their entire livelihood and thus will vote with them.
Clinton is going to take steps to shut down coal production in the US because of the extreme environmental damage it's causing.
Oh really when?Republicans don't "hate the environment" per say (they are not Captain Planet villains). However, they consider the economic benefits of fossil fuel use to be too good to pass up and as such tend to be very willfully dismissive of criticisms of fossil fuel usage.
Leviticus 19:34I dunno, I saw plenty of right-wingers worldwide hate environmentalists and "peope who ride bicycles" for being "untraditional" and "uncharacteristic of the national character", or something along those lines. Somehow liking fatty foods (especially with lots of red meat), hunting, driving fuel-guzzling vehicles, and ingesting (unfancy) alcohol, seem like more of a national character thing. Unless they're French, then the alcohol should be good wine if it fits the budget.
” Under the previous government a specific left-wing policy concept was followed with which the world must move in only one direction, the Marxist model – to a new mix of cultures and races, a world of cyclists and vegetarians who only focus on renewable energies and fight against any form of religion. This has nothing to do with traditional Polish values. ”
That's funny, I always thought that Marxists were all about man-over-nature, giant power plants and dams, irrigation projects that dry out entire oceans, and just exploiting the shit out of Nature for the good of the People. Treehugging is supposed to be more of a Romantic/Neoliberal/Reactionary/Anarchist sort of thing?
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.Well, the GOP party line is that the threat of climate change is either greatly exaggerated or simply a conspiracy of liberal scientists, so naturally they don't really place much if any value on that at all. And if you actually believe that, then obviously things like coal are simply win-win. In fact it's so obvious that the liberal perspective on the issue doesn't even make the slightest bit of sense at face value, which is partly why thinking of it as a conspiracy options seems so appealing.
edited 23rd Jul '16 10:24:25 AM by Clarste
The only problem with Clinton isn't a problem with Theoretical President Clinton, it's a problem with Presidential Candidate Clinton. Because she's been around as long as she has, the shit the Republican party throws at her isn't as patently bullshit as the shit they threw at Obama. Obama was a relative newcomer, so they didn't have decades worth of dirt to dig up. They had to resort to inanities like "he's secretly a Muslim" and "he's not a natural-born American citizen", which anyone with functioning brain cells and the willingness to use them could tell was nonsense. With Hillary, their attacks are much more plausible. She's corrupt, she's incompetent, she violated security protocol, she's part of the Establishment instead of a Political Outsider (never mind that that's true of every candidate, even the ones that claim otherwise), etc etc etc.
However, just because they're more believable doesn't mean they're more true. Hillary Clinton is only human and she's by no means perfect, but she's still an excellent candidate. There's very little I've heard from her in terms of policy positions that I dislike, and I've already mentioned her impressive resume in terms of experience. On a personal level, I actually think she's rather likeable — not in a "it'd be cool to have a beer with her and talk about random shit" way like Obama, but in the sense that she comes off as a fairly normal, relatable person who can actually interact with the average person on the street without being cringe-inducingly awkward, an insensitive jackass, or a script-reading robot. I could see having a real conversation with her, as a person rather than as a candidate or a politician. I wouldn't feel bad about her being the face of the country for the next four or eight years.
You'll notice that none of that is "well, she's bad, but she's not as bad as Trump". There's basically nothing about her that makes her a bad candidate except for the endless amount of shit that the Republicans have been throwing at her for decades — and that's only an electability concern, not something that brings into question how well she'll actually do the job should she win. Now, electability is an important consideration (running someone who would be perfect as President is pointless if they'll never actually be able to win an election), but I think her supposed unlikability is exaggerated. She quite soundly trounced Sanders in the primary, after all — so people certainly appear to be willing to vote for her even if Sanders had much lower disapproval ratings.
tldr, Clinton is worth voting for her on her own merits, not just as the lesser evil compared to Trump.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.So I've been checking in on the DNC email controversy now and then, and just about the worst thing that seems to have been in the emails (which have so far been read) involved some DNC staffer or another suggesting putting the screws to Sanders on his atheism. That's reprehensible for many reasons, but the reaction to it has been completely out of scale. This was probably someone paid to look for angles of attack, and that's traditionally been a legitimate one in American politics. You'd really expect someone in a campaign against him to suggest it at some point regardless of the candidate they were working for, wouldn't you?
"I have no fear, for fear is the little death that kills me over and over. Without fear, I die but once."I can't help but think that talking about her as if her most valuable or even only valuable trait is that she's not Trump is actually helping her chances.
Then again, pretending like she never had any enthusiastic supporters to begin with has always seemed weird to me.
edited 23rd Jul '16 10:32:41 AM by LSBK
![]()
![]()
The issue is that the DNC itself is doing this. Even if they never carried these plans out this stuff is sketchy as hell and I think the relevant people should be removed from power as a show of good faith.
Fortunately it appears Clinton was ignorant of them helping her in this way. If she specifically asked them to discredit Sanders there'd be hell to pay.
Maybe the slow drip of more emails does more to overshadow the convention?
Also, somewhat hyperbolic, but the tone of the GOP this time around has been making it harder not to get pulled into orbit above planet Godwin. http://warontherocks.com/2016/07/the-real-reasons-the-gop-convention-in-cleveland-should-unsettle-you/
edited 23rd Jul '16 10:47:21 AM by Artificius
"I have no fear, for fear is the little death that kills me over and over. Without fear, I die but once."

Republicans are generally skeptical of criticisms towards fossil fuels, and believe we should be utilizing coal more frequently (since it's really cheap energy)
edited 23rd Jul '16 10:00:27 AM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34