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
It's still heavily unlikely, and Utah would be the one case where turnout against Trump would not translate to downticket victories for Democrats, the voters there would just be making a statement, although if enough of them flipped to Gary Johnson or just plain didn't vote, Hillary could be in striking distance there. Or Johnson himself for that matter, which would still deny Trump the E Vs.
@Ghilz I know that, this is also a problem for users with multiple devices or users who move from hotspot to hotspot.
@ Discar Those sign on also require every single user on the network to be registered in the company, which is simple if you're talking about a limited number of users but it becomes a clusterfuck at national level.
@Medinoc proposed one of the the easiest and least invasive way to implement those, though most parenting websites already block websites with adult content, which is easy because most of them have easily recognized html tags that identify them as such.
Also those I Ds sing on are implemented at the transport layer, which puts the identification of the user in a server that gathers the user's ID and then authenticates it to allow the user access to the internet as a whole. For that to work you need a robust server that is physically close to the devices it is authenticating and you need a very powerful server to handle all the users accessing it.
At government level you'd work at the Link Layer which would create a massive bottleneck, that would basically force each device connected to the internet, like every cellphone, notebook, touchpad and computer to send a access requisition to be validated first and then sent back and refreshed if needed to. This amounts to Google like clusters worth of authentication servers to handle the data spread across the United States just to deal with the US internet traffic alone.
And lets be frank, having all this trouble just to prevent children from watching porn is stupidly counterproductive, expensive and more often than not it is a way to implement both internet surveillance and censorship. It is much easier just to tell the parents to stop asking the state to do the parenting for them and tell them to install some parenting control softwares on their devices.
Besides there are parents who don't think that their children seeing porn is such big deal anyway, and I am pretty sure the people proposing those bans and restriction at one point or another borrowed their fathers playboy/hustler stash before reaching the legal age.
edited 2nd Aug '16 7:12:50 AM by AngelusNox
Inter arma enim silent leges<Peaks behind the lurker wall>
@Utah: I've been looking at the projected polls at fivethirtyeight
and 270towin
and they show Trump not holding a terribly strong support. Only one of the reported polls have Trump at >40%, the rest stay in the 30% range. Of course, both sites have Utah as a safe republican state so maybe the stats are an outlier. Now if you excuse me...
<Returns to lurking>
We are all made of star stuff. Very, very weird star stuff.They shouldn't be saying that. We are Americans. We hear the word "war" and we start prepping the bombers.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.I don't get it, what is he saying that is even remotely dumb?
I've been looking up Biden's stuff. This guy is solid and sensible, and calls shit out when he sees it. I really like him.
On another topic, from The Atlantic: "Clinton, for the love of God, stop fucking lying! This election is yours to lose, don't let Donald Trump win by presenting bullshit!"
That’s wrong and she knows it, which makes it a lie.
“Clinton is cherry-picking statements by Comey to preserve her narrative about the unusual setup of a private email server,” wrote Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler, who awarded Clinton the maximum four “Pinocchios” for her whopper. “This allows her to skate past the more disturbing findings of the FBI investigation.”
Read here if you want to know about the FBI’s findings. In addition, her actions were an assault on the Freedom of Information Act and the hallowed concept of legislative oversight.
edited 2nd Aug '16 9:30:45 AM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.Obama declares Trump unfit to be president.
I particularly liked this quote, to the GOP: "If you are repeatedly having to say what Trump says is unacceptable, why are you still endorsing him?"
He nailed it. But of course, the sacred party line is more important than the person you elected having constant diarrhea of the mouth.
Trump's supporters have gotten a taste of political power, and if their candidate loses, not all of them will slink back to their homes and stash their KKK hoods in their attics. They'll make trouble for a lot of GOP candidates for quite some time to come.
edited 2nd Aug '16 9:42:50 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"OMG, please don't post direct links to Fox News without an excerpt. I don't want to give them the dignity of more pageviews.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The best example I can think of that off hand was (IIRC) during the 2012 election cycle, where he was speaking to a predominantly black audience, and he said something like "the GOP wants to put you in chains". The media was all aflutter about good ol' gaffey Joe, accidentally making a comment that could be seen as a reference to slavery in front of a black audience.
Accidentally my ass. He knew exactly what he was doing, and it was entirely deliberate. It was basically a left-wing dog whistle: he was saying "Republicans are racist shitheads" without actually saying it. And it was glorious.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.It's not that blatant about it, obviously, but that's the general feel.
If I had been Trump or the GOP, I would have gone with that, pretty much verbatim. "As I said, some, I assume, are good people."
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.…
While I disagree with her on many issues, I will vote for Mrs. Clinton. I will be hopeful and resolute in my belief that being a good American who loves his country is far more important than parties or winning or losing.”
WHOOOO! Vive la revolucion!
I hope many more will follow in his footsteps.
And, while I'm being hopeful, I would love to hear, "And let's also get Judge Garland approved already! F*ck's sake, we've propagated a lot of party bullshit, haven't we?"
edited 2nd Aug '16 10:20:05 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Actually there have been Republicans who have said let there be an up or down vote in the past. It just doesn't matter because the decision to do so or not lies with Mc Connell.
Trump has claimed that the election will be rigged against him, without offering any evidence of course.
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/world/donald-trump-election-rigged-1.3703650
He's basically ensuring a riot if he loses.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Warren Buffett Takes On Donald Trump at Hillary Clinton Rally in Nebraska
At a raucous rally, the Berkshire Hathaway chairman and chief executive sarcastically mocked Mr. Trump, disputing the New York businessman’s claim that he can’t release his tax returns because of a continuing Internal Revenue Service audit. Mr. Buffett called the GOP nominee’s standoff with the family of a fallen soldier the “final straw” and asked Mr. Trump: “Have you no sense of decency, sir?”
Mrs. Clinton came to this Republican state, aiming to compete in an Omaha-area congressional district that could deliver one additional electoral vote to the Democratic nominee. Omaha’s best-known billionaire sought to boost Mrs. Clinton’s prospects with an enthusiastic show of support and a scathing critique of her Republican rival.
Mr. Buffett called on Mr. Trump to release his tax records and pledged to do the same, saying he would meet the New York businessman “any place, any time” so both men could field questions about their income-tax returns. Mr. Trump has cited the IRS audit as the reason for breaking with tradition and declining to make his taxes public, but Mr. Buffett said he, too, was under audit but that nothing precluded the release of their returns.
“He’s not afraid because of the IRS,” Mr. Buffett said of Mr. Trump. “He’s afraid because of you.”
The trips reflect both campaigns’ calculations that if the race winds up close, even one electoral vote could make a difference.
That is what’s at stake for Mrs. Clinton in Nebraska—one electoral vote. In Maine, Mr. Trump may have a shot at a single electoral vote, too. That’s because these states (and only these two states), allocate their electoral votes by congressional district.
So, while both states have additional votes in the Electoral College, each party sees its best chance as picking off a single congressional district that is more liberal or conservative than the rest of its state.
That formulation gives Democrats a shot at the Omaha-area district in a state that is near-certain to vote Republican overall and gives Republicans a chance in northern Maine’s vast and largely rural Second Congressional District.
Mrs. Clinton is the first Democratic presidential nominee to campaign in the Cornhusker State since Franklin D. Roosevelt came through on a whistle-stop tour in 1936, the state party said. The last time the state voted for a Democratic presidential candidate was in 1964.
Mrs. Clinton’s short trip—and her TV ads—serve a dual purpose, as Omaha’s media market reaches into western Iowa, a traditional battleground state.
Mr. Synhorst predicted a “tough race” for Nebraska’s Second Congressional District and said he was intrigued by Mrs. Clinton’s decision to campaign there. But he said her visit could backfire by galvanizing GOP support for Mr. Trump. “It’s invigorating our base,” he said.
Many Nebraskans will reflexively vote for Mr. Trump simply because they are Republicans, said Vincent Powers, chairman of the Nebraska Democratic Party. But he said the GOP nominee could struggle with some voters because in Nebraska, “people are nice” and “they don’t like bullies.”
“We don’t have mountains. We don’t have oceans. We have great people,” Mr. Powers said. “Donald Trump is just not a fit here.”
Democrat National Committee CEO Amy Dacey has resigned sources say.
Huh, I thought I got it right the first time.
edited 2nd Aug '16 11:21:33 AM by tclittle
"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."

Utah would have to vote blue and the last time they did that the internet hadn't been invented. The linked site doesn't give us any info on the poll so unless a few more from recognizable pollsters show up I'll call it an outlier.
Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?