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
Capsace, you fail to recognize several fundamental points, which determine the outcome of your little crusade:
- There are many issues facing both our nation and our planet.
- Not everyone agrees on what the most important issues are.
- In a democratic system, the people who disagree with you get a say.
- If you insist on perfect purity of action, you will accomplish nothing, because the majority will see you as a dangerous radical and will not allow you to accomplish your goals.
Perhaps most importantly, at least here on TV Tropes, you've been cautioned about turning this topic into a personal soapbox, and even been suspended for it once. If we have to do it again, there won't be any more chances. So ... chill out.
edited 13th Aug '16 5:45:07 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Believe it or not, I agree with all of those points. Moreover, as I pointed out, we can and do work towards addressing multiple issues at once, and rarely if ever are in a true "A or B" Sadistic Choice scenario. However, for the purposes of gauging the relative importance of issues, the rational method of determining that is based on which option is preferred if only one is feasible.
Moreover, I have not ever really cared about purity of action. What I do care about is intent, since that is what will guide decision-making, and intent is best proven by observing a person's actions in a context where they are not restricted.
I'm not trying to offend anyone, just debating positions.
edited 13th Aug '16 5:57:57 PM by CaptainCapsase
With Global Warming, I feel the problem will most likely sort itself out what with rising gas prices and what have you. I think the most practical solution is probably to loosen up restrictions on nuclear energy and start using that more often.
Leviticus 19:34
By the time gas starts getting more expensive- which is more or less the definition of post-peak oil-we're almost certainly already past the point of no return, and will be facing an anthropogenic catastrophe that could kill billions of people (famine and war being the two biggest causative agents); hence why climate scientists are so adamant about us needing to move away from fossil fuels as soon as possible.
edited 13th Aug '16 6:08:04 PM by CaptainCapsase
I was just looking into Trumps comment about self appointed poll monitors to see if there were already any ramification and I found something interesting. It seems that Trump may have violated the RNC's consent decree regarding voter intimidation.
https://electionlawblog.org/?p=85289
This decree has been in place since 1982 and prevents the RNC from engaging in voter intimidation in the name of fighting voter fraud. Now I don't think that anything will come of this (aren't the Republicans getting away with it in Georgia?) because anyone seeking to do something about this would have to prove that Trump is an "agent" of the RNC and as the Washington Post points out, that could be pretty iffy. Still Trump's possible violation combined with his high visibility could mean this decree and the reason it exists could be brought to public attention and cause trouble for the Republicans.
@Fighteer: I think Capsase has very valid concerns about the Democrats that many people, at least a good chunk of Democratic voters, have. You yourself had said before that the political parties other than the Democrats are various levels of stupid and insane. Having only one competent party is not healthy for a nation. While I am now satisfied with the direction that the Democrats are taking even if it's not all I wanted, I can understand why others may not be satisfied.
Wizard Needs Food BadlyI seriously doubt Trump cares about his party.
I agree, for the most part. It's rather frustrating for me (a Republican) that Hillary Clinton has to be easily the sanest and most competent person in the race.
When was the last time America really had a choice? Mc Cain/Obama was pretty even (pre sarah palin) but after the bush years the democrats could've put Nixon's head on the ticket and won.
Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?I think the GOP has heartily proven it's never had that level of foresight (see the Southern Strategy) nor any inclination towards introspection until Trump turned all their prejudiced subtext into text.
An article about the GOP and how it's trying to cope with Trump:
GOP could be near Trump breaking point; frustration abounds: http://bigstory.ap.org/2faea10578944e11be20eb4824cd29ad&utm_source=android_app&utm_medium=copy_to_clipboard&utm_campaign=share
edited 13th Aug '16 6:50:25 PM by sgamer82
America did have a choice. There isn't some Omniscient Council picking all our candidates for us per say (there kind of is, but even those people are elected by us).
Leviticus 19:34What Trump has been saying kind of reminds me of a scene from the C.S. Lewis book Out of the Silent Planet. There's a bit right near the end of the book where Ransom, the protagonist is asked to translate the villain's speech into the language of Malacandra (Mars). Ransom is pretty bad at speaking the language, so the villain's eloquent speech is rendered down to the absolute simplest level: that humanity's destiny is so important that all other life in the universe should just die, and that the other life should be happy to do so.
Trump's rhetoric is pretty much just what the GOP has been saying for years, dressed up in fancy language and dog-whistles, but Trump's vocabulary is so basic that he can't talk on that level and just renders it down to the absolute most basic level.
In a just world, Hillary Clinton will win by a massive margin not seen since Reagan, and the Republicans will use the massive loss to redefine themselves to be a more moderate party.
Wizard Needs Food Badly
(x5) Speaking of the Southern Strategy, this election gives me the feeling that the GOP establishment may not be able to hold on to their Southern white base much longer. They're tired of being taken for granted by establishment Republicans and never having promises delivered to them, so the Tea Party wing of the party turns to an outsider like Trump. If Trump loses (and should none of the voter intimidation he's talking about happen, I'm pretty sure he will), you can expect that disappointed base won't just sit there and take it.
So, that makes me think of three questions should Trump lose: What will his supporters do, form their own party? Should the GOP lose the South, what becomes of them? And how are the Democrats doing in all of this?
538 actually did a thing on what a Clinton landslide could look like.[1]
edited 13th Aug '16 7:04:16 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranWhether or not Trump cares about the damage he's doing is irrelevant. My point is that public knowledge of this consent decree is just more bad juju the Republican party doesn't need.
RE: Sanders' recent home purchase
One of the sites I frequent (an image board that's arguably a step above 4chan in behavior) has one guy that's vehemently anti-Clinton to the point of falling under the Sour Grapes trope, while others have belittled Sanders and his supporters constantly - the current tactic is to imply that Bernie profited personally from the Primary election and/or endorsement of Clinton and using the purchase of the new home as evidence. Which tack they take depends on whether they're pro-Clinton or pro-Trump.
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"@Sagmer: In fairness the GOP probably would have gotten away with the Southern Strategy were it not for the influx of Latino immigrants, both illegal and legal, and the Wall Street Crash of 2008.
Also, as long as their is a large White majority in the South, the GOP will hold it. These people have nowhere else to go.
edited 13th Aug '16 7:23:01 PM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.True, but it's a chicken and the egg scenario. The GOP base probably would not have thrown such a fit and nominated Trump had they not been panicking at the prospect of a majority minority America that they nominated someone as boorish and bigoted as Trump. And even if they did, in the long term the GOP would not be nearly as fucked as they are now.
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.

Now in reality, we aren't facing that kind of A or B choice, and really never are. Both issues can be addressed simultaneously, but in a hypothetical world where we can only choose one or the other, the choice is obvious.
edited 13th Aug '16 5:39:23 PM by CaptainCapsase