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 only thing that's remotely interesting about the video is that it links to a website that supposedly matches people who would vote Democrat in a certain state with people who would vote Republican in the same state, to make sure that both people can vote Libertarian without it simply being one less vote for your second choice. Since you're matched with someone who has the opposite second choice, together it's one less vote for each mainstream party and two more votes for the Libertarian party.
Of course, Gary Johnson is a lunatic almost as bad as Trump (just on economic policy rather than social policy), so even if the site is completely legit and above-board (which I am deeply skeptical about, given that such and obviously pro-Libertarian site has little reason not to send every vote they possibly can to Johnson, and it's largely impossible to confirm that the site is legit and that the people using it aren't feeding it crap), presenting Johnson as preferable to Clinton is laughable.
I'd be curious to know if Johnson is actually drawing votes equally from both the left and the right, as the video claims. I very much suspect that it draws more from the right than from the left.
edited 27th Aug '16 3:11:52 PM by NativeJovian
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.edited 27th Aug '16 3:24:48 PM by NativeJovian
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.Far as I remember, 538's conclusion based on comparing polls with and without third-party candidates is that (for now anyway) Clinton is losing more votes to third-party candidates than Trump by about 1 percentage point. This was several weeks ago, though, so it may or may not still be valid.
The damned queen and the relentless knight.Sure but that's with the Greens included as well, the Libertarians aren't the only independents. The same way the many Libertarians lean Republican many Greens lean Dem.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranWith Melania Trump, I think part of the criticism or at least defense of the criticism from liberals (myself included) is because how early on, Michelle Obama got a lot of generally racist criticism for not fitting the ideal of what a first lady is supposed to be. And it took the form of accusations about her being low class (despite being a well educated lawyer) and dressing in an inappropriate manner (wearing sleeveless outfits).
And to this end, it's ironic that Melania seems like a poor fit for first lady, what with her questionable English language skills and background that at the very least is unprecedented. It's a nice parallel with how most of the false accusations leveled against Obama by conservatives (unqualified, racist, in the pocket of foreign enemies) actually apply to Trump.
I mean slut shaming is bad of course and I don't think it was right that the New York Post had a cover using a nude picture of her. However, while I can't really put my finger on it, I'd say that the First Lady is supposed to have a certain amount of class which she lacks. One thing is that while there's nothing wrong with not being a native English speaker, she doesn't come across as being fluent, which does seem like an implicit requirement. If nothing else, she has poor taste in husbands.
edited 27th Aug '16 5:54:21 PM by Hodor2
People claiming Michelle Obama wasn't classy enough to be first lady doesn't justify talking about how Melania Trump isn't classy enough to be first lady unless one of those people was Melania Trump.
Nor do I think the accusations are actually relevant. Neither Michelle nor Melania were ever running for office. If you want to take a shot at Donald Trump, take a shot at Donald Trump, not what his wife allegedly did for a living. It's not like there's a shortage of targets, for crying out loud.
That's true.
I guess the argument I'm making is directed against the (hypothetical?) people who criticized Michelle Obama but praise Melania Trump.
I have to acknowledge that I don't have the impression that Donald Trump himself is one of those people, nor is Melania as far as I know. So yeah, not really fair to her or justified.
The Libertarian Party is composed largely of people who haven't learned the life lesson that everyone running around doing whatever the hell they want with no laws or restrictions doesn't make a functional society. Those few who actually think about the implications of their ideology sound reasonable but are ignored by the majority, who seem insistent on building a world based on the Chaotic Stupid trope.
edited 27th Aug '16 7:46:37 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I always felt the Libertarians were principles zealots who want perfectly equality between the people and the state-even when it makes no sense.
Leviticus 19:34No, Libertarians believe in the concept of the state. They're minarchists, not anarchists.
Leviticus 19:34
If we're going for a pretty extreme form of libertarianism, they only want a military for defensive purposes (and are anti-interventionist) and they also want the police and courts to remain public. If they go beyond that, I'd argue they aren't libertarians, but anarcho-capitalists. Though, to be fair, the difference between the two is mostly in degree.
edited 27th Aug '16 8:46:07 PM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34Yeah I have a friend who's a self-described socially liberal libertarian and I can back that ![]()
up. On the subject of the police force as with
this guy is pro-BLM and sees the cops as pigs. He is willing to accept minimal support services for the poorest people plus some scientific research funding, which is extremely ironic since he's working at an institution in a position that is largely supported by government funding via the NIH.
He thinks most science should otherwise be sponsored via private donations and industry, since they would be more efficient at identifying which projects benefit society the most, which seems hypocritical considering as a scientist he should know best that a lot of major breakthroughs were achieved via basic science research on things like nematodes and other types of projects which don't have immediate benefits for human health.
edited 27th Aug '16 8:57:44 PM by AlleyOop
So the Maine gov. has now completely lost his shit
and is saying nonwhites are the enemy and should be killed.

The problem with "they warned us about X!" is that they probably didn't, so much as describe the general human condition.
Leviticus 19:34