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
![]()
Viewers Are Goldfish. If Trump wasn't constantly reminding people why they hate him, the general public would completely forget the awful things he said.
The old GOP had no intention of implementing those policies on the federal level, ideologically the "old" brass was fairly similar to the democrats post-Bill Clinton. Their base became wise to that some time between the Bush years and Romney, leading to the tea party revolution where a pack of lunatics got put into office, and here we are today.
edited 6th Sep '16 6:37:09 PM by CaptainCapsase
Which is really weird, when you think about it. People have had their political hopes crushed because they made a weird noise or because they drink a lot of water. It looks like Americans are super-critical of the entirely superficial things and are totally indifferent about actual severe flaws.
...that kind of explains a lot when I think about it.
Because Trump demonstrates that a person can act like a completely deranged, racist lunatic for 7 months, act "statesmanlike" for a week, and have a huge chunk of the electorate completely forget about it, or at least start thinking "oh, maybe he's not that bad." Populists like Trump build cults of personality which can and will rationalize any sort of hypocrisy on the part of their object of affection (somehow the candidate who changes positions every other day on virtually every issue is the one who "tells it like it is"), and if Trump 2.0 has it in him to act like a statesman for a single month, he stands a very good chance of winning.
Of course, hopefully Clinton gets lucky, and things work out such that she's up for reelection in a good economy with no major international crises occurring. If "she"* doesn't knock it out of the park during her first term though, we're in serious trouble.
* Scare quotes because it's more or less out of the Presidents control in our particular political climate whether 2020 is a good year to be an incumbent or not.
Also, in regards to how demographic transition will affect the political landscape, I'm becoming increasingly worried that won't actually come to pass; not because people in my age group will suddenly turn into raving conservatives after they hit thirty, but rather because you see a trend of increasing political apathy among younger generations that hasn't been seen in the past, with the most politically enthusiastic sector of the population also having increasingly authoritarian leanings.
edited 6th Sep '16 6:57:15 PM by CaptainCapsase
What Capsase is saying is that Nixon follows Goldwater as the Republican nominee and becomes President. If Trump is the Alt-Right's Goldwater, then all the Alt-Right needs to win is their equivalent of Nixon.
Wizard Needs Food Badly![]()
These "Brownshirts" are outright domestic Western Terrorists, the cops should have to stop them.
edited 6th Sep '16 7:11:17 PM by Bat178
Ya'll are missing the obvious elephant in the room.
WHERE does the alt-right go? Seriously. They're a good percentage of the GO Ps base. The Democrats sure as hell won't want them (hell, they'd make it a point to actively reject them at every level from local city council all the way to the Presidency).
And Trump has enabled them so they CAN'T use dog whistles anymore because Trump exposed that for what it was to the entire populace.
So, again, the GOP is pretty much fucked at this point. Their only, and I do mean ONLY saving grace is their control over the states. If that ever changes, and the 2020 Census Redistrict's favor Democrats again with their current demographics, then the USA will become a de-facto One-Party State, indefinitely.
![]()
They don't need to go anywhere, all they need is for the trend of disillusionment with democracy
among young voters to continue.
edited 6th Sep '16 7:19:20 PM by CaptainCapsase
![]()
While his scenario is completely unworkable, Trump winning means the US goes back to the Dark Ages until 2050 or so. And that's assuming he doesn't cause a global depression by starting trade wars, if not WW3.
Trump winning isn't just bad, it would be nothing short of a disaster for almost everyone.
Also true. At the very least, the northern hemisphere of the globe would be more or less destroyed. Maybe South America and Africa could try and salvage something from the ashes.
We probably won't have to worry about Trump though, the state-by-state polling is still very much against him in terms of getting to 270 electoral votes.
edited 6th Sep '16 7:36:11 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.You make it sound like his nomination isn't already. The GOP's ignorance of their 2012 postmorterm may have doomed them politically, but that's not the only thing they can still do.
Americans, Brace Yourselves for the Bunga Bunga
Like Silvio Berlusconi, Donald Trump is entertaining the masses. He’s also damaging his country’s democracy for a generation.
BY VALENTINA PASQUALI MARCH 2, 2016
Americans, Brace Yourselves for the Bunga Bunga
Now that Super Tuesday has brought the Republican nomination, and possibly the White House, within the grasp of Donald Trump, my home country of Italy may have a few lessons to offer America in dealing with his particular brand of leadership. No, not from our time under Mussolini — though Il Duce’s unexpected relevance in an American presidential campaign in 2016 is indeed unsettling. I’m thinking rather of what Italian politics suffered during the 1990s and 2000s, when we elected a billionaire with an abrasive style and a populist flair to govern us. The name of our Trump was Silvio Berlusconi and — spoiler alert — he did not make Italy great again.
It’s unnerving how alike the Republican front-runner and the former Italian prime minister are: skillful practitioners of political expediency, proud makers of shady deals, and unrelenting peddlers of their own cause. “Trump is Berlusconi in waiting, with less cosmetic surgery. Berlusconi is Trump in senescence, with even higher alimony payments,” columnist Frank Bruni wrote in the New York Times. Also in the Times, Italian author Beppe Severgnini didn’t mince words: “Both are loud, vain, cheeky businessmen, amateur politicians and professional womanizers. Both have a troubled relation with their egos and their hair.” In the Washington Post, Rula Jebreal noted, with more garb, that “like Berlusconi in Italy, Trump has built a political campaign employing unvarnished language and jaundiced humor.”
Over the course of the campaign, Americans have gotten a taste of Berlusconi-like bravado. But it is nothing compared to the main course — to what the likes of Il Cavaliere and other self-avowed nonpoliticians do to their countries once they’ve actually been put in charge.
Berlusconi came to power in 1994, riding a wave of popular discontent with the national political class resulting from a corruption scandal that enmeshed all levels of government (never mind that Berlusconi himself was also tainted by it). Between the time he was first elected and 2011, when the euro crisis and pressures from Brussels finally brought his reign to a rather ignominious end, he served as Italy’s prime minister three times, for a total of approximately nine years. Whether from his pulpit as the head of government, as a larger-than-life leader of the opposition, or as the owner of the country’s largest media empire, Berlusconi single-handedly dominated Italian politics for nearly 20 years. The country has nothing to show for it.Berlusconi single-handedly dominated Italian politics for nearly 20 years. The country has nothing to show for it.
Leave aside the fact that Italy’s economy stopped growing circa 2002, during his second, and longest, term as PM. Or that the ease of doing business in the country — as assessed by an annual World Bank study — plummeted during his third go-round between 2008 and 2011. So many factors affect a country’s economic performance that it’s hard to pinpoint with whom exactly the fault lies and what part Berlusconi and his politics may have played, though he certainly bears some responsibility.
No, the single worst thing Berlusconi has done, with his decades of dismissive — if not outright abusive — talk about everything from political parties to the judiciary to the media to the presidency (which serves a largely ceremonial role, but crucial to the nation’s cohesiveness) is that he has shattered Italians’ trust in their democratic institutions.
Last month, he called Prime Minister Matteo Renzi’s government an “illegitimate regime” and the judiciary “the worst cancer of our democracy.” Over the years, he has insisted that any and all legal charges against him were “arbitrary” attempts by “totalitarian” magistrates to undermine the will of the people who elected him. He once said he was “absolutely the politician most persecuted by prosecutors in the entire history of the world throughout the ages.” He has also described journalists as “criminals” and made a habit of suing those who criticize him along with their publications, including foreign ones like the Economist. He has referred to his nemesis Romano Prodi as a “dangerous liar” and accused former Italian President Giorgio Napolitano of conspiring with European authorities to orchestrate “a coup” against him in 2011. He has described the euro as a “rip-off” that “screwed everybody.”
This incendiary rhetoric has profoundly affected Italian voters. According to the private research institute Eurispes, in 2004 approximately 17 percent of Italians said they had little or no trust in the president of the republic. By 2012, after Berlusconi had left office at last, that figure had jumped to more than 35 percent. Distrust in the judiciary went from an already high 41 percent in 2004, a good decade into Berlusconi’s unceasing fight with justices, to a whopping 61 percent in 2012. All the while, freedom of the press in Italy decreased, whereas perceptions of corruption increased (according to Reporters Without Borders and Transparency International, respectively).
Swept up by the tornado of demagoguery and conspiracy theories that was Berlusconi, Italians grew progressively more despondent and disaffected, as seen in the falling participation rate in national elections. This went from more than 86 percent of all eligible voters in 1994 to around 75 percent in 2013. Even worse is the trend for European elections, going from 75 percent in 1994 to less than 60 percent in 2014.
Today, Italy’s voters remain as apathetic and embittered as ever, prey to the facile appeal of fear-mongering, inward-looking, anti-European parties like the Northern League or the Five Star Movement.
All in all, it’s not in the political philosophy or the election pledges of a Berlusconi or a Trump that one should look for clues as to how they may govern. Because the truth is, they have none. Those who say Trump is a “Republican in name only” are right. Trump, like Berlusconi, is not a conservative per se, certainly not an ideologue. Berlusconi only had a right-wing worldview and legislative proposals insomuch as they served his own personal agenda. He was a populist who espoused conservative talking points because, at the time, they were in vogue, and therefore it was advantageous for him to do so. But it’s not hard to imagine him enthusiastically embracing the opposite positions had those more effectively buttressed his case.
Rather, Americans should be alarmed by Trump’s open disregard for even the most basic political conventions, his eagerness to insult his opponents, the ease with which he overlooks the U.S. Constitution and refuses to engage with the press, and his tendency to prioritize his own interests over the interests of the country. Berlusconi has taught us that their kind leaves only ruin in its wake. America, you’ve been warned.
edited 6th Sep '16 7:35:59 PM by Krieger22
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiotThe problem here is that there is no way the Republicans will be kept out of power even with the Alt-Right controlling them. Eventually, the Democrats will fuck up big time, and the Republicans will take control of the Presidency. The nature of a two-party system is such that when the controlling party fucks up, the opposing party takes control. To prevent the Alt-Right eventually taking control of the United States, either they have to be purged from the Republican Party or the Republican Party has to collapse like the Whigs did. In The Cycle of Empires, America has pretty much entered The Decay Phase.
edited 6th Sep '16 8:09:54 PM by GameGuruGG
Wizard Needs Food Badly

You just completely ignored my question. The base already proved that they're tired of dogwhistles and will nominate the person that doesn't use them. Why should this suddenly change in 2020? It's not that different from how Tea Partiers will primary moderate Republicans if they don't toe the party line.