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
If there is any room for interpretation, people will interpret it the wrong way.
(That's probably a corollary to Murphy's Law.)
edited 10th Sep '16 9:46:21 AM by pwiegle
This Space Intentionally Left Blank.I agree with Clinton, many of Trump's supporters are racist/every other ist. But perception is everything.
Nate Silver and the others at 538 looked at Clinton's issues with the polls, it comes down to her having a few bad media cycles and her convention bump wearing off. The debates are a big opportunity for her (and the media might not go easy on Trump after the Lauer debacle, and Clinton will finally get a chance to call him on his BS to his face) and Trump's negatives still give her a 3-5 point edge in their eyes. And despite this being a low point, Clinton is still winning and might attract swing voters who will freak out at Trump winning and won't stay home/vote 3rd party.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-is-trump-gaining-on-clinton/
They do think there is a risk of Trump "winning" the first debate because the media will praise him if he manages to string a paragraph together.
edited 10th Sep '16 9:55:48 AM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.I personally think she made this comment for not only taking the news cycle away from Trump and her emails (ugh), but also for a chance to double down on it at a press conference, and THEN have Trump's supporters and surrogates prove her right, furthering the news cycle and THEN have it brought up during the first debate, and once she's face-to-face with Trump, with the knowledge of how he'll debate from the Presidential town hall, she's going to bait him into saying some racist/sexist shit and GG.
It's honestly, kind of genius.
New Survey coming this weekend!Really, the issue with Clinton's "basket of deplorables" statement is that it's not something that's going to win over any of Trump's voters who might be on the fence. The lifelong Republicans who are voting for him out of party loyalty and/or a (likely futile) hope that the GOP establishment will be able to control him, or the working class whites who desperately cling to his claims that he can bring back manufacturing jobs. You know, the people who are either in denial about Trump's racism or sufficiently apathetic to race issues to vote for him on other points of agreement.
Yes, but recently Trump has generally been better about avoiding the legitimately damaging (in regards to poll numbers) gaffes like the Khan thing, the penis size thing, and so on, either because he's capable of learning from experience like anyone else, or because his handlers are doing a better job than before.
edited 10th Sep '16 10:59:49 AM by CaptainCapsase
It depends on what Clinton's ultimate strategy is; if she's hoping to get disaffected GOP voters to flip, this isn't a winning strategy. The bigger issue however, is that media seems to be portraying it as a gaffe on Clinton's part, and that in and of itself can cause problems.
edited 10th Sep '16 11:18:45 AM by CaptainCapsase
Here her statement about that https://twitter.com/GideonResnick/status/774671801808982016
It was a gaffe but she still stands by the alt right speech main point. It still not a great look for Trump though. The question becomes "Are racists half of Trump's base, or only 10%?" instead of her emails.
![]()
She was being overly generous at best, and outright lying at worst. I doubt there's a single Democratic politician who genuinely believes there's a good chunk of Trump voters who are just having "economic anxiety" and not having racial resentment towards minorities.
It's the racism. Period. Point blank.
New Survey coming this weekend!Clinton isn't worried about alienating Trump's band of racist nationalists the way his primary opponents were. She's also a much better debater than Jeb(!) ever was. I remember she held her own against Obama back in 08, and she didn't get beaten by Sanders either.
edited 10th Sep '16 11:44:33 AM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.![]()
Sanders? Going easy? On Clinton (or anyone really, man sticks to his guns)? What primary did you watch?
And this, Clinton didn't want to drive off the moderates that made up the majority of Sanders' support base and consider her a viable second option.
edited 10th Sep '16 11:58:36 AM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

How exactly was the statement bad? She called out Trump for giving a voice to the racists, anti semites, homophobes, and other bigots.
She also pointed out that the rest of his supporters are people who just want things to get better, but are looking to the wrong person. That we should talk to those people and convince them that Trump's plans won't help them.
I don't see the fault in what she said.