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
For reference: United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973
I'm not gonna read through 10+ pages but we're now on whether US force is justified in Syria, I think?
To go very realpolitk for moment: The US got their first and they have a perfectly just (as in they can justify it to their citizens and the UN) cause to continue their bombing campaign. Everything else is just so much noise.
Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?So... How does the victory prospects look for Clinton, now that the first debate's date is fast approaching? I don't know which media sources to trust, with all the rampant bias and other issues that plague the news media these days for one reason or the other.
Speaking of which, I thought Trump had declared he has no intention of entering any debate with Clinton.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.60:40 in favor of Clinton or so from 538, 70:30 from betting market aggregates.
As far as Trump refusing to debate, this would hardly be first time he's completely walked back on a statement while pretending he was always "on the right side."
To be honest, I imagine he was only threatening to walk as a negotiating tactic. He clearly wants the moderation to be biased in his favor, and he's done an excellent job thus far of cowing the media into submission using this tactic.
edited 23rd Sep '16 4:59:49 AM by CaptainCapsase
Amazing how all of this started because 90210 thought Trump and Hillary were equally bad.
Such bs that the Democrats are always held to a higher standard. At worst, she's just a typical garden variety politician.
I mean, notice how the people who think GOP = Dems = Bad, always seem to give more passes whenever a Republican does/says something horrible.
@ 940131:
#139759 was in relation to this comment of yours:
It supposed to prove that Libya and Iraq did attack allies of the US. Mind you, Iraq's always been...troublesome since it was created after World War I.
edited 23rd Sep '16 5:18:38 AM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling OnKrugman on the debates and fact checking.
He says that it is the responsibility of the media to cover not the "feels" of the debates, but the candidates' truthfulness. That means that if Donald Trump lies five times more than Hillary Clinton, that should be the story. To save time, they could cover only the lies that are independently graded as "False" or "Pants on Fire" by Politifact.
Facts, folks. They exist. Anyone who claims Clinton and Trump lie equally is simply wrong.
edited 23rd Sep '16 6:51:06 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
I disagree; it's worse. The Trump quote you mentioned is typical inflated ego boasting, the Omarosa quote is authoritarian.
"Bow to me. You weak, pathetic fools! I've come for your souls!"
edited 23rd Sep '16 6:53:26 AM by speedyboris
I'm not sure why I'm still bothering to answer numbers but:
1; The question about Cuba is nonsensical and irrelevant. It would depend on the current diplomatic relations with Russia, the current diplomatic relations with Cuba, the degree to which Cuba was acting as a representative government to its people and where exactly those soldiers and missiles were being pointed. My answer would change depending on the state of any of those factors. It is hypothetical anyway because Russia can not currently project power to Cuba, Cuba's government is losening its dicitorial hold on its people and Cuban-American relationships are improving. That said, the Bay of Pigs invasion was a terrible idea back in the day, American foreign policy is not the same today as it was in the 60s.
2: The Ukranians who were in favor of ties with Russia were a small minority
. Oh, there was a referendum that showed a majority were in favor...after Russian troops were already marchng into the region. There's also evidence that many pro-russian demonstrators were being paid by Russia.
Yeah, it's worse. The Convention quote was essentially, "I am the greatest thing to happen to this country ever and you should vote for me because of it!" while the Omarosa quote is basically, "KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!!!"
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.@Fughteer Facts exist, but I'm not sure they really matter in our current situation. Trust of the news media is at or near all time lows based on opinion polling. Beyond that there is an additional layer of distrust in our political institutions; a large chunk of the electorate no longer has faith in "the system", myself inclured to a significant degree.
I will support Clinton for now, because the alternative will likely see the rising popular ire directed in the most destructive way possible. But sooner or later, populism is going to overcome the current establishment, even if there isn't a major shuffling of politicial offices. Whether we see these grassroots sentiments directed in a constructive direction or not is ultimately going to fall upon the second Clinton administration, God willing.
edited 23rd Sep '16 7:20:58 AM by CaptainCapsase
They matter because not everyone is divided up into camps. That the whole country has already decided who to vote for and every single voter is a hardline Trump or Clinton supporter is a myth. If that were true, the polls wouldn't move an inch.
Hard as it is to believe, there are moderates in this election. They're the people who keep touting, "They're equally bad!" and who pick their side based on whichever seems less bad based on whatever events just happened.
Trump insulted a Gold Star family! Shift to the left.
Clinton's health controversy might not be bunk after all! Shift to the right.
If the news would stop pretending everything Trump says is unquestionable holy gospel, we might see more of them shifting left.
edited 23rd Sep '16 7:25:49 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Everyone trusts news media. They just disagree on which news media to trust.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
Statistically, most people don't know who to believe anymore; Gallup has America's trust in the mass media as of September 16th down to 32%; 30% among independents, 14% among Republicans, and 51% among democrats.
edited 23rd Sep '16 7:32:49 AM by CaptainCapsase

In what ways?
"Yup. That tasted purple."