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
Some local (for me) fallout from the latest Trump debacle, an Idaho senator has withdrawn support for Trump.
Idaho’s Crapo withdraws endorsement, urges GOP to replace Trump
http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/politics-government/election/article106926957.html
edited 8th Oct '16 10:00:59 AM by sgamer82
Edit: Woops, this thing moved fast.
edited 8th Oct '16 10:03:47 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"@ Draghinazzo:
Because these comments might hit down-ticket contests — and even with parts of Trump's base
:
“Oh, it matters. But how much does it matter?” Barbour asked. “This hurts him with … independent women, undecided women, of course it hurts him, everyone knows that. When you look in states like Mississippi or North Carolina or the panhandle of Florida, central Pennsylvania, really conservative areas, I think it hurts him with white seniors, one- or two-time, particularly two-time a week churchgoers, particularly ones in rural areas. They’re the ones going to be the most turned off by this. They’re not going to vote for Hillary at all, they despise Hillary, but this is going to be too much for them to take.
“They are his base, but there’s going to be some percentage of them, I don’t know what it is, that he’s going to lose their support.”
The "deplorables" will continue supporting Trump because, for them, misogyny and being a "rape boy" are plusses, not minuses. Less crazy Republicans, however...
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Yeah this could very well lose him church-going southern seniors.
I have relatives who'd vote for him, but this might strain the dictates of their patience. My grandmother doesn't tolerate even the softest swear in her presence, let alone this.
And she's probably not alone in that.
edited 8th Oct '16 10:30:01 AM by Matues
The difference here is that even the non-deplorable Trump supporter base is turned off by this. This is the difference between a close election where Hillary wins and a landslide election where Hillary wins.
Wizard Needs Food BadlyThat depends on how badly they fear getting targeted in primary elections by the Tea Party/alt-right. This election is creating something of an acid test in Republican circles for how repugnant a candidate can be and still earn party support.
edited 8th Oct '16 11:05:36 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"They won't pull their support because even if they don't like rape apologists, voting Democrat is a much bigger sin to them than supporting a guy advocating sexual assault.
Even so, they'd better not try to replace him. He needs to lose on Election Day. He has to be defeated by the opposition party, or his deplorable frogs won't be demoralized.
That's right, boys. Mondo cool.I think we should distinguish the GOP from the Republicans, the latter meaning their registered voters. There's plenty of very principled Republican voters. A lot of them live in Utah, for instance, and it shows.
There's really no such thing as a principled politician. The closest you get is someone like Sanders who develops a reputation for doing what he says he's going to do. Heck, I would believe too much principle is actively counterproductive and dangerous: good politicians can and indeed should flip-flop when new evidence comes to light or after thinking things through. No-one should be a slave to obsolete ideas just because they are afraid of looking bad if they don't stick to their guns.
edited 8th Oct '16 11:41:28 AM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.That is true. But my point is more that the Republican Party (as in the GOP) has let any number of racist and misogynistic comments (not to mention policies) from Trump slide and there were any number of times they could have condemned and/or disavowed him. And so if they do so now, it's kind of too late to be principled. And even if it is personally principled on the part of individual politicians, it doesn't seem "fair" that the replacement candidate would win in part as a "reward" for this supposedly principled action.
In the cases of Romney and Kasich, they've been consistently against Trump/above the fray, so despite my disagreements with their politics, if anyone deserves to come out well form this, it's them. But I'd separate that from wanting a Republican to win the Presidency and for the GOP to retain its hold on the rest of the government.
edited 8th Oct '16 11:56:51 AM by Hodor2

While I know the veto thing was nearly the entire Senate, I can't help but think that the Republican party keeps playing political chicken. They'll do something outrageous like stop the veto on an untenable bill, indulge Trump's position in the primaries, or obstruct the Supreme Court nomination, apparently completely certain that things will go the way they want without ever realizing how badly things can (and have been) backfiring with senators trying to backtrack out of the bill, Trump damaging the Republican name, and Clinton's victory helping guarantee a more liberal Justice in Scalia's place then if they had just gone with Obama in the first place.
edited 8th Oct '16 9:25:12 AM by sgamer82