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
Trump is making cow-eyes at Putin, speculating about a meeting post-election but pre-swearing in
, and saying Hillary and the Democrats have been too tough on the Russian strongman. In this, he continues to go against the GOP party line, including that of his own running mate, and is defying the information in his own national security briefings, during which the Russian attempts to interfere with our election were discussed.
edited 18th Oct '16 9:35:20 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"RE: Emancipation Proclamation
One thing to keep in mind was that the wording included the fact that it was an Executive Order, and thus might have offended "Small Government" sensibilities based on that aspect more than freeing the slaves.
The similar question regarding desegregating the military, however, is fair game - http://www.snopes.com/trump-supporters-pro-slavery/
Just to give you guys a light respite from the fact your society is so full of Trumpist idiots:
There's a pretty visible and relatively well supported (I mean, it's basically tiny in terms of membership but a lot of people lean a bit toward them without actually outright supporting them) movement in Finland against immigration - refugees, in particular. Most refugees come here via Russia, and recently they've been mostly from Iraq. (We also get refugees from Somalia and Syria and so on - they usually manage to get smuggles to Russia and cross the border to Finland from there.)
A recent demonstration held by one anti-immigration group had a demonstration with a sign saying they want the Russian border to be opened so that Putin can come in and purge Finland - presumably of people who support refugees.
So, you know, Trump's supporters probably aren't alone at the peak of anti-immigrant idiocy in the world. There are probably plenty of people around the world competing for the top spot in that category.
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.![]()
Yeah, I know one of those Finns. Thinks that whichever bored asshole starting car fires in Malmo, Sweden is going to hop the border any day now. Oh, and it's got to be an immigrant since a meme told him so. Well, half the morons who played that racing game have now thrown their lot in with the alt-right...
Probably a result of his Russian ventures. It's pretty hard to do big property investments in Moscow without involving an oligarch or two, and Putin has ties to those.
As you watch Billy Bush lose his job and likely his career, he could be the canary in a coal mine. What I'm suggesting is that there's an increasing likelihood that what happened to him, as well as to Trump and Clinton, could happen to you or your kids in the not-too-distant future.
What many do not realize is that it isn't only new stuff that is being digitized — it is old stuff as well. So there is an increasing chance that — as in Trump's case — something you did years ago eventually will be connected to your name.
It kind of makes me wonder what will happen in the next major election, because we are just at the tip of the iceberg now. It is very likely that in the next eight years, and certainly in the next 18, much of our past lives will be available to anyone who wants to do the research — whether we like it or not.
Given the lack of honesty, almost to an extreme level, it is also clear that this election is fueling ever-more-powerful real time fact checking. Given that the fact checkers currently have no controls placed on them, I expect some abuse. However, the ability to maintain lies for even a few minutes soon may be obsolete, as more and more folks learn to live-search information on candidates' comments during their speeches and debates.
It wouldn't surprise me if in future debates, some streaming services run fact-checked responses in real time right next to video of the candidate talking.
The part I highlighted in purple is something I very much disagree with. Considering how much misinformation is out there, and how many people get harassed sometimes over shit that didn't even happen, and considering how much people believe stupid conspiracy theories about their least favorite candidate, I don't buy that.
Well, they're sadly correct. It's why I could never run for office. Somebody would drudge up something I said ten years ago, when I held much different views than I do now (i.e. right wing), and claim, "See? See? They claim ____ but years ago he said ____, so how can we trust him?!"
Unfortunately, there's really no easy solution to this. Educating the public that, yes, sometimes people change their minds or don't associate with the same people now as from their past, is virtually impossible, especially now with info bubbles. And for the young child wanting to run for office someday, what are you supposed to do? Teach them that you can never change your views or associate with anybody, because that person might be used against them someday? Yeah, that won't warp them at all.
edited 18th Oct '16 12:29:08 PM by speedyboris
Eh. I use social media to a moderate degree, and at this point the cat's pretty much out of the bag as far as anything I might have said or believed in the past. You can't stuff it back in. Someone doing any degree of diligence could easily link me to my entire posting history here on TV Tropes and then selectively use things I've written against me.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I know humanity is fucking stupid and everything, but unless your past views were literal baby eating, I'm sure people will give someone the benefit of the doubt that someone can change their mind when they growing up.
I mean it's not like you flip flopped in an hour like Romney once did
The problem is that these sorts of attacks — dredging up past statements and quoting them out of context — are demonstrably effective in character assassination. People don't react to the carefully researched facts and context underlying the case; they react viscerally to the first, worst impression.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"538 has Democrats up in must-win Senate contests almost across the board in polls-plus: Nevada, Missouri, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, and even North Carolina.
edited 18th Oct '16 12:51:18 PM by CrimsonZephyr
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."![]()
and Re:online activity of political candidates
This actually might directly correlate with the oft-mentioned emphasis by both parties on their candidates' ideological purity and "honesty".
I can see a Catch-22 as well: candidates who have online footprints to be scrutinized will have even their Halloween costumes or reenactment uniforms scrutinized for "suspicious" leanings, while those that abstain from online activity will be deemed as archaic, anti-social, or "crooked and shady because they're clearly trying to hide their past".
edited 18th Oct '16 12:53:18 PM by FluffyMcChicken
x8 Ah, but you ARE on TV Tropes. It may not be Facebook or Twitter but it's still social media.

Trump's entire brand is looking less interesting to consumers, which is hurting him politically and could harm his business empire.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/18/opinions/trump-brand-becoming-boring-sable-johnson/index.html
Essentially, he's getting stale and everyone other than his hardcore support base is starting to view him as more trouble than he's worth.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.