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
And, two, it acts as if there's some actual moral ground to be held in not voting for either and increasing the chance of the greater evil, who by definition you consider worse, a chance at power because of "principals".
The boss had NPR on at work Thursday afternoon, and they had on some woman who'd campaigned for Bernie in the primaries, and said she wasn't sure if she'd support Hillary after she won the primary. They had her back to ask if she'd changed her mind since then, and she said that she'd "tried to picture herself voting for Hillary, but just couldn't." She said she'd talked to a couple Hillary supporters and asked them to convince her why she should vote for her without bringing up Trump or the Supreme Court, and they couldn't, so she might just not vote, and that's when I got completely pissed off.
Lady, that's like asking someone to convince you not to smoke without bringing up lung cancer or emphysema. If the chance that you might literally die hasn't already convinced you, nothing is. You've already made up your mind based entirely on feelings; don't pretend you're being rational. You are not taking a principled stand, you are holding your breath because mommy isn't perfect.
Also, on the sentiment of how Hilary shouldn't be made out to be a perfect or paragon candidate, I can agree to that, because I think making presidential candidates, and politicians in general, out to be either the savor of the world or the devil is ridiculous.
The thing is, I don't consider saying something like "she's the most qualified" to be an example of that because that's something that can be backed up with her actual political history, positions, and experience. The same about her actually caring about issues, because if you wanted Bernie, you should be fine with her, because of what
said.
edited 30th Oct '16 4:25:02 PM by LSBK
It reminds me of the discourse on Tumblr surrounding Romney and how he was basically Satan and a huge bigot not too different from Ted Cruz, when he's definitely from the more moderate wing of the Republican Party, and a lot of his more extreme statements were the result of him pivoting rightward to survive the primaries.
It's telling that even nowadays they describe his condemnation of Trump in "when even the Devil says you're bad" terms. Yes Romney is an out-of-touch plutocrat and he was not my choice of president, but I would much rather take him than most of the people he was running against in the GOP.
If you look at 538's graph of each candidate's chance of winning over time, it seems America really does need a monthly reminder that Trump is an idiot/monster. Because both candidate's chances wave up and down in cycles.
It's almost like they just forget everything from week to week.
edited 30th Oct '16 4:58:44 PM by Lennik
That's right, boys. Mondo cool.I don't think that's what they're saying. It's just kind of annoying how people seem to easily forget that Trump is a terrible person. Why does this happen? I get that over time a person's opinion can improve if they aren't reminded of someone's faults but I'd think people would remember these sorts of things for more than a few weeks.
So is it just me, or are the current patch of polls/reports bipolar? Because on the one hand, 538 still puts Clinton at 76% and Trump at 23%, but on the other, I get emails from Citizens United saying that voters are abandoning Hilary in droves and that Nate Silver says Trump might win the election. So I'm getting mixed messages here, which doesn't really help anything.
![]()
You will always get e-mails from political groups warning you that their candidate is losing. It encourages people to donate and to get out and vote. It's annoying, but it's understandable.
![]()
![]()
I looked up what Citizens United is, and according to The Other Wiki it's a very conservative Republican group. So with those emails, they might be trying to scare Democrats into giving up/boost Republicans by telling them Trump is winning. At the very least, it doesn't look like it's a group known for accurate reporting of national election polls.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_(organization)
Although if it's a different group that happens to have the same name, then I wouldn't be able to tell without seeing the emails in question.
edited 30th Oct '16 5:15:47 PM by Rainbow
Oh, sorry; they're End Citizens United, which I guess is a democratic group created in response to the actual Citizens United. But yeah, ![]()
might have the right idea either way.
Also, to anyone interested, here's the actual email:
NATE SILVER: We likely “have a very close election and perhaps a President Trump”
[Kkhohoho], Nate Silver has NEVER been wrong about a Presidential election.
So when he says Trump could win, you better believe it.
Voters are ABANDONING Hillary in droves. If we don’t turn things around soon, there’s no doubt: Trump will WIN the Presidency.
So we need you to answer immediately: Are you still voting for Hillary?
And then they give me various options for donations. Along with an option to unsubscribe. Guess which I chose.
edited 30th Oct '16 5:36:11 PM by kkhohoho
I actually got encouraged watching Fox News at the gym today. It was one of their dumb talk shows, and the host and hostess were looking at past polls and how they never quite captured the actual percentage of the vote the candidates got on Election Day. But the trend was - with the exception of Bush vs. Gore back in 2000 - both candidates ended up with about two points more when it came to votes than they did in the polls, but there wasn't a reversal, the guys were who were leading in the polls still won the elections.
Yes, they didn't go into detail about which polls, or if they did I couldn't catch it through the closed captioning, but the other thing was that the hosts started talking about the odds of Trump pulling off an upset in the last week of the race, and they pointed out that unlike any of the Republican candidates of the last 16 years, Trump lacks 1) a proper ground game and 2) the unified support of his party. So even when other fair and balanced reporters on the channel are having to adjust their pants as they speculate over what terrible Clinton emails might come out of this new phase of the investigation, at least these two talking heads didn't sound optimistic that it would be enough to swing things for Trump.
DOD has a warrant for the emails. Wouldn't be surprised if Comey accelerates the investigation and releases the results to help his Fuhrer. Assuming anything damning is there.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/30/politics/clinton-emails-fbi-abedin/index.html
edited 30th Oct '16 5:56:16 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Well, I hope there still is some dirt on Trump for that last week, because the tendencies make it look like it might become closer until next Tuesday. On one hand, I'm happy not to be American, on the other, I don't want to know the consequences that asshole could have on the rest of the world who didn't ask for anything (except Russia).
That being said, the silver lining of sorts is that we'll get an Election Night in French on the show Quotidien - which is inspired by the Daily Show for the tone, but still features journalists, not comedians. The main man in the US should be the awesome Martin Weill, so even if the results make me want to hang myself, at least it should be entertaining to watch.
Weill was the one who did the piece on the coal miners in West Virginia. He did several pieces like that on "red states", trying to show the different kind of people that could vote that Trump (it does look baffling from the other side of the Atlantic - not Trump's ideas, but the fact that his personality hasn't eliminated him already).
The four stops he did were:
- Buchanan County, West Virginia - which was about coal mining, as said previously
- Martin County, Kentucky - he focused the piece on the fact that Trump was favored among the extremely poor because he wasn't a politician
- Pike County, Ohio - this one was about the fact that gun maniacs favored Trump over Hillary
- Cincinnati, Ohio - and there he mixed a bit of Confederate Flags and got to interview two Klan members
Personally, I think that only the last two belong to the deplorables. The former two I had sympathy for the Trump voters, because their situation really sucked hard.
edited 30th Oct '16 6:52:52 PM by Julep
So, Trump may have called on his supporters to commit voter fraud, by voting more than once. He says that the first ballot might be lost in the "rigged" system (Colorado lets you mail in a ballot early, or vote in person), so you should vote again and have the first one voided. This is of course, BS.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/30/politics/donald-trump-write-in-ballots/index.html
edited 30th Oct '16 6:54:42 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

Maybe someone got to him.
Do not obey in advance.