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
I've been doing research for this paper in Poli Sci, and I came across an article about Clinton's involvement in Haiti
. There's also this one from the perspective of someone living in the Carribean.
I thought it was pretty interesting but I wanted ti gauge what you guys thought of this
RE: Sanders being harder to attack than Clinton
Sanders once tried to have Vermont's nuclear waste shipped to unsafe storage in a Hispanic Texas town that didn't want it. I have no problem imagining the Trump attack ad—"I may wanna deport you, but Bernie wants to irradiate you".
Then there's the fact that he actually vacationed in the USSR. Think about all the Communist garbage they threw at Obama. Now imagine similar stuff containing a grain of truth.
Admittedly, I do think the US needs competition. They've gotten too egotistical with being the only Superpower since 1992 onwards (Well, technically 1991, but the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union only collapsed and stopped being a Superpower at the very very end of the year at December 26th, so 1991 doesn't really count). However, voting in a psychopathic maniac who would destabilize it is not the answer.
edited 31st Oct '16 1:15:32 AM by Bat178
Isn't Sanders' career as a Senator famous for sneaking his own preferred legislation into larger bills but he didn't necessarily approve of the entirety of? He seems more like a "take every inch we can get" kind of guy, rather than refusing to compromise. And of course after he lost the primary he almost immediately turned around and endorsed Clinton.
I mean, it's reasonable to think his ideas are impractical or disagree with him personally, but I don't think its fair to criticize him for being too stubborn.
edited 31st Oct '16 4:14:52 AM by Clarste
I think Sanders' made one mistake: he underestimated how much of his base was driven by anger towards the "establishment" rather than a desire for progress. So when he decided to endorse HRC, who is considered by some to be the embodiment of the "establishment", that upset a (hopefully) small percentage of his former supporters.
Disgusted, but not surprisedI'm not sure that's really a mistake he made. Those extremist voters were likely never going to vote for Clinton in the first place. If anything they'd just have stayed home and complained during the election (which they're effectively still going to do, if they're voting for Stein or whoever).
I mean, it happened, but I don't see how it was either his fault or will have any noticeable effect on the general election. Perhaps him winning the primaries would have been bad though.
edited 31st Oct '16 5:46:41 AM by Clarste
Unless you're really lucky, the third parties generally have little to no presence down-ticket. There are a couple states that have a third party present (New York has one, I believe), but while the Libertarians or Greens might have some random districts where they have a candidate, for most of the country, that's not an option. So people tend to vote which major party the agree with more, even if only marginally.
As i said in the women's issues thread, he's really lost the plot this cycle, after steadily losing his touch through the Obama years.
Perhaps he fears irrelevance and is lashing out, or perhaps he genuinely believes the myth of the "Missing White Voter" which suggests that there's a mass of potential GOP voters out there who are just waiting for the right candidate to speak to them, which isn't supported by the math (apathy among eligible voters hurts Democrat-leaning groups the most, namely black, Hispanic, and under-30s).
Left wing documentary maker know for occasionally stretching the truth, (especially when it comes to Quote Mining) at least. Hyper critical of the Bush administration, (to a slightly lesser degree, the Clinton administration) the Iraq War, US Healthcare, gun laws, corporations, etc. Had a big run from about 2001-2009 with films like Bowling for Columbine, Sicko, Farenheit 9/11, books like Dude, Where's My Country, etc. Used to be part of the Hillary haters, recently joined her cause and tried to get any Bernie or Bust voters to turn out for Clinton.
edited 31st Oct '16 7:48:40 AM by TheWanderer
| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |It's kind of funny to see someone not know who Michael Moore is. At the turn of the millennium he was absolutely everywhere, especially after 9/11. There were probably more politics-savvy people in the US who knew who Michael Moore was than those who could name the President of France. Now it seems you have to be, well, not-very-young, to know him.
Sic transit...
(I suppose this is just me being "old". I make some of you feel the same by not remembering Ross Perot, whom I've only really found out about recently, and some of you will feel the same when today's kids are 20-something and don't remember who Jon Stewart was.)
edited 31st Oct '16 7:55:54 AM by BestOf
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.Well, he has been quiet for almost a decade, aside from his film about the 2009 financial crisis, (which bombed) so it's not entirely surprising with all these youngsters around. ![]()
x7 ...Uh-huh. Look Moore, I can understand where you're coming from, I really do, but just sit back and look at yourself for a moment, will you? Some of the stuff you're saying sounds somewhat reasonable, sure, but I don't know if you really understand half of what you're talking about here. For example:
Dude. I am a millennial. And I can safely tell you that I am voting for Hilary. In fact, I'd imagine that millennials are among her largest supporters compared to Trumps. They're young, (generally) educated, full of fresh ideas, and tend to strive for progress and moving forward more than Trump and the GOP's conservative antics. Is every millennial going to vote for Hilary? No, of course not. Even those who aren't voting for Trump may still not vote for Clinton, instead going for some supposedly more libertarian third party or maybe even writing down Sanders on a ballet. But I can tell you that many of them will not be voting for Trump.
And here's the other thing:
If someone's voting for Trump, they're probably not going to do it to 'make mommy and daddy mad'; they're going to do it because they want their pound of flesh and they don't care how they get it. Either that or they think Hilary's a crooked SOB, but I have not heard of anyone planning to vote for Trump just to 'upset the apple cart'. This is not the UK. This is not Brexit. There is no guarantee that voters will fuck over their own country just because they're upset or because they think that, no matter what they vote, Trump is still not going to win .You are basing this off of one example that many UK voters ended up regretting, and I'd like to think that we Americans, having already seen what that sort of action will lead to, won't make the same mistake. Then again, what do I know? I'm just a young millennial. Obviously, I don't really know anything, and everything I've said is just uneducated gibberish. So forgive me for using actual common sense.
edited 31st Oct '16 8:04:22 AM by kkhohoho

This is literally the first time I've ever seen anyone say anything other than "Hillary" is the correct way to spell that name. I was also assuming the singular L was repeated typos. (Because let's face it, some typos are just incredibly common.)