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
Also as to Comey, besides the Bureaucrat trying to cover his own ass, there's also the very likely possibility everyone's ignored:
He's a Republican. Likely a friend to many establishment Republicans. He doesn't want to be unpersoned by essentially his friends and personal associates after he steps down from the FBI. He likely wants to make sure he gets a job on K Street or in Wall Street or a Conservative Think Tank that is nice and comfortable and cushy and if he doesn't make things hard for Clinton, same said friends will basically go:
"Don't trust Comey, he's a snitch! He went easy on the Democrats!"
Or something to that effect.
The Russian connections are incidental. He wants Trump to win or at least Hillary to not landslide so he has a cushy job lined up for him. lol.
Thread Hop to answer The Wanted because I know a bit of the technical answer to the "How do we know it's Russia?" question.
The entity that claims responsability for the hacks calls themself/selves "Guciffer 2.0", after the original Gucifer, the hacker who revealed the existance of Clinton's email server (the later having been caught and charged). Examining the material from the DNC leak, the civilian security companies identified signs that were consistant with the hack having been carried out by Russian actors, particularly those known to security experts by the codenames "Fancy Bear" and "Cozy Bear". Evidence includes Russian-language metadata on converted files
, the fact that the means to hack the accounts were probably obtained by a Russian-operated spear phishing operation
and the fact that Russia's done this sort of thing in other countries before
Plugging "Russia" into Ars Technica's search will probably give you more reading mateiral than you ever wanted.
It'd be good if the US would cut some of its military spending and use that money elsewhere (such as social security, healthcare, education, infrastructure, etc). Certain parts of the US military are already getting more money than the Pentagon requests, which results in bases and equipment that are not used at all. The problem is that representatives in Congress want to increase military spending in their constituency because it creates jobs. When it's time to cut, everyone points at everyone else's constituency and nothing gets cut. That's how it tends to go in the US.
The US does, though, want to maintain a very strong military and extensive capability to deploy anywhere. That's because the US has interests and allies around the world, and sometimes the only way to keep them is by using the military. Sometimes it's even used for good - for instance, the motivation for the intervention in Libya seemed to be respectable, and the Western countries participating in the operation to carry out the UN mandate mostly struck to the perimeters established in the Resolution.
There's also the issue of deterrence. You want a strong military because it's a great deterrent. NATO helps, as well. Sometimes you have to use said military to maintain the deterrent, but there you go.
Oh, and I meant to say: if my last two posts contain information that you didn't already have, I think it's fair to say you probably don't regularly follow international politics or news about military issues. That's fine, of course; it just means this probably isn't one of the main issues on which you'll vote this election. Not everyone can be interested in everything. (And I, of course, am not even an American - I'm just following this from outside. I'm not from a NATO country, either.)
edited 31st Oct '16 4:31:25 PM by BestOf
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.@Trump and Russia, I'm gonna have to hunt down the article again, but a few months ago there was info floating about that Trump had something close to a billion dollars in real estate deals with Russia that are currently tied up in red tape. It was speculated that his friendliness with them was partly over that; if Trump wins he can use his newfound power to leverage his business deals in Eastern Europe.
edited 31st Oct '16 4:30:48 PM by carbon-mantis
@The Wanted
The US has the ability to project force in a way that other NATO members do not. Germany and France can defend themselves, but they cannot easily defend Eastern Europe without American logistical support. And no, they cannot simply invent a logistics system to equal that of the USA out of nowhere. It would require totally overhauling the structures of their air forces and navies.
Additionally the larger the alliance is, the greater the deterrent. If the alliance appears to be falling apart, the effectiveness of the deterrent lessens, which increases the chances of Russian meddling in Eastern Europe, and with that, the chances of a direct confrontation between the Russian and NATO militiaries—and with that, it should go without saying, the chances nuclear confrontation.
I don't think this is really a difficult concept to approach.
edited 31st Oct '16 4:33:24 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
That includes the bits of Europe that are actually pro-US and don't constantly criticise it?
Because that's most of Europe, it's only the far left who actually embody the hipster anti-US ideas you're imagining. Despite what many Americans claim our continent is not dominated by Jill Stein style wackjobs.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranTo be fair, it is a legit criticism of most NATO countries that one of the requirements of membership is spending 2% of GDP on defense, which most member nations fail do to. The only ones that do it are the US, UK, Greece, Poland, and Estonia — that's five out of 28.
edited 31st Oct '16 4:40:31 PM by NativeJovian
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.I need to stop watching Secular Talk. Dude just went off and started spewing how Hillary was "evil" because of her votes on Iraq, Patriot act, supposedly in-favor of "deregulating" Wall Street (using ONE bill as an example that didn't even pass), Wall Street speeches etc. And still hasn't done a segment on Jill Stein's ties to fossil fuels.
He's literally the embodiment of EVERYTHING wrong with the far-left.
Like, it's not a tongue in cheek "evil". Like, literally, he was arguing evil as if Hillary is a Villain Protagonist.
New Survey coming this weekend!Switching gears a little bit, I'm getting a tad annoyed at pundits calling Comey a "typical" bureaucrat. He violated what is possibly the biggest rule for public servants, you absolute do not interfere in the democratic process. That goes double for senior figures. As an aspiring public servant myself, everything I've learned (be it from school, work or research) has shown me that his actions were in no way typical, let alone acceptable.
![]()
![]()
The recent numbers/new "scandal" aren't starting to concern you a bit?
edited 31st Oct '16 5:11:15 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.With the whole "Christians are so oppressed" thing that the Religious Right has in the US, the Synchtube Troper Coven is watching a movie on, well, that particularly modern political issue tomorrow night.
It's God's Not Dead 2. Which, appropriately enough, is a courtroom drama about a teacher getting fired due to bringing up Jesus in a non-proselytizing context in class, and it later going to court. Or to put it another way:
So yeah, it's basically a fantasy of the Religious Right. I figured since it's directly related to a major US political issue - albeit one not really talked about by Trump (he's played the whole "stores will say 'Merry Christmas'" angle, but that's it) - it could be fitting to bring it up here.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13456679170A21340100&page=692#17289
is the topic where it's talked about. We're gonna show it Nov 1 at 8 PM EST if anyone wants to jump in the chatroom as it's streamed. No obligation, you could just drop in any time.
edited 31st Oct '16 5:17:35 PM by BonsaiForest
/glances at 538's senate forecast
The Dems still have a meaningful lead. It's not exactly in the bag, but them getting a majority is still more likely than a tied Senate or a Republican majority.
edited 31st Oct '16 5:17:33 PM by Gilphon
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST.
New Survey coming this weekend!The lead is tightening guys. It was doing so even before Friday. All Comey's thing did was do it faster. But do not mistake this for Trump winning.
538's numbers are doing everything they can to make sure they account for all possibilities. Even then, he only gets a one in four chance. That is still terrible for him.
And yet the thread is going on about Russia (and I've repeatedly said its being overemphasized in general, what amounts to official trolling being taken instead as the Trumpchurian Candidate) and jumping the gun on Comey.
I frankly find the Donna Brazile thing more worrisome than the bloody emails.
EDIT- I'll wait for more neutral sources.
edited 31st Oct '16 5:33:42 PM by FFShinra
LOCK HIM UP LOCK HIM UP!!!!!!! If this isn't treason I don't know what else is. That piece of shit should be in jail and we should start plotting to put a little bit of radium into Putin's coffee. It's better than putting an ICBM into Sochi, which is what he's asking for if he persists in his plots.
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.

Not to mention, many NATO members are slowly ratcheting up their military spending towards the required 2%.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.