TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

AlleyOop Since: Oct, 2010
#154626: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:08:34 AM

One of them did dox a KKK guy who taunted them I think. The way he was practically begging them means I can't feel sorry for them no matter how broadly I think the no-doxxing rule should cover people due to misuse and often accidentally getting innocents.

edited 13th Nov '16 9:13:39 AM by AlleyOop

carbon-mantis Collector Of Fine Oddities from Trumpland Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Married to my murderer
Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#154628: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:21:15 AM

Well, that TTIP is history now is more or less the only good thing which came out of the election so far...and if Canada disconnects for the US, I actually see Ceta working better, too.....

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#154629: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:21:23 AM

"The liberal media is totally rigging it for Hillary guys! The Democrats are corrupt scumbags! I'm the only honest politician!"

Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#154630: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:21:45 AM

Totally unsurprising if true. Sounds very much like Trump, thinking his money will gets him whatever he wants and needs.

He wasn't really wrong, tragically.

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#154631: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:24:03 AM

It's just more evidence that Trump thinks Hillary and the Democrats have the same flaws as him. When presented with evidence that his plan doesn't work he concludes that they're just doing a better job. It's not the fault of him personally.

nervmeister Since: Oct, 2010
#154632: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:26:58 AM

[up][up][up]If Wall Street, Goldman & Sachs, and other large establishment interests were backing Hillary, then yes, it's not outrageous to think much of the media was in her corner. Doesn't make Trump an unblemished angel, but I wouldn't rule that out.

edited 13th Nov '16 9:29:31 AM by nervmeister

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#154633: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:30:50 AM

That is not even close to bribing them. They supported Hillary because she's a better candidate. Trump evidently tried to pay them to say nice stuff about him.

nervmeister Since: Oct, 2010
#154634: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:33:13 AM

[up]They (mainly) supported her because she'd have been easier to control than Trump, better candidate or not.

edited 13th Nov '16 9:33:31 AM by nervmeister

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#154635: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:36:32 AM

The media does not control the president. Where are you getting this idea from?

RhymeBeat True colors from Eastern Standard Since: Aug, 2009 Relationship Status: In Lesbians with you
True colors
#154636: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:36:45 AM

"Easier to control" here means "isn't dangerously unpredictable".

The Crystal Caverns A bird's gotta sing.
Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#154637: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:37:23 AM

Those two ideas are not equivalent.

nervmeister Since: Oct, 2010
#154638: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:38:38 AM

[up][up]No. More as in "She'll do what we want" but that could be another reason.

[up][up][up]It's more a matter of Hillary being more likely to stay in their good graces by passing legislation that favors them no matter the cost to everyone else.

edited 13th Nov '16 9:41:28 AM by nervmeister

Gaon Smoking Snake from Grim Up North Since: Jun, 2012 Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
#154639: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:40:42 AM

I'm pretty sure big business supported Hillary because she is a lot less likely to turn the entire country in a smoking crater.

It's a case of Evil Versus Oblivion. The apocalypse isn't good for business.

"All you Fascists bound to lose."
nervmeister Since: Oct, 2010
#154640: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:43:30 AM

[up]Like I suggested, it doesn't have to be just one reason.

LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#154641: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:48:24 AM

Why would she do that? She doesn't answer to them.

Oh really when?
carbon-mantis Collector Of Fine Oddities from Trumpland Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Married to my murderer
Collector Of Fine Oddities
#154642: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:50:37 AM

Random dumb thought- wouldn't "Hillary is in the pockets of big business" garner her more support from economic conservatives?

nervmeister Since: Oct, 2010
#154643: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:51:27 AM

[up][up]Not in as direct a way as you're thinking. It's more of a "quid pro quo" type of thing.

[up]Are there even that many left in this day and age?

edited 13th Nov '16 9:52:59 AM by nervmeister

AngelusNox Warder of the damned from The guard of the gates of oblivion Since: Dec, 2014 Relationship Status: Married to the job
Warder of the damned
#154644: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:52:24 AM

They (mainly) supported her because she'd have been easier to control than Trump, better candidate or not.

This is the exact train of though that drove swats of voters towards Trump. The idea wouldn't be bought and the support Hillary got from the establishment meant for many people that she would do whatever they wanted her to do and Trump for being a billionaire would be above such kind of influence, meaning that Trump would be able to actually do what he says because and only listen to the will of his voters.

Which failed to account that every big business thrives on stability and their markets rely on predictable policies to account for future business projections, Hillary offered stability Trump didn't. Trump flip-flopped the economic issue and presented may proposals that could be very harmful for the US economy and since no one really knows how much of those policies he will try to follow it creates a lot of economic uncertainty.

But given how Trump just assembled a team filled with power brokers, lobbyists and corporate magnates and with some nepotism by appointing his son to a government role showed that the notion that Trump was free from the establishment to be

On the words of your then elect president: WRONG

edited 13th Nov '16 9:54:19 AM by AngelusNox

Inter arma enim silent leges
AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#154645: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:53:35 AM

[up][up]And your evidence for that is what?

edited 13th Nov '16 9:54:41 AM by AmbarSonofDeshar

BestOf FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC! from Finland Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Falling within your bell curve
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
#154646: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:57:44 AM

Usually when businesses pay extremely high fees to active politicians for pointless talks, they're paying for "access" - the chance to lobby at that person while they're thinking about the money they're making by spending that one day with that particular special interest group or corporation.

There's no law against politicians associating with businesses like this, but I think it's dishonest of their supporters to pretend that that sort of "access" isn't likely to result in a shift in that politician's decisions.

There is a little bit of truth in the idea that someone as rich as Trump would be sort of immune to that sort of lobbying. If you offer him $200 000 to give a 1-hour talk and have a nice chat at a 5-star restaurant he'll say that was his plan for the evening anyway, sans the talk and chat with the lobbyists. The $200 000 is the sort of money he might just drop while trying to get a card out of his wallet and he wouldn't bother to pick it up. Clinton is very wealthy, but not so wealthy that she wouldn't care about that sort of offer.

Of course, the other side of it is that Trump makes his money by cutting corners wherever he can and by burdening the justice system by throwing lawyers at it until everything just stops. Also, he did say he'd let his family run his businesses while he's President, rather than having a blind trust run his businesses. He said people could just trust that his children and wife wouldn't tell him anything about any potential ramifications of his political decisions to his business, so there wouldn't ever be a conflict of interest. That is simply a very transparent lie, so obvious it doesn't really even register as a lie. He absolutely means to make policy decisions of the advice of the managers of his corporations, and he essentially said as much. That is first-order corruption. There's not even any intermediary. The special interest group he seeks to favour is himself, so there's no need for bribes or highly paid, fake "advisory" roles in the companies he's helping out.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
nervmeister Since: Oct, 2010
#154647: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:57:55 AM

[up][up][up]Well, someone here did mention that Trump wanted "a seat at the table" with Hillary's backers and wasn't flattered when they blew him off, so I believe you about Trump.

edited 13th Nov '16 10:02:40 AM by nervmeister

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#154648: Nov 13th 2016 at 9:59:57 AM

There's no law against politicians associating with businesses like this, but I think it's dishonest of their supporters to pretend that that sort of "access" isn't likely to result in a shift in that politician's decisions.
On the flip side, if you think that this has occurred or is occurring, you should be able to actually point to examples. If you're claiming that of course Clinton is influenced by that sort of thing, but can't actually point to any pro-Wall Street policy that she's supported, then you don't really have a leg to stand on.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#154649: Nov 13th 2016 at 10:00:51 AM

[up][up][up]And then there's the fact that Trump can be controlled with a compliment.

edited 13th Nov '16 10:01:04 AM by AmbarSonofDeshar

InAnOdderWay Since: Nov, 2013
#154650: Nov 13th 2016 at 11:05:56 AM

Wikileaks may be a blatant tool for Russia now, but they still leak true things (it's just misconstrued by the alt-right and carefully selected to make their worldviews shine through). The DNC was absolutely working with the media to garner Hillary support.

Whether or not the media was "right" to support her, it did nlt help her perception as a stickler for the establishment.


Total posts: 417,856
Top