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

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
kkhohoho (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#158077: Nov 23rd 2016 at 10:36:35 AM

[up]Huh. What do you know? It worked.tongue

And now that I've read the article... well. Now I'm just fucking pissed.

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#158078: Nov 23rd 2016 at 10:39:34 AM

An excerpt nonetheless:

    Trump has a plan for government workers. They’re not going to like it. 
By Lisa Rein November 21

President-elect Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress are drawing up plans to take on the government bureaucracy they have long railed against, by eroding job protections and grinding down benefits that federal workers have received for a generation.

Hiring freezes, an end to automatic raises, a green light to fire poor performers, a ban on union business on the government’s dime and less generous pensions — these are the contours of the blueprint emerging under Republican control of Washington in January.

These changes were once unthinkable to federal employees, their unions and their supporters in Congress. But Trump’s election as an outsider promising to shake up a system he told voters is awash in “waste, fraud and abuse” has conservatives optimistic that they could do now what Republicans have been unable to do in the 133 years since the modern civil service was created.

“You have the country moving to the right and being much more anti-Washington than it was,” said former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), a leading Trump adviser who serves on the president-elect’s transition team.

“We’re going to have to get the country to understand how big the problem is, the human costs of it and why it’s absolutely essential to reform,” said Gingrich, who urged Trump to shrink big government and overhaul the “job-for-life” guarantee of federal work.

Gingrich predicted that Stephen K. Bannon, a former Breitbart News chief who helped steer Trump’s campaign and is now one of his most influential advisers, would lead the effort. “It’s a big, big project,” he said.

The project aligns with Bannon’s long-stated warnings about the corrupting influence of government and a capital city rampant with “crony capitalism.”

Breitbart headlines also provide a possible insight into his views, with federal employees described as overpaid, too numerous and a “privileged class.”

“Number of Government Employees Now Surpasses Manufacturing Jobs by 9,977,000,” the website proclaimed in November. There are 2.1 million federal civilian employees.

Top Republicans on Capitol Hill say their first priority will be making it easier to fire employees regarded as incompetent or who break the rules.

“It’s nearly impossible to fire somebody,” said Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. “When the overwhelming majority do a good job and the one bad apple is there viewing pornography, I want people to be held accountable.”

Chaffetz said he plans to push through wholesale changes to the generous retirement benefits that federal workers receive, by shifting to a market-driven, 401(k)-style plan for new employees.

He said the model would be his home state, which six years ago replaced the defined benefit pensions that have disappeared at most private companies with a defined contribution plan for new state and municipal workers.

“We have a Republican president who will help us drive this to the finish line,” Chaffetz said.

The promises go hand in hand with Trump’s promise to shrink the size and reach of government, from eliminating some agencies outright to lifting regulations and running the bureaucracy with fewer people.

Gingrich said the Trump administration probably would look for guidance from Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R), who stripped public employee unions of most of their collective-bargaining rights and forced workers to pay more into their pensions and for health care in what became a bitter political fight.

The White House also can look for lessons from policies advocated by Vice President-elect Mike Pence.

As Indiana governor, Pence battled public employee unions and approved pay increases for state workers who receive good performance reviews, a strategy tried at the Defense Department under President George W. Bush but which was poorly managed and eventually abolished. The pay-for-performance idea is nonetheless a rebuke to the government’s system of raises based on longevity.

“We’re going to be playing defense for at least a couple of years,” acknowledged William R. Dougan, president of the National Federation of Federal Employees, the third-largest federal union.

“The most immediate worry is: How are we going to shrink government?” Dougan said. “Are we going to lay people off? Eliminate whole agencies or do it through attrition?”

Trump has promised that in his first 100 days in office he will freeze hiring by not replacing employees who leave. The military and employees in public health and safety roles would be exempt, according to the president-elect’s Contract with the American Voter.

He has pledged to eliminate two regulations for every new one passed and shut down the Education Department and parts of the Environmental Protection Agency.

But he also wants a military with more ships, planes and troops. He has said he wants to triple the number of immigration enforcement agents and beef up the Border Patrol by thousands.

So a selective hiring freeze may be more realistic, Trump advisers say, where agencies that Republicans dislike shrink and ones they like grow.

Trump can freeze hiring without Congress’s approval, with an executive order or less formal instructions to federal agencies.

[House tries to give Veterans Affairs more power to discipline employees]

Democrats and federal employee unions are preparing to fight the image of government workers as a privileged class and the bureaucracy as a bloated mess.

Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D), whose Northern Virginia district includes thousands of federal workers, said: “What study are they citing saying there are too many federal employees? Are you going to make a bunch of exceptions, in which case your plan looks like Swiss cheese?”

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the oversight committee, said in an email that he would “fight any effort to roll back civil service protections” — and worried that whistle blowers could lose their legal right to be immune from retaliation.

Others raise the specter that Republican proposals could allow political favoritism to creep into a system Congress created in 1883 to remove federal jobs from patronage ranks.

“Of course we want accountability,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who will enter the Senate in January, “but we also want to protect against political favoritism. It’s important that we not allow the civil service to be politicized.”

Congressional Republicans have clamored for years for a smaller bureaucracy and a workforce that resembles the private sector. The calls quickened after a string of scandals, particularly at the Department of Veterans Affairs, where managers instructed employees to falsify patient wait times to cover up delays for medical appointments.

But much of this GOP-written legislation was opposed by the Obama administration and blocked by Senate Democrats.

Now, with a Trump White House eliminating a veto threat, conservatives see their vision within reach.

And Democrats acknowledge that senators who are nervously looking to reelection bids in 2018 and represent red states friendly to Trump may not fall on their swords to defend federal employees, whose presence is more diffuse outside the Washington area.

Many inside and outside government agree that change to the way federal workers are hired, promoted and disciplined is long overdue. Employees under investigation for breaking the rules can sit at home for years — collecting paychecks and benefits — while their cases drag on. Performance rankings are widely panned as a joke, because the vast majority of workers are rated as exceeding expectations or doing outstanding work.

Federal workers are seldom fired for poor performance — and it can take years for managers to make a successful case for dismissal for misconduct. About 0.5 percent of the civil service gets fired every year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

“The civil service system fails at almost everything it was designed to do,” said Paul Light, a civil service expert at New York University. “It’s very slow at hiring, negligent in disciplining, permissive in promoting.”

“There’s a private awareness among Democrats and Republicans alike that we need to do something about this,” he said.

Trump says he wants to freeze hiring to clean up corruption in government — but not necessarily to save money, a connection roundly dismissed by critics.

“Look at what’s happening with every agency — waste, fraud and abuse,” he said on the campaign trail. “We will cut so much, your head will spin.”

Other presidents, including Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, have frozen hiring to shrink government — but rarely succeeded for long periods. Reagan imposed a freeze the day he came into office in 1981 that was retroactive to Election Day, forcing managers to renege on job offers to hundreds of people. But the government soon ballooned with active-duty military and civilians as he began a massive defense buildup.

The civilian workforce is the smallest it has been since Reagan left office, after plummeting under Clinton and expanding under Bush and President Obama.

Yet Republicans say a leaner government goes hand in hand with a more accountable one in which managers and rank-and-file employees who’ve failed should not get to keep their jobs.

These changes have taken root, with a bipartisan law in 2014 to limit the appeal rights of senior executives at Veterans Affairs who face discipline for wrongdoing.

Since then, similar restrictions for employees across government have stalled in Congress, in part because the Obama administration made little use of its new authority — and this year stopped using it altogether in the face of a court challenge alleging that it violated employees’ right to due process.

Other changes could result in longer probation for new employees, with the goal of making it easier for managers to let poor performers go since they would have little job protections. This has started at the Defense Department, where the current standard has doubled to two years.

These changes are vigorously opposed by unions, which could be severely weakened under GOP plans to eventually wipe out what’s known as “official time,” union work done by employees who continue to receive full salary and benefits.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said in an email that he will reach out to federal employee unions as his panel works to enact “long-overdue reforms to our civil service.”

Said Johnson: “If we start with areas of agreement, I am confident that we can make continuous improvements to the functionality of the federal workforce.”

Eric Yoder contributed to this report.

Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#158079: Nov 23rd 2016 at 10:42:19 AM

Exceprt means parts, not the whole article. I know paywalls are annoying and not all of us can pay but if we want to support the cause of actual journalism, maybe those who can should seriously consider it and also consider not reposting the full text here.

edited 23rd Nov '16 10:43:28 AM by Elle

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#158080: Nov 23rd 2016 at 10:45:28 AM

[up] Fair enough. I'll be a bit more thoughtful on that going forward.

Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#158081: Nov 23rd 2016 at 10:59:21 AM

I have another thought about Haley being tapped for the ambasador job: What kind of person would likely replace her as governor in SC? Who profits in that?

edited 23rd Nov '16 11:02:09 AM by Elle

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#158082: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:02:41 AM

[up] The Lt. Gov. Henry Mc Master — a Trump supporter.

Disgusted, but not surprised
TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#158083: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:03:42 AM

Regarding the DNC chair, can we not just give it to Obama? He said he's staying in Washington and intends to stay involved in politics. The man got more votes in 2008 and 2012 than any Presidential candidate in the history of the United States. His approval ratings are through the roof. Even goddamn Trump is praising him.

The central platform of the Democratic Party going forward should be, "Shut the f*ck up and listen to Obama."

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#158084: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:04:40 AM

[up] Rightly or wrongly, he's seen as too "corporatist" by the more Leftish voter base. The TPP didn't help matters, regardless of why he believed it was necessary to counter China's influence.

edited 23rd Nov '16 11:05:16 AM by M84

Disgusted, but not surprised
Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#158085: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:04:55 AM

Obama's indicated he has plans and chances are they don't involve a DNC chair.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#158086: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:05:51 AM

In all honesty, the guy and his family deserve a break from public life.

Disgusted, but not surprised
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#158087: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:06:01 AM

Corporatist or no, Obama did win his elections and is/was a fairly good president. So I'd have no particular objections.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#158088: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:06:44 AM

[up] Same here.

Disgusted, but not surprised
Krieger22 Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018 from Malaysia Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: I'm in love with my car
Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018
#158089: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:06:50 AM

Also if Zuckerberg's denials weren't enough to convince you that Facebook has little interest in curbing pro-fascist activity on their site

I’ve been banned from Facebook.

My account has been suspended supposedly for violation of community standards.

My profile is still active, you can still access the page and comment on posts that haven’t been deleted by Facebook. But I myself am locked out. I can’t post, comment, or access the Facebook messenger system.

The community standard I violated is apparently the one where you’re not allowed to criticize actual, no fooling, Nazis.

Yes, actual Nazis.

That’s right, I was banned for criticizing an actual Nazi.

This is the post that got me banned:

I don't envy Mike Godwin, his law is getting a hell of a workout

I've got hundreds of angry messages here telling me to stop calling Trump supporters fascists. And I would, except for the part where I keep running into ACTUAL FUCKING NAZIS.

This guy for example. He's upset at my "brand of profanity" (I used the term "ball-gargling" in reference to Sean Hannity. My apologies, but as a retired military officer and professional writer when I see somebody gargling balls I'm required by law to use the technical term. I digress), but sees nothing profane about naming himself after an infamous French collaborator and member of the Waffen SS. Not to mention his "heroes" are literally a list of fascists, fascist murderers who became the actual Nazi party, and white supremacists.

And then there's "Jewry." Just right there, in a sentence, like you know that's something people who aren't Nazis do.

So again, you don't want to be called a Nazi?

Then stop hanging out with actual Nazis. Just stop it. Stop it. Stop it.

Stop hanging out with Nazis. Don't be polite to Nazis. Don't think that the First Amendment means you have to be respectful of Nazis. Don't pretend Nazis have a valid point of view. They're Nazis.

Stop standing next to Nazis.

Stop acting like Nazis.

Stop cheering Nazis.

Stop voting for the people Nazis vote for.

They're fucking NAZIS. You don't have to be polite to them. It's okay to hate them. They're fucking NAZIS.

And for the love of Dread Cthulhu, stop using the word "Jewry."

image

Now, nothing I posted violates Facebook’s community standards.

If you plug “Henri Fenet” into Facebook’s search function, you’ll find literally hundreds of neo-Nazis praising the ideology of Nazism on Facebook. Talking about Nazis is okay. Posting comments favorable to Nazis is okay. Being an actual Nazi is okay with Facebook.

Nor is it use of profanity, in fact, if you type “fuck” into Facebook’s search function, you will literally find tens of thousands of results of that word posted to Facebook, including actual Facebook Communities and Groups that use the word in their titles. For example:

image

In fact, those who complained to Facebook about the post, flagged it as “spam” because they couldn’t find an actual violation of Facebook’s community standards – despite the fact that my post is obviously not spam by any definition including Facebook’s.

So Facebook removed the post and then banned me from the platform for the next 24 hours.

The people who do this sort of thing, do so specifically in order to silence people they don’t like, not because they are actually offended. This is targeted harassment specifically designed to suppress people like me.

In my case, I’ve been targeted by certain rabidly obnoxious members of the Science Fiction community and more recently by actual neo-Nazis and Trump supporters. These people spend an inordinate amount of time obsessing over my Facebook page and scheming to find ways to have me shut down.

As I noted the last time this happened, unfortunately this is the risk you take when you sign on to Facebook and other social media sites. You don’t control the platform. Hell, you can’t even talk to the those who run the platform. And the size of it makes any attempt at real-time moderation by the platform managers a complete joke. Neither Facebook nor Twitter has made any real effort to prevent harassment, bullying, or any of the other more unfortunate aspects of social media. And Facebook has made no effort whatsoever to prevent abuse of their system and they’ve made it impossible for the victims to do anything about it, they are in fact complicit and they are very likely to become more so in the future.

My ban from the platform is the result of Facebook’s lousy architecture, which lets bullies and harassers abuse Facebook’s automated system – a system that was supposedly put in place to make Facebook safer – and I have absolutely no recourse to protest or appeal.

Despite the fact that I personally bring more than 90,000 people to the table on Facebook, the people who profit from the content I create simply don’t care.

If Facebook was serious about their supposed commitment to free speech and the safety of their users, they would take immediate steps to publicly remove those who abuse the system. But not only do they not remove those who abuse the system, they actively protect those abusers and keep them anonymous.

I’d like to say that this won’t silence me, or keep me from posting to the community I’ve created on Facebook.

But the truth of the matter is that it very well could.

In fact, given America’s new acceptance of fascism, I suspect platforms like Facebook and Twitter will either have to become more accommodating of actual fascist ideology and less tolerant of people like me, or risk going to the wall themselves – especially given that our new president has made it very clear that he intends to directly control how the media, including social media, reports on his administration.

I guess we’ll find out.

I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiot
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#158090: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:09:30 AM

[up] Ugh, I'm glad I never really use my Facebook account. Also glad I never signed on to Twitter.

Should I start practicing how to goose-step at this point?

Disgusted, but not surprised
carbon-mantis Collector Of Fine Oddities from Trumpland Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Married to my murderer
Collector Of Fine Oddities
#158091: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:12:04 AM

Sounds similar to the way antivaxers have been getting actual physicians banned; a bit of loophole abuse and a bit of baiting them into posting anything including a portion of the offenders name which is then reported as harassment and garners an automatic ban after a certain number of reports are sent, if I recall.

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
carbon-mantis Collector Of Fine Oddities from Trumpland Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Married to my murderer
Collector Of Fine Oddities
#158093: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:14:07 AM

Emm, I mean real physicians and scientists who call them out for claiming to be medical academics when their "degree" is an internet course in Quantum Mind-Body Bullshittery.

RedSavant Since: Jan, 2001
#158094: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:20:14 AM

I figured something like that was going to start happening. It's a combination of alt-righters doxxing the people who they hate and who speak out against them (this isn't a doxx, obviously, but it's the same sort of targeted, anonymous pile-on) and corporations already starting to toady up. It was pretty obvious the instant Zuckerberg started dissembling about how Facebook had no way to flag false news and that even if there was fake news being spread, surely Clinton supporters shared just as much as Trump supporters.

It's been fun.
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#158095: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:22:55 AM

[up] ...Man, our country is full of cowards, isn't it?

Disgusted, but not surprised
SciFiSlasher from Absolutely none of your business. Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
#158096: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:35:04 AM

For the record, that article is from May.

Goddamn it.

Now, back to the topic currently being discussed...

The day after the election, my German professor (who is German) set aside half the class to have us talk about the election. For the record, he did spend some time in other classes beforehand telling us how terrified German were of Trump because he reminded them way too much a point in their history that they were ''not'' proud of.

Honestly, the responses some of my classmates gave were just as appalling as the ban that guy got on Facebook for arguing iwht legit Nazis:

  • "I feel we see people wearing a Trump shirt, and we just automatically assume the worst about them. That's why this country is so divided!"
  • "White Americans that are racist might be like that because they think minorities are racist to them, so they don't think they can communicate with them!"
"We need to stop demonizing those in the Republican party!"

Honestly, I don't understand how American people-even liberals-can continue spouting this "racists are people too!" bullshit. It ties in with our constant romanticization of the Confederacy, where we keep portraying them as "morally gray" just to make the US Civil War seem more like a tragic fight between brothers rather than the fight between America and treasonous slave owners and racists that it was. Why is it so hard to say that racists almost never change and do not add anything of value, and that we do not need their opinions? Yeah, the dumbasses at Fox News and Breitbart call us "PC" and shit like that, but if that's the best they can do, then there should be no reason for speaking the truth about racists and what place they have in a modern democratic power (i.e., none).

"Somehow the hated have to walk a tightrope, while those who hate do not."
FergardStratoavis A Fluff Ringer from Bellveins (Troper Knight) Relationship Status: A gay little love melody
A Fluff Ringer
#158097: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:43:25 AM

[up][up][up]That's rather strange, considering that a bunch of Polish nationalist accounts has been suspended on Facebook for spouting their usual drivel. They've even burned a Facebook flag on their march at Independence Day.

Why would American Nazis get a pass and continue to exist?

[up] Sadly, the first statement is not inaccurate, at least partially. We do seem to think the worst of people who voted Trump, whether they posted in this thread, voted out of desperation, genuine affection for his racism or whatever reason.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#158098: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:44:46 AM

It's not strictly impossible to convince a racist to change their minds, or at least convince them not to act on their prejudices. But generally, if they are already of voting age or so — it's going to be way more difficult.

You gotta engage them while they are young and haven't quite filled up on FOX News or Breitbart or the occasional rants from their Racist Grandma.

Disgusted, but not surprised
Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#158099: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:48:29 AM

Twitter has its own issues when it comes to dealing with people who abuse the platform but remember they did ban Milo and more recently, Tia Tequila among others.

Also, that one guy on facebook got hit because people were able to abuse the automated system. Twitter appears to only use automated systems against bot accounts.

edited 23rd Nov '16 11:51:41 AM by Elle

Krieger22 Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018 from Malaysia Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: I'm in love with my car
Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018
#158100: Nov 23rd 2016 at 11:50:37 AM

[up][up][up]American Privilege (TM).

And, really, whether they live in the depths of desperation or live in the heights of privilege, they decided that a looter of his own companies, someone who tried to erode public trust in governmental institutions and an extreme racist was fit to be President of the United States. Educating them to come to Jesus to reality and holding them accountable for this are not mutually exclusive.

[up]After how many dogpiles led on by both? They only got into trouble with consequences because they picked a fight with people with pull. They got away completely scot free in the past.

I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiot

Total posts: 417,856
Top