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

henry42 [REDACTED] from Western Hemisphere Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: It's not my fault I'm not popular!
[REDACTED]
#158701: Nov 26th 2016 at 5:36:20 PM

[up][up] Yeah, that's probably why. I'll admit that this is a problem among socialists, but it extends to other ideologies as well.

[up] The definition of socialism has nothing to do with welfare programs or nationalized industry.

Also, I know what that gif is, even without looking at it.

edited 26th Nov '16 5:38:17 PM by henry42

One does not shake the box containing the sticky notes of doom!
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#158702: Nov 26th 2016 at 5:36:36 PM

"@The Handle: You forget that a lot of that land redistribution that heralded the transition from feudalism to capitalism was from the peasants to the landlords. Lets face it, if we are talking pure production a smaller number of large farms will beat a larger number smaller farms, especially when fully industrialized."

Not necessarily. Cif. intensive farming, subsistence farming, etc. There's a reason plantations can be a terrible idea.

As for your second point, see my edit. It doesn't matter what the cat's colour is; so long as it fails to catch the mouse, it's fucking useless.

Also, @tribalism, [nja]

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Stormtroper from Little Venice Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: I-It's not like I like you, or anything!
#158703: Nov 26th 2016 at 5:44:20 PM

Goddamnit this thread moves fast.

Expropriation is definitely socialist? No, it isn't. It's state-ist. Or would you call King George III a socialist?

Expropriations are a socialist practice, yes, it's been done and supported by all socialists everywhere at all points in history. It's not an invention of socialism, of course, but it's a central part of the ideology.

As for how socialists praised it and said it would be fine, I'll just point to all the times Capitalists applauded their dictators and their drastic IMF austerity policies ("restructuration") and claimed it was all fine despite disastrous tangible consequences. People who divide themselves along tribal lines get fucking stupid about defending people in their tribe, and selectively rigorous in the scrutiny of the other.

How silly of them, all those dictators had to do was to claim they were leading an anti-imperialist revolution for the people and hordes of socialists would be sucking up to them to this day.

The other side has its nasty side, but it is also the side that is capable of valuing human life above ideology. And even if that weren't true, two wrongs don't make a right.

I've been waiting to use this gif for a while.

I knew what that link contained before I even clicked on it.

edited 26th Nov '16 5:44:52 PM by Stormtroper

And that's how I ended up in the wardrobe. It Just Bugs Me!
henry42 [REDACTED] from Western Hemisphere Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: It's not my fault I'm not popular!
[REDACTED]
#158704: Nov 26th 2016 at 5:54:54 PM

The other side has its nasty side, but it is also the side that is capable of valuing human life above ideology.
Tell that to the edgelords who can't stop praising Pinochet.

Also, I just remembered that this thread is supposed to be American politics, not Venezuelan politics. I think we've gotten a bit off track here.

One does not shake the box containing the sticky notes of doom!
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#158705: Nov 26th 2016 at 5:57:58 PM

[up]Quite. If they valued human life above ideology, they wouldn't try to slash healthcare and welfare at every opportunity, among many other things.

It turns out, there's a ton of things that people value above human life. Ideology's only one of them.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Stormtroper from Little Venice Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: I-It's not like I like you, or anything!
#158706: Nov 26th 2016 at 5:59:03 PM

Pinochet's oppositors included in no small part capitalists. The reverse is not true for any given socialist dictator, with the arguable exception of Stalin.

But yes, I guess it's off-topic.

edited 26th Nov '16 6:08:24 PM by Stormtroper

And that's how I ended up in the wardrobe. It Just Bugs Me!
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#158707: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:02:08 PM

Yeah, that's inaccurate, starting with every single case where their revolution wasn't a one-party endeavour and moving forward to opponents domestic and abroad.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Stormtroper from Little Venice Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: I-It's not like I like you, or anything!
#158708: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:07:58 PM

Quite. If they valued human life above ideology, they wouldn't try to slash healthcare and welfare at every opportunity, among many other things.

With few exceptions, social services have been shit in all socialist countries. Those of us who care about them should look into some other form of government.

By the by, I'm noticing something. You're being very strict about what counts as "socialism", but you're using welfare and healthcare as if they were incompatible with capitalism, as if it weren't the case that almost (exactly?) all capitalist countries has those.

[up] Examples? The revolution devours it children, yes, but the immediate result ends up with one political block without a significant local socialist opposition.

Although I guess the Khmer Rouge should also count as another exception, considering Vietnam.

edited 26th Nov '16 6:10:02 PM by Stormtroper

And that's how I ended up in the wardrobe. It Just Bugs Me!
JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#158709: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:09:42 PM

As this article notes:

There’s no question that without the record support of working-class whites, Trump would not have eked out his narrow wins in the Rust Belt—or in the Electoral College. But the truth is, 2016 did not mark a fundamental shift in the American electorate—and revamping the Democratic Party’s entire political strategy would be an enormous mistake. “This was an extreme election,” says William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution. “All the stars and moon were aligned the same way for the Republicans.” In fact, a closer look at what happened in Macomb County and elsewhere in the Rust Belt reveals that 2016 may well represent what demographer Ruy Teixeira calls “the last stand of America’s white working class”—the final time that blue-collar whites will determine a national election.

It’s all in the numbers. Since 1980, working-class whites have seen their share of the electorate plunge by about 30 percent—and it will continue to decline another two to three points every four years. Meanwhile, the “rising majority” that favors Democrats—single and professional women, people of color, and millennials—will continue to grow. Overall, the minority share of the electorate, which stood at just 23 percent in 2000, will soar to 40 percent by 2032. Over the past four years alone, the clout of Asian American and Latino voters has jumped by more than 16 percent.

Even with Clinton’s shortcomings, Democrats fared well in states with the fastest-changing demographics. Clinton won Virginia and Colorado handily, and Nevada more narrowly. She also cut into the GOP’s victory margins from 2012 in Arizona, Texas, and Georgia. But in North Carolina and Florida—two battleground states expected to trend blue in the future—Democrats fell short of expectations. “Unfortunately for Democrats, not every state looks like Virginia or Colorado,” says Kyle Kondik, who analyzes elections for the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.

The trend is so strong that no level of turnout among working-class whites will stem the demographic tide. “The racial composition of the electorate will continue to shift dramatically over the next four elections,” says Teixeira, co-author of The Emerging Democratic Majority. “Even with the astronomically high support for Trump among the white working class and the relatively weak minority support for Clinton, projected demographic shifts will still produce a very different outcome in 2020.” Even if blue-collar strongholds like Macomb County swing redder next time, the GOP will still come up short.

In the words of an especially brutal socialist, "Not one step backwards, comrades".

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#158710: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:11:25 PM

Demographics only matter if Democrats actually bother to turn out. Again, Trump easily could have been stopped if turnout in Florida and NC (and maybe one other state) had been just a bit higher.

And I'm wary about any projections that say that its impossible for a given event to happen in four years. Nothing is impossible after this cycle.

edited 26th Nov '16 6:12:31 PM by Rationalinsanity

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#158711: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:16:19 PM

By the by, I'm noticing something. You're being very strict about what counts as "socialism", but you're using welfare and healthcare as if they were incompatible with capitalism, as if it weren't the case that almost (exactly?) all capitalist countries has those.

We're talking about ideologists sacrificing human life on the altar of their perfect world. Are you going to pretend that there aren't "capitalists" (or "market fetishists", if you prefer) who are against welfare and healthcare on principle and do everything in their power to destroy them? Who, in fact, believe that they are incompatible with "true" capitalism, and freedom, and all great things? Are you familiar with the concept of "Starving the Beast"?

edited 26th Nov '16 6:17:30 PM by TheHandle

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
henry42 [REDACTED] from Western Hemisphere Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: It's not my fault I'm not popular!
[REDACTED]
#158712: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:17:11 PM

@Stormtroper Yeah, while I still dislike capitalism, I'll admit that it's not incompatible with welfare programs. This is mainly just a problem with neoliberalism.

@JulianLapostat and @RationalInsanity, thanks for getting us back on topic.

One does not shake the box containing the sticky notes of doom!
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#158713: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:18:30 PM

Define neoliberalism. Clinton has been called one, yet she carried Sanders' platform, and they have near-identical voting records.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Ogodei Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers from The front lines Since: Jan, 2011
Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers
#158714: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:22:06 PM

Cuba wasn't the worst as far as socialist dictatorships go. They produced some good outcomes and their human rights abuses were probably less than some of the non-com alternatives in Latin America like The Process or Pinochet, albeit still unacceptable. The island's poverty is balanced by strong fundamentals in health care and education.

The revolution succeeded for a good reason, too. It wasn't like Eastern Europe where Stalinism was thrust upon the people at gunpoint. Folks yammering about free and democratic Cuba have many in their ranks who would have touted Batista as a necessary evil, if not outright praised him.

Mio Since: Jan, 2001
#158715: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:22:43 PM

@ Julian Lapostat: I kind of understand the fear that the Democrats may over-correct, but the they should not be relying on the "inevitable" demographic changes, as they may not arrive before the current republican paradigm entrenches itself and causes permanent damage. As Alfred Maynard Keynes said (admittedly in a somewhat different context) "in the long-run we are all dead".

As such the Democrats will need to find way to get some of those Working Class Whites back on their side. There is always the chance that Trumps terrible policies will drive them back to the other side, but that can't be relied upon either.

[up]As true as that may be I still find it baffling when people say things like Castro was "not a dictator" despite lifting much of his governing style from the Leninist-Stalinist playbook.

I will never understand the European Left's sympathies with the Cuban regime.

edited 26th Nov '16 6:24:41 PM by Mio

AlleyOop Since: Oct, 2010
#158716: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:26:35 PM

When it comes to the Democrats wooing over "rural white voters" it's less about dropping the minority approach like a hot potato in favor of Republican dogwhistles (as [up] mentioned they might but it's more a case of overcorrection than outright flipflopping) and more about exercising demographic outreach muscles that had atrophied under DWS's stewardry. It's not a zero sum game or at least it's not supposed to be. They do need to be cautious going forward but if they're not idiots about it then it needn't be them throwing minorities to the dogs to woo the rural white voters.

[up][up] "Not as bad as" doesn't change the fact that Castro was still a brutal dictator who oppressed his people, had many political opponents jailed and killed, and forced many to flee for their very lives because of his despotism. It's fair to point out ways in which his government did succeed in an impartial way, but my Cuban relatives and various bloggers have pointed out that Castro was in many ways exactly what people fear Trump will become, yet the reaction among non-Cubans is extremely muted and rife with apologists and wannabe anti-imperialists who try to defend his actions because of leftist tribalism.

[down] It's ironic, I've seen a lot of anti-imperialist leftists praise the USSR and back in the day you had a lot of Soviet sympathizer groups making their members deny communist war crimes and praise their regimes for sticking it to the West, but the USSR definitely had a lot of imperialist characteristics of its own. The forced Russification of names in many Central Asian countries for example.

edited 26th Nov '16 6:40:50 PM by AlleyOop

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#158717: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:27:48 PM

[up][up] They also need to accept that Latino voters simply aren't going to be a reliably democratic voting block in the way African Americans are, it's probably destined to a 40:60 split or so.

As far as why the European left sympathized with Cuba, they were pretty much the only nations in the western hemisphere to successfully defy the United States until fairly recently.

edited 26th Nov '16 6:28:59 PM by CaptainCapsase

henry42 [REDACTED] from Western Hemisphere Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: It's not my fault I'm not popular!
[REDACTED]
#158718: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:33:31 PM

@TheHandle Basically, "market fetishism". Its adherents advocate deregulation, free trade agreements, and cutting or privatizing social services—all of which Hillary has supported.

@Ogodei Yeah, people often forget that Cuba was a pretty shitty place before the revolution. They're probably the most successful Marxist-Leninist state, although that's setting the bar a bit low.

edited 26th Nov '16 6:37:37 PM by henry42

One does not shake the box containing the sticky notes of doom!
PotatoesRock Since: Oct, 2012
#158719: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:34:33 PM

What Unions Got Wrong About Trump

Specifically the Union Leaders

One official with the United Steelworkers said his Pittsburgh-based union had urged members to back Mrs. Clinton, but many preferred Mr. Trump, largely because of his tough talk on trade with Mexico and China. Many lapped up his promises to bring back manufacturing jobs, hinting at a return (an improbable one) to the 1950s and ’60s, when manufacturing boomed and unions were mighty. (Mr. Trump’s G.O.P. allies are spoiling, however, to further hobble labor unions, which are far weaker than in the ’60s.)

Many steelworkers, the official explained, disliked Mrs. Clinton because of her ties to Wall Street, because her husband had championed Nafta and because she had supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership before coming out against the trade pact during the campaign.

Leo Gerard, the steelworkers’ president, sent a letter to his union’s 600,000 members, acknowledging that its ranks “were divided this election season.” While the economy has grown, he wrote, “the growth has failed to stimulate the manufacturing sector because of our nation’s failed trade policies.” Maintaining that Mr. Trump had appropriated his union’s message, he wrote, “Trump used our own words to speak to these problems, and to the real suffering, fears and anxieties that so many feel.”

Truthiness > Truth

NAFTA and Trade Deals are seen as Un-American.

Protectionism is desired out of hope that jobs remain home even if robots keep appearing.

Voters want to see the financial industry burned to the ground, and the Earth where it laid salted so it can never grow again. And bankers jailed and/or executed essentially, even if it's against the law. Someone needs to be punished and the banks need to be smashed. 2008 is "Never Forget".

edited 26th Nov '16 6:35:32 PM by PotatoesRock

Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#158720: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:35:18 PM

If the GOP made an actual effort to court them and dropped the implicit racism against them, they'd actually be much stronger. It's well-documented that older latinos tend to have conservative and old-fashioned social mores, so if the GOP actually tried they could probably get them to vote for them even more than they already do.

MadSkillz Destroyer of Worlds Since: Mar, 2013 Relationship Status: I only want you gone
Destroyer of Worlds
#158721: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:36:16 PM

30:70 split in favor of democrats, really. Cuban-American are in favor of Republicans but the younger generations are starting to lean towards Democrats.

The GOP could pick up a huge voter base among hispanic-americans if they could somehow get their rural white voter base to cozy up to Hispanics in their society and if they'd stop dog-whistling about us.

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#158722: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:38:03 PM

Fact is historically this is how white revanchism was legitimized and persisted.

At the end of Reconstruction, the Republicans abandoned freedmen to Jim Crow, because they wanted to cater to the poor-whites. During the Depression, the New Deal was originally extended to poor whites in the South as a kind of neo-feudal entitlement and deliberately directed to exclude African-Americans and minorities. You can see this in a wonderful film by Elia Kazan called Wild River which is about a New Dealer (Montgomery Clift) going down South to purchase land to build the Tennessee River Valley, and the poor-whites hate the idea that African-Americans could find work, work that should go to them first...damnit!

Then you have the Southern Strategy and the Second Redemption in the 60s and 70s with dog-whistle politics and various policies erected to disproportionately target African-Americans and Reagan's whole "Let's Make America Great Again" Campaign slogan, was a deliberate reference to the era before the 60s when America was "great". And of course Bill Clinton had to co-opt Reaganomics because he felt that it was necessary to abandon the old Democrat party platforms to make them "electable" and he did that by adopting tough on crime laws and paving the way for mass incarceration.

The great danger with this election is not really from the Republican party, its from guys like Sanders who says identity politics doesn't matter. By doing this they legitimize white revanchism again and allow it to persist into the future for a new generation of Mudsill who will believe that their tender feelings about culture and "those people" were validated after all.

TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#158723: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:39:03 PM

I live in a small town. Those postmortem articles are pretty accurate. It's nothing but white people for miles and miles here. There were maybe eight nonwhite people that attended my school of some 2000+ students.

Thought you lived in Wilmington? That's a pretty diverse city as far as I was aware

New Survey coming this weekend!
MadSkillz Destroyer of Worlds Since: Mar, 2013 Relationship Status: I only want you gone
Destroyer of Worlds
#158724: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:39:11 PM

If the GOP made an actual effort to court them and dropped the implicit racism against them, they'd actually be much stronger. It's well-documented that older latinos tend to have conservative and old-fashioned social mores, so if the GOP actually tried they could probably get them to vote for them even more than they already do.

If Steve Bannon succeeds in destroying the conservative party and birthing a nationalist party then they'll forever lock out Hispanics.

Ogodei Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers from The front lines Since: Jan, 2011
Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers
#158725: Nov 26th 2016 at 6:39:15 PM

It's funny about the anti-wall street anger, since whatever Trump's rhetoric, his administration is going to be perpetual handjobs for Wall Street.


Total posts: 417,856
Top