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

Pseudopartition Screaming Into The Void from The Cretaeceous Since: Dec, 2013 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
Screaming Into The Void
#159526: Nov 30th 2016 at 8:36:58 AM

About Trump's businesses:

While I am not mandated to do this under the law, I feel it is visually important, as President, to in no way have a conflict of interest with my various businesses.

...Wait, I thought it was literally in the Constitution?

Mio Since: Jan, 2001
#159527: Nov 30th 2016 at 8:37:07 AM

I really don't like how much we seem to be depending on Trump's administration being an abject failure, not that I don't think it will be (at least on some level) but I can't help but feel that continuing to express how we are all waiting for the house of cards to collapse is just lowering the bar for Trump.

We've already seen that Democrats are held to a much higher standard then Republicans, and Trump is already held to an even lower standard. I'd really for it to get to the point where Trump can pull that stunt with the Carrier factory a few more times and carry that as his major success all the way through to the next election, which doesn't sound all that unlikely.

He needs to held to a higher standard and we can't let anything he does go unscrutinized, which I know is easier said then done given the condition of our major media outlets.

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#159528: Nov 30th 2016 at 8:41:29 AM

@Capsase: An AU universe I am working on. To whit, a major point there is that governments which can't handle natural disasters tend to end up in trouble. And the in-universe counterpart of the US had its healthcare system gutted, prompting an outbreak of an infectious disease. Not a dangerous one, but it spread unchecked and eventually convinced a lot of people that Republicans are dangerous for one's own health.

@Mio: Good point, actually. I also think people need to make sure that a Trump administration ends up being a failure - for one thing, to stop their mostly awful policy proposals.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159529: Nov 30th 2016 at 8:43:08 AM

...Wait, I thought it was literally in the Constitution?

There is a Emoluments Clause yes, but Trump has found a few loopholes around it.

Separation of business and personal interests has been an unwritten norm until now, an evolving tradition that everyone just took for granted. Even Richard Nixon and Bush II followed it.

Other unwritten norms include releasing your tax records. It's just something everyone is expected to do but there isn't a rule that demands that.

TheWanted Since: Oct, 2013
#159530: Nov 30th 2016 at 9:49:20 AM

Well it appears that house democrats are stuck on stupid and re-elected Nancy Pelosi to house minority leader.

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159531: Nov 30th 2016 at 9:52:34 AM

Since she's a defender of identity politics, I approve that decision.

Mio Since: Jan, 2001
#159532: Nov 30th 2016 at 9:54:35 AM

I don't really see much of a problem unless the Moderate/Social Justice wing of the part of the party starts to puchback against the Left/Economic Justice wing, or perhaps more likely the other way around.

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159533: Nov 30th 2016 at 9:55:59 AM

[up] If it happens, it's going to be coming from both sides as the center and left descend into infighting, much like what's been going on with the UK Labor party since Brexit.

edited 30th Nov '16 9:56:08 AM by CaptainCapsase

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159534: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:06:05 AM

Firstly remember American politics doesn't work the way in England. The Economic Wing of the party, the ones who focus on the "white Trump voters" I am sorry to say that these individuals are in danger of becoming "useful idiots" to the Trump regimenote .

I mean the information from the election shows that Trump won on race, we know that 40% of the working class is in fact minority-leaning, and they get paid less than these so-called white "working-class" Trump voters and that none of Trump's policies, his pathetic privatizing of government property disguised as infrastructure, the kleptocratic white supremacist cabal he's assembled as a cabinet, are really interested in that.

The ones who talk about chasing the great white Trump voter are as misguided as Ahab in his search for the White Whale (God, even Captain Ahab would make a better President at this point). What they must do is strengthen the existing base, build the party members and get people to vote and take on all positions, low-level administrators to upper in the elections. Follow what Jamelle Bouie prescribes here.

Remember what Thomas Pynchon said in Gravity's Rainbow: "If they have you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers." Right now people are asking wrong questions. What happened was Trump is a narcissist with the luck and temperament of Gladstone Gander, and he won on total fluke. That's it, there's no science or rational explanation aside from the fact that America is filled with racist idiots who are victims of poor investment in education and bad textbooks.

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159535: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:06:07 AM

So if Trump was planning to get protesters to make themselves look bad by burning flags, he's succeeded.

We told you to burn the fucking confederate flag, but you just wouldn't listen, dammit!

[up] I'd argue there's a fair amount of talking past each other going on here. When people talk about appealing to Trump's base, at least in my case, it's more focused on a very small but electorally important sliver of people in the rust belt, and even then it's more about splitting that vote outright capturing it, since that's very unrealistic. Far more important is the massive numbers of people who simply didn't vote, but I would argue that a stronger focus on an economic message is going to be an important part of capturing those votes as well.

edited 30th Nov '16 10:09:24 AM by CaptainCapsase

NoName999 Since: May, 2011
#159536: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:09:22 AM

It would be nice to know what exactly counts as an "establishment Democrat."

Then again it would also be nice that the economic progressives realize that social stuff go hand in hand. What's the point of improving the general economy if a black person with a clean record still has a lower chance of getting hired than a white ex-con?

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159537: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:10:16 AM

I think that misses the point. The Constitution in First Amendment under a Supreme Court decision, backed by Antonin Scalia himself, upheld flag burning as legal.

It could be and should be done without impunity, fear or threat. Trying to look bad or being worried about it, is unimportant.

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159538: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:11:23 AM

[up][up] Because general economic improvements, even distributed unequally are beneficial to all classes of people? Moreover, if the current political climate remains unchanged, such measures are far more politically feasible than furthering the social justice agenda.

[up] It's only unimportant if the backlash against this is minimal. Principles are a nice thought, but reality doesn't always comply with the way we'd like the world to work.

edited 30th Nov '16 10:14:23 AM by CaptainCapsase

RabidTanker God-Mayor of Sim-Kind Since: May, 2014 Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
God-Mayor of Sim-Kind
#159539: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:16:15 AM

So with Trump winning the election (if nothing bad happens with the recounts), how long do you think for him to commission The Great Wall of America?

Sure, it'll probably be one of the more expensive construction projects in American history and it might work at stopping illegal immigration. But to me, it's an curiosity.

Answer no master, never the slave Carry your dreams down into the grave Every heart, like every soul, equal to break
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159540: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:17:11 AM

[up] He's already backtracked on the wall. At most it'll be a fence and it might just be increased border patrols and funding for ICE and the like.

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159541: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:19:19 AM

Look Hillary's entire policy was a strong economic message. It was just not covered in the media but it was a very progressive and left-wing vision, much more so than Obama's.

She didn't lose on economics, she lost on racial resentment, male privilege and whitelash. That's it. I am sorry, but the hard brutal fact is that a significant chunk of America is racist, and are content with a white supremacist in office. Some of them shared his views, others voted him in despite knowing that he shared those views, a small part of that are individuals misled by TV and advertising, and others are Republican voters, apparatchiks who want a one party state, who hated Trump, but saw him as a means to launch their coup d'etat and deinstitutionalise America into the Neoconfederacy.

The fact is the real economic issue is climate change...renewable energy and automation...bringing Coal back might give Steampunk cosplayers joy but it will just make things worse.

Mio Since: Jan, 2001
#159542: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:19:46 AM

[up][up][up][up]The African American experience post-WWII would say that that is not necessarily true. There is a good reason why most African Americans will take candidate with a solid social justice background then an economic one. That's ultimately why most of them did not vote for Sanders in the primary.

[up]There is an argument to be made that her position she did emphasis her economic message enough for some segments of the electorate, and perhaps it was left enough.

Racism was an important component to this race, but it wasn't everything, and at least a few of those people who voted Trump will need to be brought to the Democrat's side if they want to win in the next cycle.

edited 30th Nov '16 10:25:36 AM by Mio

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#159543: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:21:30 AM

[up][up] What her actual platform was is irrelevant. It did not come across in most media coverage, and there was an expectation, unfounded or otherwise, that she'd renege on most of it once in office.

[up] I would argue that the relatively good economic conditions of the 50s and 60s and were a perquisite to the success of the civil rights movement; resistance would've been much fiercer (and it was already pretty damn bad) with a stagnant economy.

edited 30th Nov '16 10:25:20 AM by CaptainCapsase

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159544: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:23:04 AM

So with Trump winning the election (if nothing bad happens with the recounts), how long do you think for him to commission The Great Wall of America?

I think it would be hilarious if he actually went ahead and tried to build the wall. That would never work. It never worked as popularly believed in China either.

Just think of the great infrastructure and institutional achievements: FDR: Works Progress Administration (Including TVA and many other things), Eisenhower: ARPA and the Space Program, Kennedy: Peace Corps, LBJ: Great Society, Nixon: EPA, Obama: ACA...Trump: My Wall which turns out the Mexicans did not pay for after all.

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159545: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:28:07 AM

[up] I would argue that the relatively good economic conditions of the 60s were a perquisite to the success of the civil rights movement.

That's not really what happened.

As poorquentyn explains here:

I strongly disagree that economic malaise explains what we’re seeing on the right. ... First of all, it’s condescending; the voters in question aren’t idiots. They’ve always known the GOP leaders don’t care about them economically. They’ve voted Republican anyway because the tribal white-nationalist grievances the GOP indulges matters to these voters MORE than intra-class solidarity. They’re not ignorant; these are honestly their priorities.

Secondly, I don’t buy the supposed causal link between the repeated racial radicalization of the right and real-world economic patterns. The right rises up in white revanchist fury during good economic times and bad, under Democratic and Republican presidents, when immigration is a flood and when it’s a trickle. This pattern is much older than the modern hypercapitalist hierarchy. So the faux-populism is just that: an excuse, a patina, a facade. As Lee Atwater confessed from the inside, even when they’re talking ostensibly race-neutral issues like tax cuts, the endgame of right-wing policies is to keep POC down. American racism is not a misdirected expression of economic woes. It is the heart of our country; it’s who we are. Presidential elections bring that out.

As he continues here:

The “false consciousness” idea that tribalism is misdirected economic distress, which can therefore be dispelled by economic programs, dangerously misses the point. The rise of the second Klan happened before the Great Depression, not in its wake. The postwar economic boom, the best time in our history to be a working stiff, did not stop revanchist whites from blowing up black churches and attacking black schoolchildren and voting for George Wallace

Remember when Marx was saying "false consciousness" he was saying a general pattern and he was basing it on observations on European society and history. Marx naturally assumed that readers are smart enough to not use and misapply his terms carelessly

edited 30th Nov '16 10:31:00 AM by JulianLapostat

Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#159546: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:29:26 AM

Look Hillary's entire policy was a strong economic message. It was just not covered in the media

That's the problem isn't it? The media didn't seem to care much about that. The actual platform Hillary was running on was totally irrelevant to most voters, who were more concerned with her "lack of charisma" and personal antipathy, which doubtlessly led to a low turnout because too many democrat voters care overly much about being "inspired".

Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#159547: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:30:24 AM

No wall in history ever has worked for longer than a few decades and the story always ended the same way, with whoever built it had to give up on it because it was just too expensive to maintain. Multiple dynasties went bankrupt over their version of the Chinese wall (yeah, there were multiple of them and no, I really don't understand why the Chinese ruler kept building those things when they were actually pretty useless), the Berlin Wall as well as all the attempts to control the Soviet states were nearly the downfall of Russia itself....one would think that after all those attempts, people had learned to try something else instead....

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
#159548: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:35:03 AM

That's the problem isn't it? The media didn't seem to care much about that. The actual platform Hillary was running on was totally irrelevant to most voters, who were more concerned with her "lack of charisma" and personal antipathy, which doubtlessly led to a low turnout because too many democrat voters care overly much about being "inspired".

Yeah this was a total media failure. And Hillary's lack of charisma...well its hard for women to be charismatic. Especially professionals who work and establish their careers. Women can be sexy, they can be goofy pixie girls, but charisma is not something that comes easily to them. At least not anymore.

The whole concept of "charisma" really needs to die anyway. Richard Nixon wasn't especially charismatic and he was a far better and substantial president than the overrated and dangerous incompetent that was JFK (who I see as the Liberal Trump)

edited 30th Nov '16 10:36:11 AM by JulianLapostat

Perian Since: Jun, 2016
#159549: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:36:10 AM

There's not a single Democrat from the Sanders/Warren wing of the party who is claiming that they should ditch minorities (so calling the moderate wing the 'social justice' wing seems completely wrong to me). Rather they're saying that the Democratic party needs a strong economic message in addition to a strong social message. These two are not exclusively at all, so why are they contrasted so much in the current debate? Minorities would probably benefit the most from it, so I doubt that it would alienate them.

She didn't lose on economics, she lost on racial resentment, male privilege and whitelash.

I don't deny that racism wasn't a major factor in Trump's election, but that still doesn't explain why Obama carried the Rust Belt so easily eight years ago.

RabidTanker God-Mayor of Sim-Kind Since: May, 2014 Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
God-Mayor of Sim-Kind
#159550: Nov 30th 2016 at 10:40:20 AM

...And yet history repeats itself.

Besides, I doubt if the wall alone will stop the drugs. The cartels have used some sort of catapult and glider with an engine strapped to it in order to ship their drugs.

Answer no master, never the slave Carry your dreams down into the grave Every heart, like every soul, equal to break

Total posts: 417,856
Top