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
The whole thing with BMW is ridiculous...ignoring that he can't simply go and change the rules that easily, the people who drive German cars in the US are the ones who are already quite rich. And BMW specifically is not a car, it is a status symbol. BMW drivers don't necessarily care how much they pay for one - well, they do care, but they will do it, because the worth lies partly in the quality but especially in the brand. "See what an expensive car I can afford, aren't I cool????" Sensible German drivers prefer smaller and more practical cars. The guy who picks a BMW is the guy who goes "My car, my house, my boat". I doubt that those tariffs would hurt BMW sales much.
It's impossible to understand what goes on with Trump, if you don't realize that America is literally two diametrically opposed worldviews, living in one country.
It's almost getting to a breaking point. If there continues to be this complete rejection of facts, reality, and basic human decency on the backs of racism, bigotry, and xenophobia, then a peaceful coexistence is no longer sustainable nor desirable.
Five Idaho lawmakers ask to quit their committee posts in response to punishment of fellow lawmaker
http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article126832124.html
The fellow lawmaker was a woman who said other female lawmakers basically slept their way to the top and we removed from her committee posts I'm response
edited 16th Jan '17 11:21:17 AM by sgamer82
With All Due Disrespect:
from Paul Krugman.
Now Mr. Lewis says that he won't attend the inauguration of Donald Trump, whom he regards as an illegitimate president.
As you might expect, this statement provoked a hysterical, slanderous reaction from the president-elect - who, of course, got his start in national politics by repeatedly, falsely questioning President Obama's right to hold office. But Mr. Trump — who has never sacrificed anything or taken a risk to help others — seems to have a special animus toward genuine heroes. Maybe he prefers demonstrators who don't get beaten?
But let's not talk about Mr. Trump's ravings. Instead, let's ask whether Mr. Lewis was right to say what he said. Is it O.K., morally and politically, to declare the man about to move into the White House illegitimate?
Yes, it is. In fact, it's an act of patriotism.
By any reasonable standard, the 2016 election was deeply tainted. It wasn't just the effects of Russian intervention on Mr. Trump's behalf; Hillary Clinton would almost surely have won if the F.B.I. hadn't conveyed the false impression that it had damaging new information about her, just days before the vote. This was grotesque, delegitimizing malfeasance, especially in contrast with the agency's refusal to discuss the Russia connection.
Was there even more to it? Did the Trump campaign actively coordinate with a foreign power? Did a cabal within the F.B.I. deliberately slow-walk investigations into that possibility? Are the lurid tales about adventures in Moscow true? We don't know, although Mr. Trump's creepy obsequiousness to Vladimir Putin makes it hard to dismiss these allegations. Even given what we do know, however, no previous U.S. president-elect has had less right to the title. So why shouldn't we question his legitimacy?
And talking frankly about how Mr. Trump gained power isn't just about truth-telling. It may also help to limit that power.
It would be one thing if the incoming commander in chief showed any hint of humility, of realizing that his duty to the nation requires showing some respect for the strong majority of Americans who voted against him despite Russian meddling and the F.B.I.'s disinformation dump. But he hasn't and won't.
Instead, he's lashing out at and threatening anyone and everyone who criticizes him, while refusing even to admit that he lost the popular vote. And he's surrounding himself with people who share his contempt for everything that is best in America. What we're looking at, all too obviously, is an American kakistocracy — rule by the worst.
What can restrain this rule? Well, Congress still has a lot of power to rein the president in. And it would be nice to imagine that there are enough public-spirited legislators to play that role. In particular, just three Republican senators with consciences could do a lot to protect American values.
But Congress will be much more likely to stand up to a rogue, would-be authoritarian executive if its members realize that they will face a political price if they act as his enablers.
What this means is that Mr. Trump must not be treated with personal deference simply because of the position he has managed to seize. He must not be granted the use of the White House as a bully pulpit. He must not be allowed to cloak himself in the majesty of office. Given what we know about this guy's character, it's all too clear that granting him unearned respect will just empower him to behave badly.
And reminding people how he got where he is will be an important tool in preventing him from gaining respect he doesn't deserve. Remember, saying that the election was tainted isn't a smear or a wild conspiracy theory; it's simply the truth.
Now, anyone questioning Mr. Trump's legitimacy will be accused of being unpatriotic — because that's what people on the right always say about anyone who criticizes a Republican president. (Strangely, they don't say this about attacks on Democratic presidents.) But patriotism means standing up for your country's values, not pledging personal allegiance to Dear Leader.
No, we shouldn't get into the habit of delegitimizing election results we don't like. But this time really is exceptional, and needs to be treated that way.
So let's be thankful that John Lewis had the courage to speak out. It was the patriotic, heroic thing to do. And America needs that kind of heroism, now more than ever.
Also, a Trumpling biker gang are going to at the coronation
vowing to be a "wall of meat" against the protestors.
I do not like this. I do not like this at all. This situation was volatile enough already.
edited 16th Jan '17 11:21:41 AM by RBluefish
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."@166945 (Apologies I posted this way late).
You're leaving blacks out of the betting pool, or are their odds just too good? Don't forget the police violence that led to BLM is nothing new, camera phones are. Asian Americans still get positive discrimination in media (classification on the checklist), while blacks are pushing at dehumanization (black and criminal are nearly synonymous, implicit biases like the whole looting or finding issue from New Orleans comes to mind).
Outside of that, plenty of people I know have a well-learned anxiety towards traveling in and especially being pulled over in rural areas, not just due south. At least one mentioned Ohio.
edited 16th Jan '17 11:26:47 AM by CenturyEye
Look with century eyes... With our backs to the arch And the wreck of our kind We will stare straight ahead For the rest of our livesWith the atrocity that we call a prison system still chugging along, we might as well already have African-American internment camps. Plus slave labor.
That's not to say that the risk of literal black internment camps happening should be in any way discounted. We can't afford to not prepare for the worst-case scenarios.
One thing I'm seriously worried about is BLM being declared a terrorist organization, and its leaders being locked up without due process. The kind of people who make up Trump's base would like nothing better.
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."The Franco regime voluntarily democratized from above the moment Franco's successor (Juan Carlos) was at the wheel. Franco didn't have much to say on the subject, but neither did the people.
Basically, to overthrow an authoritarian regime through protest, you need a regime that isn't willing to massacre its own people. Otherwise, Violence Really Is the Answer.
Well, everybody take heart. It's not like Trump praised the Chinese government over the atrocities they committed at Tiananmen Square or anything.
Oh wait.
Yeah, we're in trouble.
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."The only hope for nonviolent protest is that the government is a Slave to PR — a repressive regime with a Controversy-Proof Image, or one that exists in the Tyson Zone, is basically impervious to the practice. It's what made Gandhi's assertions that the correct way to confront Nazi Germany was for Jews to passively accept their extermination as a form of protest not only ludicrous, but deeply offensive.
edited 16th Jan '17 11:36:52 AM by CrimsonZephyr
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."![]()
![]()
The thing about Tienanmen that also worth mentioning is that China was literally at the brink of a civil war when the order to deploy the military was given. The units which carried out the crackdown were actually based in the countryside, as the brass correctly deduced that the urban-based troops wouldn't be as willing to open fire upon their own fellow citizens. Otherwise, you have the Romanian Revolution, which featured the military openly revolting against the head of government upon being ordered to crackdown on the protesters.
What I fear the most is the Right-Wing Militia Fanatic types coming out onto the streets to "aid" the authorities. Unlike the police or military, the types such as the Oathkeepers answer to no one, and are not bound by protocols or a chain of command asides from Trump's mouth.
edited 16th Jan '17 11:43:31 AM by FluffyMcChicken

If it happens (which would also signify our utter failure as a country and as a culture), then it would happen to immigrants and Muslims before it happens to Asian-Americans.note Simply because more track has been laid down there.
For Asian-American internment camps to return, there are still a few more steps that need to happen. With the others, all of the factors are in place. All that needs to happen now is for somebody to try it, or for a disaster event (a terrorist attack, especially) to whip everybody's fears up enough to break the floodgates.
And if it happens, we need to stop it. At all costs.
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."