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

Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#171701: Jan 31st 2017 at 7:38:19 PM

We keep talking about 2018, 2020...but as impossible as it sounds now, if a clear opportunity to campaign for impeachment presents itself, we should take to the streets and demand it. Even at the risk of a Tienamen Square.

RBluefish Since: Nov, 2013
#171702: Jan 31st 2017 at 7:43:57 PM

Absolutely. He's already committed any number of what should be impeachable offenses, from Constitutional violations to treason. We just need one of them to gain traction.

Because we keep talking about 2018 and 2020 as though the Trump and the Republicans are going to risk having free and fair elections. Why in the world would they? And that's why their entire agenda needs to be ground to a halt immediately before even more damage is done to our democracy.

Although I don't think the GOP would inflict a Tiananmen Square on a bunch of peaceful white protestors right out of the gate. That would lead to nothing but disaster for them. If and when they start to get violent, they'll start with targets against whom violence has already been normalized—Standing Rock, BLM protestors, and the like.

In hindsight, there was never going to be police violence at the Women's March because there's no way the Trump administration would risk that headline—gunning down white women in pink fuzzy hats? But shooting "scary black rioters!" or "those damn angry Indians!" is another matter entirely. And then they can just escalate from there.

"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."
HextarVigar That guy from The Big House Since: Feb, 2015
That guy
#171703: Jan 31st 2017 at 7:47:44 PM

I hope he plans to sue the airport - any judge in practically the country at this point would whip the book at them so hard it'd leave a scar.

edited 31st Jan '17 7:47:56 PM by HextarVigar

Your momma's so dumb she thinks oral sex means talking dirty.
LinkToTheFuture A real bad hombre from somewhere completely different Since: Apr, 2015 Relationship Status: What's love got to do with it?
A real bad hombre
#171704: Jan 31st 2017 at 7:54:13 PM

I'm actually not sure the Dems should actually try to filibuster Gorsuch. If they get nuclear option'd, as they almost certainly will, then when the next Court seat is open and Trump or any Rep is still President then we are fucked.

edited 31st Jan '17 7:54:36 PM by LinkToTheFuture

"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work." -Thomas Edison
Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#171705: Jan 31st 2017 at 7:55:48 PM

From a history professor at Boston College: "Shock events" and Bannon's tactics

There is talk about reaching across lines here and how Lincon pulled it off. I'm trying to think what lines there are that aren't inpenritable. The old school conservatives, libertarian groups along the lines of the CATO institute, for example.

It's unfortunate the Bush family is going through personal trouble right now (Mr. and Mrs. Bush Sr. have both been in the hospital in poor health).

[up]Part of the problem for them is that their constituents are loudly demanding resistance and not doing so makes them look weak.

edited 31st Jan '17 7:57:07 PM by Elle

DingoWalley1 Asgore Adopts Noelle Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Can't buy me love
Asgore Adopts Noelle
#171706: Jan 31st 2017 at 7:56:44 PM

[up][up] That's something I'm thinking. Perhaps the Democrats should begrudgingly accept Gorsuch, but if a Liberal Justice Dies or Vacates, then Trump tries to nominate, say, Hardiman, then they should use the Filibuster.

It'd also give certain Democratic Senators a better chance at holding onto their Seats in the next 2 years.

edited 31st Jan '17 7:57:14 PM by DingoWalley1

RBluefish Since: Nov, 2013
#171707: Jan 31st 2017 at 7:57:12 PM

If the GOP won't let us filibuster it now, why on Earth would they let us filibuster it then? If they're intent on invoking the nuclear option, then the filibuster's doomed either way. Better to be screwed over while fighting than to be screwed over while tucking tail and surrendering.

"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."
CrimsonZephyr Would that it were so simple. from Massachusetts Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
Would that it were so simple.
#171708: Jan 31st 2017 at 7:59:03 PM

At this point, it's a question of honor, because we have nothing left but that. We can either be a helpless political party that takes the punches with its head held high, or we can be a helpless political party that allows itself to be bullied. If the Republicans are going to hold us hostage by threatening to nuke the filibuster, then they should nuke it and be damned.

edited 31st Jan '17 8:02:11 PM 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."
RBluefish Since: Nov, 2013
#171709: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:00:28 PM

Basically my thoughts. You can't afford to play the long game when your house is burning down.

Also worth pointing out is that if my understanding is correct, a filibuster may not even be necessary. SCOTUS nominees require 60 votes to be confirmed. With the Democrats holding 49 seats, Gorsuch is unlikely to get that 60 votes. The question then is whether the Republicans will just change the rules and allow him to be confirmed with fifty-something—which they probably would do in a heartbeat.

edited 31st Jan '17 8:01:59 PM by RBluefish

"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."
Pseudopartition Screaming Into The Void from The Cretaeceous Since: Dec, 2013 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
Screaming Into The Void
#171710: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:02:29 PM

Although I don't think the GOP would inflict a Tiananmen Square on a bunch of peaceful white protestors right out of the gate. That would lead to nothing but disaster for them. If and when they start to get violent, they'll start with targets against whom violence has already been normalized—Standing Rock, BLM protestors, and the like.
It probably goes without saying, but this is why white folks need to turn all of their talk into some action and start showing up at these protests in huge numbers. As screwed up as it is, this might actually keep people safer.

On a personal note, I was afraid my faculty at school (Earth Science) was going to be in favour of this presidency because of its potential to create resource jobs. However, they've just announced that this week's town hall; usually geared towards scientists giving talks on their research, will be given by one of our school's history professors - who is Iranian-born - on politics and oil in the Middle East. I don't know exactly what the details of the talk will be, but I think I can be proud of them.

edited 31st Jan '17 8:03:23 PM by Pseudopartition

RBluefish Since: Nov, 2013
#171711: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:04:47 PM

Exactly. White privilege can be a potent weapon in the battle for equality, and right now white people need to be deploying it as a shield to protect the vulnerable. They say they're allies? Time to hit the trenches and prove it.

Also, if we're talking local politics we're proud of, my mayor (who hates Trump) is introducing legislation tomorrow that would legally turn my hometown into a sanctuary city. And he's also saying that the Senate Democrats should block Gorsuch.

"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."
Hodor2 Since: Jan, 2015
#171712: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:06:08 PM

I'm a bit wary of the demonization Gorsuch is getting because while he's clearly a Scalia-style or even Scalia-lite conservative, nothing immediately stands out to me as marking him as an extreme ideologue. I mean some of his rulings are iffy, but they aren't "Brock Turner sentencing iffy", which is what I had expected.

I guess I'd say that regardless of his virtues, Democrats need to block him at least for the present. If in a year give or take, President Pence still wants to propose him, then the Democrats should give him a fair hearing then.

DingoWalley1 Asgore Adopts Noelle Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Can't buy me love
Asgore Adopts Noelle
#171713: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:08:06 PM

If the Filibuster is successful, and then the option is Nuclear'd, do you guys worry that Trump might intentionally pick someone worse from his list? Or just pick someone else entirely at random?

RBluefish Since: Nov, 2013
#171714: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:09:20 PM

Iffy? As Tom Perez says here, he would overturn Roe v. Wade in a second given the chance, has an abysmal history with women's rights and police brutality, is no friend to LGBT Americans, and supports voter suppression. He's exactly the kind of right-wing asshole the GOP have wanted in that SCOTUS seat ever since Scalia died, and he needs to be stopped. People say to hold our fire—hold our fire for what? This is the Supreme Court. The battles don't get any bigger.

"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."
Advarielle Homicidal Editor Since: Aug, 2016
Homicidal Editor
#171715: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:10:39 PM

Seriously, is no one at the Republican party has any kind of long-term planning capability? I mean, at the rate that this madness is going, America is going to collapse first before their master plan is complete. Their master plan might guarantee that they hold absolute power in the government, but what is the point if there is no, you know, government? I'm seriously at a complete loss here.

Only an experienced editor who has a name possesses the ability to truly understand my work - What 90% of writers I'm in charge of said.
RBluefish Since: Nov, 2013
#171716: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:12:54 PM

at the rate that this madness is going, America is going to collapse

Read this recent quote from President Bannon, and then reconsider current events in the light of those words.

"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."
CrimsonZephyr Would that it were so simple. from Massachusetts Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
Would that it were so simple.
#171717: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:14:52 PM

[up]That quote has been around for a few months, hasn't it? Or has my memory of this time blended together into one waking nightmare?

"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."
TropesForever God forbid women do anything from wait where is she Since: Sep, 2016 Relationship Status: I wanna be your dog
God forbid women do anything
#171718: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:15:02 PM

Was "President Bannon" deliberate?

thebeatles.com/careers
Journeyman Overlording the Underworld from On a throne in a vault overlooking the Wasteland Since: Nov, 2010
Overlording the Underworld
#171719: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:15:08 PM

Then you haven't been paying attention. America's collapse IS the plan. Full stop. They're all rich, they all worship Ayn Rand, they're going to steal everything not nailed down, stick it in vaults, and wait out the rest of us dying before coming back with technical manuals and hand picked survivors and building a technocracy where the only people living are their descendants and the technicians to run everything. They need stopped. Now.

RBluefish Since: Nov, 2013
#171720: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:18:00 PM

@Crimson Zephyr: It has. I say "recent" in the sense that "it's not like this was something he said in high school."

@Tropes Forever: You bet it was.

"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."
Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#171721: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:18:21 PM

One of us a while back called the GOP a "death cult". I laughed, because it was functionally accurate: they do not care about long-term planning or the democratic institutions of the country. The only "principles" they have is their hatred of the democrats and their desire to enforce their morally bankrupt vision of America and consolidate their power to enforce that vision, or even just for its own sake.

When I think of the GOP now, I imagine a decrepit old man sitting on a throne on top a pile of charred corpses in the middle of a ruined city, watching a giant tidal wave about to swallow them and what remains of their pitiful empire, meanwhile laughing and saying that all of it was worth it.

Advarielle Homicidal Editor Since: Aug, 2016
Homicidal Editor
#171722: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:20:29 PM

@R Bluefish: Oh, okay. That one quote explains a lot of things. Although, I don't remember Lenin want to destroy the government. Heck, he kinda helped create one.

@Journeyman: Please go easy on me, I mean I don't expect that there is actually someone with the mindset of a Sunday morning cartoon villain.

edited 31st Jan '17 8:21:00 PM by Advarielle

Only an experienced editor who has a name possesses the ability to truly understand my work - What 90% of writers I'm in charge of said.
DingoWalley1 Asgore Adopts Noelle Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Can't buy me love
Asgore Adopts Noelle
#171723: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:21:51 PM

A Technocracy? You're being too kind to the Objectivists, and thinking that Society, when it collapses, just keeps marching forward. No! They don't want a Technocracy. They want Market-Based Feudalism. Essentially, the Political Class rules the Merchant Class who sell (and take money) from the Poor Class that work for them. The Political Class and Merchant Class will be literally 1-2% of these new Societies, with 98% of the Citizens will be Poor. There will be no Voting, or there will only be Sham votes with One Party. The Merchant Class can go back to Pre-The Jungle Regulations and literally make workers hunched over, brain-dead, blacked lung morons. And protesting with your voice or your wallet? You'll be arrested and imprisoned, or worse. I think the only difference is that Citizens might be able to leave certain Corperatopia's for others.

And this won't be limited to Republican dominated areas, either. You can bet that companies like Disney and Google will be waging war over each other to claim all of Los Angeles under their Brand.

Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#171724: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:22:09 PM

Bannon is a pretentious edgelord with delusions of grandeur and eloquence. Calling himself a leninist is just a part of that.

Zendervai Since: Oct, 2009
#171725: Jan 31st 2017 at 8:25:35 PM

The Leninist thing still drives me up the wall. Lenin went in saying "the current system is awful and doesn't work. Here is a new system that I think should work. I want to replace the old with the new." Say what you will about the end result, Lenin wasn't a nihilist racist with no endgame beyond "cause as much chaos as possible." And he died far to early in the process and got replaced by Stalin.

Bannon just wants to destroy the old.

edited 31st Jan '17 8:27:44 PM by Zendervai


Total posts: 417,856
Top