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
First on CNN: Trump administration ending Michelle Obama's girls education program
Just straight up spite at this point.
New Survey coming this weekend!
We already missed our chance to complete Reconstruction the easy way, right after the end of the Civil War when the source was quite clearly and geographically defined and they perpetrators had to comply at gunpoint. Now that period is past, they're too integrated into the general population, so we gotta take the long, slogging route of hearts and minds and individual conversion and education and all that nonsense.
edited 1st May '17 11:26:06 AM by danime91
![]()
It's a constant battle now. Every time we try to stamp out ignorance and bigotry, it'll flare up again in some other part of the country and spread. Can't make a clean sweep of it. Best we can hope for is that after the Baby Boomer generation dies off it'll get a bit easier.
edited 1st May '17 11:30:07 AM by danime91
So long as people keep fighting for it, probably. Push comes to shove, there's more of us than there are of them. The 2016 popular vote makes that abundantly clear.
We just need to do everything in our power to ensure we do not arrive at a point where it must be done by strength of arms. That, more than anything, would be the ultimate admission of failure on the part of democracy.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.So much doom and gloom. You were happy enough with them when they voted for Obama. Look, they were lied to by the very party that pretended to represent their interests for decades. Billionaires funded very sophisticated media campaigns designed to convince people that the federal gov't was the source of all their problems. An entire generation was essentially raised on this propaganda. Our side did squat during the same period. The Democrats basically abandoned the working class, and haven't done much for minorities recently either. Yes, the Republican Party establishment are evil shits, but that's their job- they are advocates for their own interests, and do not recognize any limits to political warfare. And it's not like we didn't know- the Powell Memo
spelled it all out.
So when the white middle class finally figured out that the Republican establishment never intended to actually solve any of the problems they use to rally the base, and having concluded that the Democrats could care less about them, they turned to a rogue, and he won.
If you want them to vote for a more qualified and progressive candidate, then offer them a qualified and progressive candidate who represents their interests. We cant represent them on the hot button social issues like abortion, civil rights, etc., but that still leaves a lot of maneuvering room. What they want is economic security, and they will vote for anyone who can plausibly provide them with it. That means protecting them (and the rest of us as well) from the more negative effects of globalization, and that means either trade barriers or targeted industry subsidies, whether in the form of tax credits, grants, or low credit government loans. When was the last time a Democrat proposed any of those things?
Trump is an asshat, but at least he pretends that he cares, which is more than anyone else in Washington ever did. And if his next 3 years are anything like his first 100 days, he isn't going to get re-elected. But the meltdown of the Trump administration doesn't solve the underlying problem, which is growing wealth disparity and the collapse of the middle class.
You want someone to vote for you? Then propose a solution to their problems. That's called politics.
edited 1st May '17 11:46:04 AM by DeMarquis
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.And since the past 3 pages or so have been about Trump's dictatorial tendencies, have this article from WaPo
.
Of course, this all ties into his legitimately not understanding that being President is not like being the CEO of a company - you don't get to call the shots de facto, you have to get the majority on-board with your idea first.
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"@Tactical: Oh? It's basically common knowledge by now. They abandoned the unions, they abandoned mortgage holders, they abandoned grass-roots organizing, at least until this last election. The Democratic party represents the interests of corporate shareholders far better than those of ordinary, middle class people. Basically, the Democratic party abandoned class struggle, and that's why a crude populist was able to win.
Or maybe you disagree with me. Tell me policies they have passed, or even proposed, in the last ten years that would have reduced wealth disparity?
edited 1st May '17 11:52:18 AM by DeMarquis
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.![]()
In California, Democrats went to the wall for the mortgage referendum, which helped the middle class almost exclusively, while making things that much harder for the lower class and having little effect on the rich. No one has consistently promoted the welfare of the middle class over the last 2 decades, but in a side-by-side comparison the Democrats win by a country mile.
![]()
![]()
Obamacare? Dodd-Frank? The CFPB? Tax increases? Infrastructure? Saving auto manufacturers? I could go on...
edited 1st May '17 12:09:14 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I keep seeing Obama brought up as though his election occurred in a vacuum. Like his victory was entirely a product of his campaign platform. As though the history of America began fresh with him, and nothing that came before ever impacted voters' minds.
It was next to impossible for a Democrat to fail in 2008, because that election was a referendum on George W. Bush and the increasingly unpopular Iraq War. It's still impressive that Obama succeeded as hard as he did, but you can't discount the fact that people were mad as hell about Iraq at the time.
Bush pissed off the red voters by doing more than just screwing them economically: he sent their children to die in a desert full of brown people for reasons nobody really understood.
edited 1st May '17 11:59:51 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Reposting this article SeptimusHeap shared two pages ago because it's relevant
.

Will it end in the next decade?
The only good fanboy, is a redeemed fanboy.