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
Interesting article on how the spending bill worked out so hard in the democrats favor.
https://www.vox.com/2017/4/30/15496696/congress-funding-deal-government-open
Basically in order to avert a government shutdown, republicans needed democratic votes, but the democrats were not budging on their positions. The more they conceded to the democrats, the more libertarians would not vote yes, forcing them to rely even more on democratic votes,
edited 1st May '17 8:54:37 PM by megaeliz
After years of being able to get by on obstruction, united by opposition to Obama, the GOP has forgotten how to govern, forgotten how to negotiate, and forgotten how to compromise. They were probably originally planning on doing the same to HRC, and didn't properly plan on how they would handle actually having so much power.
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."
Disgusted, but not surprisedI feel like the party is deeply divided as well, which also contributes to their inability to govern. There's the libertarian wing, and the moderate wing. If they try to please the moderate wing, the libertarians will balk, and if you try to please the libertarian wing, the moderates will balk, basically creating their own gridlock.
The ideological divide is incredibly deep, and probably not going away any time soon.
Would this make the republicans The Millstone to themselves or something?
edited 1st May '17 9:07:30 PM by megaeliz
![]()
![]()
Just as I thought; There aren't 2 Parties in Congress right now (at least the lower house), there are 3. The Republicans, the Democrats, and the Teapublicans/Freedomites. And if the Republicans and Teapublicans can't work together, then the actual largest party in Congress is the Democrats.
Nancy Pelosi deserves the Speakership of the House.
edited 1st May '17 9:06:56 PM by DingoWalley1
and all the democrats really need to do is extend an offer to help create something that can get passed, while the republics are infighting. This also has the added benefit of making them look more reasonable, as they are the party offering to find solutions while the republicand are screaming at each other.
edited 1st May '17 9:18:52 PM by megaeliz
This is full blown pandering to WWC.
Obama is the only winner our party has left, and its current leaders are rushing to shit on him so they can get some Bern-cred. This is disgusting.
At this rate I wouldn't be surprised if she falls over herself sucking up to Trump just because he supposedly claimed he's open to bringing back Glass-Steagall.
That said, if she does end up the Democratic Party candidate in 2020 somehow, I'll still vote for her because she's better than Trump (an incredibly low bar).
And people accuse me of purity tests.
Smh.
If this makes you lose respect for Warren but Hillary calling Kissinger her friend, seeking his endorsement and praising him doesn't then in the words of the famous Obi Wan Kenobi "Then you are lost!"
edited 1st May '17 9:14:24 PM by MadSkillz
Ha! It's funny 'cause the battle to silence the power of the courts will have to be waged in a courtroom.
Think about that.
No one should be surprised at this. Like, that was literally his reason for running in the first place: because Obama made fun of him at a White House Correspondents' Dinner. We've known that since the campaign, when one of his spokespeople outright said it.
He's in this for revenge against Obama, personally.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
As evident by 2006-2010, where, despite the vast differences in the Democrat Party, they got a whole lot done, especially compared to the Republicans from 2010-now.
It's kind of funny; The Republicans are united in Elections, but not in Government, while the Democrats are united in Government, but not in Elections.
still, I think that we are united in something positive. It's not just against Trump. We are fighting for something, our planet, our healthcare, refugees, and whatever else you're fighting for. We want to protect the positive change in our world, and help create a better one.
![]()
And the reverse is why the GOP is good at winning elections, but not actual policy, then.
edited 1st May '17 9:34:40 PM by megaeliz
@Tactical Fox: Did... did you read the part where she said "no longer" as in she was acknowledging a changing world? I mean, I don't really agree with what she's saying but uh... you've sure as hell got your own form of ideological purity, even if I can't tell what it is. I believe I've pointed out before that you're rather militant in your.... centrism? I'm not sure, really, but boy are you scathing to literally everyone, it seems like.
I for one think specifically name-dropping Obama as out-of-touch was a mistake and not entirely accurate IMHO. She could have just said "a lot of politicians" without specifically naming names, particularly from her OWN PARTY...and especially the PREVIOUS DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT.
edited 1st May '17 9:30:41 PM by M84
Disgusted, but not surprisedA purity test? Is THAT what you're calling it? Militant Centrism? When I'm pretty liberal (well, more so center left, emphasis on left)? That's hilarious.
I'm a pragmatic leftist. I operate in the real world and on realpolitik. Some of you might enjoy idealism and ideology, and that's fine, in moderation, but I don't. I only care about what's possible, both in terms of passing this shitshow we call a Congress AND how policy affects people's real lives, in a tangible way.
So forgive me if I despise any divergence from reality considering the bullshit I have to put up with day-in-and day out, and keep it real.
Does that mean I can't be wrong? Absolutely not. That's why I look regularly at even conservative think tanks just as much as I do left leaning ones. Evaluate the evidence, make a decision, move on.
Maybe I'm being a bit harsh on Warren, I can admit that, but that's because I know she knows better, that's what's even more frustrating.
New Survey coming this weekend!Saying what she did just makes for a convenient headline such as "Elizabeth Warren blasts Obama for being out of touch". Which is pretty much guaranteed to create further strife and division, even if the actual quote in context wasn't quite that damning. And I'd argue that even in context it doesn't sound good.
Either this was just a simple mistake on her part, or she really is trying to distance herself from Obama. Which also seems like a mistake to me, given that Obama, for all his faults and mistakes, is still a rather popular figure.
edited 1st May '17 9:41:14 PM by M84
Disgusted, but not surprised

I must agree - that hardly seems to be saying what you claim it is, Fox.
Oh God! Natural light!