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
![]()
![]()
That's precisely what I meant. It's also why it's probably not accurate to call him a stooge of Vladimir Putin even as it's a great way to annoy him. Putin simply doesn't have the kind of access to Trump necessary to get him to do what he wants. After a nice phone call Trump might spurt out some pro-Russian talking points, but then one of the talking heads on Fox suggests bombing Syria and away we go.
That's precisely what happened after Trump met with Obama. He suddenly started sprinkling in Obama's talking points, said nice things about Obamacare, and generally sounded surprisingly moderate. That lasted for like a week or two, then something else presumably grabbed his attention.
edited 3rd May '17 5:32:23 PM by CaptainCapsase
Also, since we're on the subject of what led to the rise of Trump. This is an amazing project, taking a closer look at some of the country's political and cultural divides, particularly in Appalachia, and documenting the first hundred days of Trump's Presidency.
Honestly, in the event of a democratic sweep in 2018, as unlikely as that is, it might be preferable to leave Trump in office rather than try to impeach him unless you can also get rid of Pence and Paul Ryan as well, since he'd be far more likely to sign democratic sponsored legislature than either of them simply because someone who sounded smart to him told him it was a good idea.
That habit of listening to whoever he heard last is something that can be exploited. Allegedly, High Priest Bannon lost his influence once the media started referring to him as Trump's puppet master. Trump's ego didn't take kindly to that and instead of lashing out at the media like he usually does, he started putting down Bannon.
The Progressives (unofficially headed by Sanders), Establishment Dems(Obama/Clinton Wing), Tuesday Republicans(John Mc Cain and his men) and the Tea Party(Rand Paul's wing).
There are actually 5: You're forgetting the Trumpeteer/Authoritarian Republicans, led by Paul Ryan, who don't actually have an agenda of their own and just follow whatever Leader has an R next to their name and lives in the White House.
At some point you can't escape the fact that Donald is immorally greedy and his business would be cut into by core parts of the Democratic platform.
Also, manipulating him into signing off on Dem-favored domestic legislation is a moot point if foreign misadventures bite us in the ass. I'd rather have Pence mostly for that reason. He's only bad domestically and we can fight that on the state and local level. We can't fight the foreign policy battles.
edited 3rd May '17 5:45:11 PM by Elle
Thing is you never took a second to acknowledge that Fighteer might be right, so it comes across as you seeing that someone else has proved you wrong and j,ping to another point to avoid anyone noticing that fact. It makes you come across as more concerned with 'winning' the argument here than having a reasonable discussion.
As for the impact of NAFTA on Mexico, that's simply off-topic, we have a Latin America thread, bring it up there, but when you bring up NAFTA in the US politics thread you are presumed to be talking about the impact it had on the US.
There's nothing new with the Sanders hate, it's been going on for a long time, Warren is now also getting flack from people because she failed their ideological purity test, but that's it.
As for the impact of Comey on the election, I find 538s point about the media to be very interesting, they don't want to acknowledge the impact that Comey had because it would raise questions about their own handling of the letter and they don't want to admit that they actually played a big role in getting Trump elected.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran@Elle: Putin didn't need Trump to do what he says; him getting in was enough, in true Xanatos Gambit fashion. With Trump in office, Russia looks a lot more reasonable by comparison to the rest of the world, and I can't really say I disagree with them.
I didn't initially mention it because I didn't have a problem with those points that he was saying. I did mention afterwards that I didn't know which side I sat on in concerns to the exact points that Fighteer is making. But I was trying to pivot into a discussion of NAFTA's other faults.
I get where you're coming from but talking about NAFTA from Mexico's perspective is still talking about America. America doesn't live in a vacuum. And I did bring it back explicitly to America when I said that NAFTA's effects to Mexico caused huge immigration waves in the 90's and 2000's that have now subsided for the most part.
Not sure if it was brought up earlier, but Trumpcare will be voted on in the House, and the GOP thinks they have enough votes to get it to the Senate.
This is not a drill. Even worse, this version is arguably worse than the original bill that didn't even get to the vote in March. The GOP is so desperate to get their tax cuts done and Trump is that desperate for a "win" that they're willing to push through a bill that will almost certainly mean the deaths of millions of Americans.
The only saving grace is that this probably won't pass the Senate.
Disgusted, but not surprised
I agree that we need to call our Congressmen and tell them that this bill is not a good thing.
I'd tell mine... But mine is freakin' Mo Brooks. I ain't changing his mind anytime soon...
I also think that New Yorkers should demand that Sne. Chuck Schumer threaten to Shut Down the government (by telling Democrats to not vote for the Budget) if the House votes for Trumpcare this week.
edited 3rd May '17 6:36:36 PM by DingoWalley1
You wanna know how bad this thing is. Blue Cross Blur Shield just came out against it. The insurance companies!!
https://media.blueshieldca.com/2017/05/03/ahca-statement/?sf75873292=1
The trick with Trump is to simultaneously feed him contradictory ideas and opinions so that his speeches turn into a feverish fugue of incomprehensible and mutually exclusionary ideas that are not only nonsensical, but actively dissonant.
"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."I touched the subject of NAFTA before. It increased trade and revenue between the countries. Here's what NAFTA does NOT do: make sure that the companies that benefit the most from the tariff reduction spread their earnings among their workers.
NAFTA, like many trade policies, runs on the assumption that companies will invest in their people instead of hoarding it in a tax paradise island.
SPOILER ALERT: They don't.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes

Well his hardcore supporters love the Tea Party.
So you could group him under there if you want especially since both are incompetent and contrarian.