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

CenturyEye Tell Me, Have You Seen the Yellow Sign? from I don't know where the Yith sent me this time... Since: Jan, 2017 Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
Tell Me, Have You Seen the Yellow Sign?
#189101: May 15th 2017 at 6:42:19 PM

No reason to sigh and wait it out though. Twas on an article from some pages ago, but a large factor in GOP support of Trump is due to myriad vacancies he can fill in the federal court systems.
Given who had to step in to stay the muslim ban (among other things), the implications of that are clear enough—and they'll be there for life barring happenstance. note 

edited 15th May '17 6:43:44 PM 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 lives
TacticalFox88 from USA Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Dating the Doctor
#189102: May 15th 2017 at 6:48:09 PM

Rep. Fredrica Wilson.

"I believe the President is desperate for attention, and needs psychological help

Whew!

Where's the lie tho?

New Survey coming this weekend!
TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#189103: May 15th 2017 at 6:49:28 PM

[up][up]Well, that would be one of the many reasons why one doesn't go around and say Trump and Clinton are barely any different.

Neil fucking Gorsuch. If that man serves on the Supreme Court until he's Ginsburg's age, he'll still be there in the 2050s, deciding that companies can have a sincerely held, factually inaccurate religious belief that trumps your rights. And then there's however many judges of the over 100 vacancies in the Federal system that they'll wind up appointing.

2016 will fuck this country over for at least a generation. Maybe two.

edited 15th May '17 6:49:49 PM by TheWanderer

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
Gilphon (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#189104: May 15th 2017 at 7:00:35 PM

They don't need Trump for that though. They just need a Republican. And it would take something truly grand to stop that from being a thing.

AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#189105: May 15th 2017 at 7:08:33 PM

@Elle Here ya go. The link goes into a lot more detail and probably goes to some places that a some people here would handwave but it's well-linked to other news sources within the article that you check it against if you want.

So this is from Jacobin magazine, a fringe publication that literally named itself after Robespierre's faction from the French revolution. I was first linked to them when a now banned poster tried to use one of their hack reviews of a book to prove that Josef Stalin wasn't so bad and that there was no genocide in Ukraine (and that anyone who said Stalin was a genocidaire was writing "right-wing history" and somehow defending the Nazis). I laughed all the way through the review then never read any of their trash again.

General rule of thumb—once a publication has engaged in genocide denial and apologism for Josef freaking Stalin, that publication should probably be regarded as untrustworthy. This goes double if said publication is itself named after a mass murderer or group of mass murderers.

edited 15th May '17 7:22:23 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#189106: May 15th 2017 at 7:21:53 PM

[up] The general claims about Gillibrand's past positions are sourced largely from the New York Times, Time Magazine, and other sources we can all agree are credible.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#189107: May 15th 2017 at 7:22:15 PM

Concerning whether or not one should vote for Gillibrand or Cuomo if they somehow end up running against Trump in 2020.

If it's Gillibrand vs. Trump, we've got one somewhat progressive candidate from New York with an iffy record when it comes to undocumented immigration vs. a dumpster fire from New York who wants to build a wall and start Trail of Tears Hispanic edition.

If it's Cuomo vs. Trump, we've got a competent but sleazy and opportunistic New Yorker vs. a horrifically incompetent, sleazy and opportunistic New Yorker.

Disgusted, but not surprised
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#189108: May 15th 2017 at 7:24:49 PM

[up] Considering the voting in the primaries are supposed to more of a formality than anything else, it's entirely possible one of them will get tapped by the party bosses. Whether or not they'll be able to get their preferred outcome without having to use the superdelegates again is another question entirely, as is what happens if it comes to that.

edited 15th May '17 7:26:08 PM by CaptainCapsase

Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#189109: May 15th 2017 at 7:25:26 PM

@Ambar: There are ample in-article citation links. The factual stuff is verifiable whatever you may think of the slant.

NYT: She did vote against the driver's license proposal, citing it as unpopular in her district

The Atlantic covers the voting records for the authorization of Bush-era survelience

NYT: She flipped on sanctuary cities when she moved from the house to the Senate

Now you could argue she's taking the view of voting the will of the people she represents rather than her own opinions. There's a case to be made for that but there are times conscience ought to be a consideration as well.

@M84: I'd take either of them over Trump but it's a tough call for the primaries. (I'd give a pass to Mad for writing in because in California she can get away with it.) I did notice Gilbrand had a good reputation for transparency and communication as a representitive which is something I'd call positive.

edited 15th May '17 7:32:13 PM by Elle

AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#189110: May 15th 2017 at 7:27:11 PM

[up][up][up][up]That's nice. Jacobin itself is not credible, however, and its interpretation and presentation of the information in those articles is unlikely to be credible either. Mad or anyone else would be better off linking to the New York Times etc, and letting people draw their own conclusions rather than linking to Jacobin's hack job summation.

[up][up][up]Nicely summed up.

[up]The slant is coming from a bunch of people who think that Robespierre and his henchmen are a good source for a magazine title. I do believe I'd sooner put my eyes out then read anything they've got to say.

edited 15th May '17 7:29:12 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#189111: May 15th 2017 at 7:29:23 PM

[up] Ambar, there's no reason to go ahead trying to deflate expectations several years in advance of the primaries.

Do note that you're also (deliberately unless I'm overestimating your self awareness) deflecting from an argument about largely agreed upon facts about the past positions of a politician by calling into question something totally irrelevant to said argument. (the piece which collated said facts, the particular spin in that piece was not being discussed)

edited 15th May '17 7:35:54 PM by CaptainCapsase

TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#189112: May 15th 2017 at 7:35:55 PM

The piece collating facts does matter when they're the ones that present them and possibly twist them. See Faux News, Wiki Leaks, etc., etc.

The principled and more intellectually honest thing to do in such a case is to at least pursue those citations to double check what they say, and then to link to those sources instead. For example, I've had several cases where I've declined to link to sources like Raw Story because they made claims about a recording or such that they were citing, and after playing said recording or listening to it I found that the things said were either different than presented or much less inflammatory.

Ambar's being harsh, but shouldn't the intellectual rigor you so prize compel one to do exactly what I outlined? Or is that just for other people?

edited 15th May '17 7:40:33 PM by TheWanderer

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#189113: May 15th 2017 at 7:38:26 PM

[up] The matter being discussed had literally nothing to do with the opinion being expressed in that article, it was being used indirectly as a citation for Gillibrand having held the positions which Mad claimed she did while in the House. Had they individually linked the various NYT, Time, and Atlantic pieces like Elle did, this would have been a non-issue.

Whether you realize it or not, you're deflecting rather than actually trying to continue the debate that I think was going rather well.

edited 15th May '17 7:41:55 PM by CaptainCapsase

TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#189114: May 15th 2017 at 7:41:35 PM

I elaborated a little bit on my original (and admittedly somewhat glib) post. Would you care to recheck and make sure your criticism still holds?

edited 15th May '17 7:41:59 PM by TheWanderer

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#189115: May 15th 2017 at 7:41:52 PM

In the case of this particular article I don't think the slant is too distorting on the subject we're talking about (immigration policy), though they throw around the Wall Street boogeyman in other parts of it, mostly in connection with Schumer. Mad did also mention the links and I checked myself.

I will say this: Gilbrand was quoted in the piece as explaining her change of views with a change in perspective from district to statewide, the district not having a major immigrant population. I can vouch for this being true though last time I was around it looked like the Capital District got a noticeable uptick in Indian/Middle Eastern immigrants from the tech industry boom.

edited 15th May '17 7:48:20 PM by Elle

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#189116: May 15th 2017 at 7:46:20 PM

[up][up] I agree that it would have been better to individually link the pieces on Gillibrand rather than linked one strongly partisan piece about her which used those as sources, but I think the fixation on the source Mad linked to when, as Elle showed the in-text citations are credible, and support the claims that were being supported with the article (Gillibrand's past positions on immigration) makes it somewhat of a deflection, intentionally or otherwise to fixate so much on it, unless you can actually provide a source which refutes those claims, in which case we go on and compare the sources and try and figure things out.

edited 15th May '17 7:51:31 PM by CaptainCapsase

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#189117: May 15th 2017 at 7:55:06 PM

I find it hilariously pathetic that we're still talking about who's the True Progressive in the house when Donald J. Trump has probably committed high treason in front of the entire nation. Some commentary on this: [1]

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#189118: May 15th 2017 at 7:55:15 PM

[up][up]Keep in mind I'm not debating Gillibrand's immigration position, I remember her having such positions during her time as a rep. My post was purely a (largely moot) point that Ambar's criticism of the source can be of merit, even if not in this particular case. There's a growing wave of misinformation preying on the left looking to equal that on the right, it behooves us all to be as sure as possible before giving random sources credit or taking them at face value.

My earlier defense of Gillibrand isn't me saying that she's perfect or a top choice for president. My disagreements with her policies don't disqualify her either. She's neither progressive savior or hated DINO to me, just a talented politician who under the right circumstances is a valuable tool/ally in hoping to make a better country. If she lives up to that, great. If not, she'll be tossed aside. We just shouldn't toss someone ahead of time, especially when they managed to win over a district that previously was 2/3-3/4 Republican. That takes talent, and we should be putting talent to use for us rather than judging it unworthy ahead of time.

edited 15th May '17 7:59:04 PM by TheWanderer

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#189119: May 15th 2017 at 7:55:22 PM

Wait, are we seriously giving crap to Ambar for pointing out that a source is biased bullshit (Jacobin in this case) and that it would be better to use more reliable sources? Especially in this era of wide-spread misinformation?

That's not deflection. That's advice.

edited 15th May '17 7:57:25 PM by M84

Disgusted, but not surprised
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#189120: May 15th 2017 at 7:56:49 PM

[up][up][up] That's a bit of an exaggeration of what happened; as President Trump gets to decide what's classified and what's not, unfortunately. He broke protocol for declassifying, but that's not high treason. It might be an impeachable offense though.

[up] It's deflection when, after someone (Elle) goes through the source and shows the in-article citations are credible in relation to the claim the article is being used to support, we agree that it's credible, and you continue to fixate on the source. Or, at the very least, it's an unnecessarily condescending way of giving advice.

edited 15th May '17 8:00:52 PM by CaptainCapsase

MadSkillz Destroyer of Worlds Since: Mar, 2013 Relationship Status: I only want you gone
Destroyer of Worlds
#189121: May 15th 2017 at 7:58:06 PM

@Ambar Elle asked for the exact article that I was quoting.

Plus I'm not gonna use that much of my time so no one looks upon a Marxist publication. The links are all there. And too many for me to link individually especially since I'm on a cellphone.

edited 15th May '17 8:08:47 PM by MadSkillz

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#189123: May 15th 2017 at 7:59:23 PM

[up][up] Intellectual rigor kind of demands that you link to credible articles supporting your claims. Not fringe websites that contain credible citations that support your claims. If you can't be bothered to do that than it's best not to try and debate a point.

edited 15th May '17 7:59:31 PM by CaptainCapsase

tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
Professional Forum Ninja
#189124: May 15th 2017 at 8:00:42 PM

Just heard Dave Chappelle said he was sorry and he fucked up for being on of the first on TV to say "give Trump a chance."

Here's where I heard it.

edited 15th May '17 8:01:58 PM by tclittle

"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
BonsaiForest Since: Jan, 2001
#189125: May 15th 2017 at 8:02:27 PM

An article about the "sovereign citizen" movement. Dumbasses who consider the US government to have no legitimacy, yet want to take advantage of all the things that taxes pay for.

I get that corruption gets people rightly pissed at the government, but the solution would be to fix or replace it with one that's loyal to the people and behaves itself, not to say "screw it, anyone in charge isn't legit".

According to data from the Anti-Defamation League, at least 45 police officers have been killed by domestic extremists since 2001. Of these, 10 were killed by leftwing extremists, 34 by rightwing extremists, and one by homegrown Islamist extremists.

Johnson and other terrorism experts worry that a generation of people who came of age in the shadow of 9/11 may not understand that historically, most terror attacks in the US have been domestic in origin.

In fact, a 2016 report by the US Government Accountability Office noted that “of the 85 violent extremist incidents that resulted in death since September 12, 2001, far-rightwing violent extremist groups were responsible for 62 (73%) while radical Islamist violent extremists were responsible for 23 (27%).” (The report counts the 15 Beltway sniper shootings in 2002 as radical Islamist attacks, though the perpetrators’ motives are debated.)

Today, the face of domestic terror looks different from in Mc Veigh’s day – sometimes literally. Some extremists – such as Jerry Kane, who was an unemployed truck driver – still fit roughly into the American popular image: blue-collar white men hiding in the woods and training for doomsday. But many do not. Not all, for example, are people on the economic margins. In 2012, Christopher Lacy, a software engineer with sovereign beliefs who had started a new job only a week earlier, shot a California state trooper in the head during a routine traffic stop.

Furthermore, not all sovereign citizens are white: Gavin Long, a black sovereign citizen, killed three law enforcement officers in Louisiana last year. An increasing number of black Americans are coming to the sovereign movement from the Moorish Science Temple, a black Muslim church that believes African Americans are the descendants of ancient Moors.

Experts believe white nationalism has waned in influence on some elements of the radical right, opening the movement to anyone enthusiastically anti-government and anti-law enforcement.

Younger and older sovereigns get an overwhelming share of their news from Infowars, the media channel of the conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, and RT, the propaganda network known for pushing negative stories about the American government.

Among some of the anti-government groups MacNab tracks, Trump has enjoyed something of a honeymoon since the election, she said. But she believes that it won’t last: when they realize Trump is not the panacea they thought he was, they will feel used, and turn against him.

Extremist sentiment follows certain historical patterns, according to MacNab; the last cycle moved through a series of specific manifestations – tax resistance, sovereign ideology, the militia era – before ending with Oklahoma City.

“We are now repeating that cycle,” MacNab said, and getting near the end.


Total posts: 417,856
Top