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
So, how much of a bump do you think Trump's ratings will get for the Syrian air strikes?
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.It’s not a left-right thing, I’m one of the more left wing people in the thread and I’m also one of the more pro-strikes people.
It’s an isolationist-globalist thing, from an isolationist perspective the US shouldn’t be doing any strikes and should stay away, from a globalist perspective the US has a responsibility to try and undo some of the damage it’s done to the Middle East and try and enforce some level of international law.
In the end Trump would get a boost from looking presidential, but he couldn’t manage it, even non-Trump fans who agree with the strikes are going to feel that Trump handled them in a shitty way, even if they were legal there’s the basic fact that he kept tweeting about them, you can’t look presidential while tweeting about your missile strikes, it just doesn’t work.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
He even lost Alex Jones of all people over the strikes, and it's kind of hilarious.
![]()
He also fails at OPSEC forever, by tweeting about them days before it happened, and presumably let them have more than enough time to evacuate the whole place.
And I do think the support here, has been more nuanced than "I support them because America!" and "Military-Industrial Complex for the win, baby!", or whatever crap you tend to hear on the Right.
edited 16th Apr '18 5:16:18 PM by megaeliz
Some of those who support the strike on the basis of humanitarianism and enforcing international norms tend to lean left, and it will take more than a single night of bombing to put them into "approving of Trump" range.
Then there's the neocons, who either already support Trump or are Never Trumpers who won't turn their coats just because of this.
He might pick up a handful of independents, and in exchange lose a few of the isolationist/alt-right guys.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.The thing I don't understand about evangelicals and Trump is the fact that there is a genuine chance he could be the Anti-Christ. I mean, consider Revelations 13:16-17.
It (the Anti-Christ) compelled everyone - small and great alike, rich and poor, slave and citizen - to be branded on the right hand or on the forehead, and made it illegal for anyone to buy or sell anything unless he had been branded with the name of the beast or with the number of its name.
Branded on the forehead - MAGA hats anyone? Not to mention Trump's stated ambition to stamp his name on everything: (Trump steaks, Trump university, Trump tower...)
I mean sure, I'm taking one passage from the Bible and taking it way out of context. Obviously not a good way to construct a sound theological argument (but certainly in keeping with many on the Christian Right).
I know that some evangelicals would see this as a feature not a bug, as they want the end-times in their lifetime. But I skipped ahead: Revelations 14:11 and 19:20-21 suggests it won't end well for them.
It's rather simple.
They're mad they're being compared to the worst aspects of President Trump. "If you support it you're just like it".
The truth is more like "you support it because you're just like it" and they're seeing it... somewhat, but they're trying to separate themselves from Trump like that. "It is not one of us", etc.
So they could have been on their way to self-reflection, but they stopped midway and then they turned around, put their hands on their ears and began shouting "la la la la but her emails!" thinking they still have the high ground because they're obviously in the right and anyone who says different is the enemy.
Or something like that.
I do remember hearing from some religious conspiracy theorists that the Anti-Christ would appear/try to take over in 2016. I think it was an attempt to solidify their hatred of a particular candidate (like Hillary) or be ready for when Obama tried to keep power.
Also, this post from Dumbing of Age artist David Willis is still relevant a year and half later.

Speak for yourself. There is a difference between proselytizing and explaining ones beliefs in a way that puts a positive spin on it, a difference that I have tried to exemplify here at TVT for years. Some of the atheists around here and I have been debating religious issues for a long time. I think progressive Christianity is due for a political and cultural comeback, frankly.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.