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

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#246851: Jun 23rd 2018 at 7:57:36 PM

Yes and no.

It was a hundred or more programs under one larger package. I'm not referring to every specific Kentucky-based program. However, Roosevelt's election was based on a campaign of "practical politics" where he was interested in acquiring votes from rural consumers versus big showy causes.

Roosevelt's strategy was the belief that he could appeal to the common voter directly by focusing on economic and society issues directly.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#246852: Jun 23rd 2018 at 8:08:56 PM

And again, what does the EC have to do with that? Because you don't need the EC to believe that's a good strategy. I very much doubt that politicians are going to stop worrying about the rural areas, particularly the ones that represent those places. Or those particular industry interests.

You're so worried about rural voters being ignored but have not made the case sufficiently that the EC helps them or that going straight popular vote would actually disadvantage them.

Like, seriously, what is your case that the EC is the lynch pin of making sure those people are represented? Because you've totally failed to convince anyone.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#246853: Jun 23rd 2018 at 8:13:21 PM

I don't understand what's hard to understand.

Rural votes are important because of the Electoral College.

Without it, politicians will ignore them and let them die.

Like they did.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#246854: Jun 23rd 2018 at 8:14:18 PM

Question: Isn't the only politician that needs to care about the Electoral College the President of the United States.

EDIT: EC reform is one of those topics I don't pay a lot of attention to. Mostly because I don't expect to ever actually happen (rendering any discussion moot, to my mind) and it's hard to argue for reform when the calls most often come right after the side wanting it just lost an election.

edited 23rd Jun '18 8:16:17 PM by sgamer82

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#246855: Jun 23rd 2018 at 8:14:51 PM

And several people have already refuted those arguments. Like they've said, the EC doesn't help most rural voters anymore than it helps voters in the most populous states.

Because most of them are solid Red or Blue, they don't have to focus on them during presidential elections.

[up]And also that. The Presidency isn't everything.

edited 23rd Jun '18 8:15:16 PM by LSBK

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#246856: Jun 23rd 2018 at 8:17:03 PM

And several people have already refuted those arguments. Like they've said, the EC doesn't help most rural voters anymore than it helps voters in the most populous states.

None of the arguments have actually refuted anything or given a single reason why the Electoral College isn't direly important to rural voters. While it only affects the Presidency, it's a major part of guaranteeing the President must take them into account.

Because most of them are solid Red or Blue, they don't have to focus on them during presidential elections.

This is wrong as we saw in 2 out of 4 elections. Indeed, it's so staggeringly incorrect, you might as well say water is fire.

edited 23rd Jun '18 8:17:31 PM by CharlesPhipps

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
CrimsonZephyr Would that it were so simple. from Massachusetts Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
Would that it were so simple.
#246857: Jun 23rd 2018 at 8:23:54 PM

Rural states like Kentucky voted R-for-Reactionary in 8 of the last 10 presidential elections and 11 out of the last 15. They're threading their own nooses and they're throttling the rest of the country on the adjacent gallows. You'd probably get more left-of-center leadership at the federal level, who would put your desperately needed policy initiatives in place, without this idiotic and antidemocratic institution, but you want your stupid campaign pantomime before voting the troglodytes into office.

edited 23rd Jun '18 8:26:13 PM by CrimsonZephyr

"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."
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#246858: Jun 23rd 2018 at 8:26:36 PM

[up][up]The only ruby red state that Obama got was Indiana, and that was his first time around. States that Trump won that Dems usually win (like Pennsylvania and Michigan have also still been competitive, even if the Dems managed to pull off the win the last few goes before him.

edited 23rd Jun '18 8:26:53 PM by LSBK

AmbarSonofDeshar Since: Jan, 2010
#246859: Jun 23rd 2018 at 8:42:13 PM

Rural voters have hanged themselves. They hang themselves in the United States, and they hang themselves here. At this point the only thing that will help the rural poor is if left-wingers are elected in large numbers, and the only way that will happen is if obstacles like the Electoral College die.

Without the EC we'd have had Gore instead of Bush, and Clinton instead of Trump. The world would be an objectively better place, and pretending the EC has done anything to help the people of rural Kentucky is just plain ludicrous.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#246860: Jun 23rd 2018 at 8:59:00 PM

Without the EC we still would have George W. Bush president because it was fraud. They would have fixed it another way and lost more votes.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#246861: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:00:28 PM

[up] So... your latest argument against changing the EC is "We'd have gotten screwed over, anyway, so why bother"?

edited 23rd Jun '18 9:00:44 PM by sgamer82

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#246862: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:01:49 PM

Al Gore received 500,000 more votes than George Bush. Without the EC, he'd have been President, full stop. How is this even debatable?

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
DrunkenNordmann from Exile Since: May, 2015
#246863: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:03:15 PM

Not to mentiont that the EC automatically means that your vote isn't equal to other people's votes depending on where you live.

"All men are created equal" indeed....

We learn from history that we do not learn from history
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#246864: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:12:12 PM

I see, it doesn't matter that Bush did it via A CRIME because all that matters is your objection to the system.

"He had 500,000 more votes and even though Al Gore would have won if not for FRAUD, it's not debatable because of my point being better."

The Electoral College is not why Bush won and you know it. Fraud is why he won.

edited 23rd Jun '18 9:13:37 PM by CharlesPhipps

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#246865: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:13:14 PM

[up] More like "The EC being absent would have prevented Bush becoming President the way he did, illegal or not"

The Electoral College is not why Bush won and you know it. Fraud is why he won.
Fraud that, in that specific form, would never have worked if the Electoral College weren't a thing. You can argue what ifs all you want about how they'd have frauded it somehow, doesn't change the point that without the EC Gore likely would have won.

edited 23rd Jun '18 9:15:13 PM by sgamer82

CrimsonZephyr Would that it were so simple. from Massachusetts Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
Would that it were so simple.
#246866: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:14:42 PM

He lost the popular vote by half a million and the Supreme Court halted a recount that could have, possibly, shifted Florida to Gore. We know and none of us is saying that's okay. Had the Electoral College not existed, that advantage of 500,000 would have stood alone, and there would have not been any basis for Bush v. Gore. Gore would have simply won.

"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."
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#246867: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:14:50 PM

More like "The EC being absent would have prevented Bush becoming President the way he did"

Yes, this is true but so would a proper investigation into the fraud, a chance for missing ballots to be retaken, and any number of other appropriate legal challenges.

Furthermore, if the electoral college is removed, then Republicans will continue to engage in fraud and I can easily see it strengthening their power base. Even now we have Voter ID and other methods to prevent minorities from voting and they'll just up it to compensate.

He lost the popular vote by half a million and the Supreme Court halted a recount that could have, possibly, shifted Florida to Gore. We know and none of us is saying that's okay. Had the Electoral College not existed, that advantage of 500,000 would have stood alone, and there would have not been any basis for Bush v. Gore. Gore would have simply won.

It's just seems to me its saying the system is broken (which it is) but not addressing the corruption and gerrymandering. Which it won't. All it will do is lead to abuse and disenfranchising of rural Americans so they can be ignored for urban communities.

But I don't thik either of us are budging on this. Thank you for taking time to explain your positions and why.

edited 23rd Jun '18 9:18:14 PM by CharlesPhipps

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#246868: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:15:54 PM

[up] Look up the definition of a non-sequitur argument some time. You are throwing everything you can at this fixation of yours, but it doesn't make any sense. Part of the drive behind voter suppression, especially in swing states, is that small changes in turnout within a state can shift the state's entire Electoral College vote. Going to national popular vote would mean you'd have to suppress millions more voters to change outcomes.

edited 23rd Jun '18 9:17:19 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
DrunkenNordmann from Exile Since: May, 2015
#246869: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:16:06 PM

[up][up] "People will break the law, so let's not try to fix stuff that is broken" - alright then.

edited 23rd Jun '18 9:16:14 PM by DrunkenNordmann

We learn from history that we do not learn from history
RedSavant Since: Jan, 2001
#246870: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:16:40 PM

The Electoral College made Florida a very convenient fulcrum to make that fraud tip the election, instead of either being a drop in the bucket of Gore's substantial lead, or requiring the Republicans to falsify or destroy over half a million votes for their win.

It's been fun.
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#246871: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:16:45 PM

Furthermore, if the electoral college is removed, then Republicans will continue to engage in fraud and I can easily see it strengthening their power base.

Even now we have Voter ID and other methods to prevent minorities from voting and they'll just up it to compensate.

~Charles Phipps

Once again, I have to ask, is your strongest argument now really "We'd have gotten screwed over, anyway, so why bother"?

Because that's what it sounds like

edited 23rd Jun '18 9:17:29 PM by sgamer82

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#246872: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:17:55 PM

@Charles, I think it's good to have view points that stray a bit from consensus from time to time, but you have a habit of not backing up your arguments, and drawing these things out much longer than you should.

Just let it go. Even if no one changes your mind, that's not a reason to keep going on like this, it just makes people less likely to care about what you have to say.

edited 23rd Jun '18 9:20:23 PM by LSBK

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#246873: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:19:14 PM

Weirdly, my argument is, "Are you guys really so used to Right Wing corruption you'd rather change the entire electoral system than try to stop the actual criminal abuses that would render the issue moot?"

Basically, everyone thinks it's better to get rid of the electoral college than:

  • Stop criminal activity in the elections
  • Campaign more in rural states

And that's just bizarre to me.

edited 23rd Jun '18 9:19:57 PM by CharlesPhipps

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
CrimsonZephyr Would that it were so simple. from Massachusetts Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
Would that it were so simple.
#246874: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:19:37 PM

Charles, reading between the lines, the only reason you're in favor of the EC is the ego trip that only undeserved, outsize political influence brings. How many reactionaries do people like you have to send to the White House before the idea takes root in your head that it isn't working?

"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."
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#246875: Jun 23rd 2018 at 9:20:22 PM

[up][up] That might be what you meant, but that's not what it sounded like.

Not to me. But, to be fair, I started following this late due to my above mentioned feelings about removing or reforming the Electoral College (it's a moot point since it realistically won't happen, anyway)

edited 23rd Jun '18 9:25:35 PM by sgamer82


Total posts: 417,856
Top