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

Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#249676: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:33:51 AM

Look, I think most have to admit at this point? If one voted Jill Stein, they got played by a foreign power, that Stein may well have been collaborating with.

Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#249677: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:35:57 AM

By the way, you like endangered species? Well... some bad news...

In another sign of what any Republican administration would do, Trump is gunning for the Endangered Species Act. The ultimate goal here is to eradicate the act entirely and I'd not be shocked if the Kavanaugh Court eliminated it one day.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#249678: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:37:46 AM

Ugh, he's probably doing this so that his sons can stuff a bald eagle and add it to their trophy room.

Edited by M84 on Jul 20th 2018 at 11:39:42 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#249679: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:39:54 AM

Honestly, this would be done by any Republican administration. Being clear, there is a lot terrible about Trump because he is Trump. There is a great deal about Trump that is horrible because he is a Republican.

tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
Professional Forum Ninja
#249680: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:44:41 AM

In an interview with CNBC, Trump says he's ready to put a tariff on EVERYTHING coming out of China to the US.

"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#249681: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:45:28 AM

Good news.

It seems Republicans are considering unseating Joe Manchin in WV a lost cause.

An outside group aligned with Senate Majority Leader Mitch Mc Connell is abruptly halting a planned ad offensive in the West Virginia Senate race, an early blow for the Republican Party in a critical midterm contest.

One Nation, a prominent conservative group, on Thursday canceled hundreds of thousands of dollars in TV and radio spending in the state. The organization had planned a $750,000 campaign casting Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, a top GOP target, as weak on immigration.

The offensive started July 17 and had been scheduled to run through July 26, according to a person familiar with the media buy.

As part of its midterm blitz, One Nation had been slated to run ads in five Senate battlegrounds this month: West Virginia, North Dakota, Nevada, Indiana and Arizona. People familiar with the group’s plans said it intended to move forward in the other four states.

Republicans have had high hopes for their West Virginia nominee, state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, but several recent polls have shown him trailing Manchin.

“We are always making adjustments to where and when we are deploying our resources,” said One Nation spokesman Chris Pack. “There’s no major shift in strategic direction.”

Manchin gets a lot of crap from the far left, but he's a pretty reliable Democrat most times when his vote makes a genuine difference.

In other words, one major pro-Trump state might well be an easy Dem victory this November. Meaning we still have to worry about Indiana, North Dakota, Florida and Missouri, but...this isn't a bad thing.

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#249682: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:45:57 AM

[up][up]Ah economy it was nice knowing you, this is a travesty and the only silver lining is that by doing before the midterms Trump may very well be guaranteeing a Blue Wave. Nothing would better encourage the rival base and depress one's own base like an economic recession from dumbass trade policies.

[up]Manchin I think is the perfect barometer for how politically pragmatic someone is, he's genuinely useful and probably the only type of Democrat that could do well in his electorate which translates to him saying some questionable things.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Jul 20th 2018 at 11:49:33 AM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
Raptorslash Since: Oct, 2010
#249683: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:46:50 AM

I don't really get the appeal of trophy hunting - I can understand hunting nuisance species like deer, killing dangerous individuals who threaten people, and people killing for food or as a cultural tradition (though that isn't an excuse all the time - see whaling in Japan), or even people who do it out of economic desperation, but I fundamentallly don't understand people who hunt and kill already endangered or threatened species that they know are threatened just for the joy of killing.

Trump's kids clearly grew up without learning much respect for life, human or animal.

Edited by Raptorslash on Jul 20th 2018 at 11:49:26 AM

Kaiseror Since: Jul, 2016
#249684: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:47:24 AM

It seems like the Trump administration is going out of it's way to completly destroy the environment.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#249685: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:49:37 AM

[up][up]It's not a cheap activity either, especially if you're hunting the animals the Trumps hunt.

Disgusted, but not surprised
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#249686: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:50:28 AM

I feel obligated as the writer of I WAS A TEENAGE WEREDEER to relate my main character's objection to calling her species a nuisance.

:)

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#249687: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:52:16 AM

@Tobias Some advise for your first time door knocking, if you go out as part of a group you can often tag along with someone (so you just stand and listen for a few doors) or possible be the person with the clipboard who records down the responce from each address.

Oh and try not to let it get you down how many no answers you get, there’s a say amongst door to door campaigners, “the outs always win”.

I'll try to keep that in mind. I'm socially anxious about talking to people, but I'm also really fond of explaining things. I've kinda built my career on the fact that I understand a wide variety of complex subject matter but also know how to break it down in a way that your average lay-person can easily grasp.

I like to joke that I'm a professional translator; in addition to English, I also speak fluent Data and I'm fairly proficient in Legal. tongue

I'm terrible at small talk and basic social interaction, but I thrive under a spotlight, where I can be like, "This is what X is about," and then field questions about it.

I've never heard the "outs always win" phrase before, but I understand the logic. Going door to door, from what I understand, starts at a baseline of 0. If even one person is convinced to vote for my guy, that's +1 Vote. People not being convinced are not -1 Vote, they're just the absence of a +1; they remain at 0. Unless I actively convince someone to vote for the other guy, it's never going to be a -1.

That's how I'm looking at it, anyway.

This is raw privilege speaking. You can only afford to rant against "the lesser evil" if you'll be alright even if the greater evil is elected. Like it or not, the two-party system means that you have a binary choice in elections. The only candidates that have any chance of winning are the Democrat and the Republican. If you vote third party, or refuse to vote at all, then you're essentially saying that you don't care which of those two win. Refusing to vote for the lesser evil isn't a victory for the hypothetical good — it's a real and concrete victory for the greater evil, and that has real and concrete consequences.

Refusing to sully your hands by making a pragmatic choice does not absolve you of responsibility for the harm caused by one of the two "bad" candidates winning. It makes you responsible for the harm caused by the the worse of the two viable candidates winning.

I hate that phrase so much. "The lesser evil." Implying that both sides are always evil. It doesn't set a great mindset, at least to me. I've been trying to wean myself off of using it, because I feel like it just fuels the Both Siders narrative. If we agree that our guy is evil, then it weakens our attempt to convince people that he's worth voting for.

Instead, there's a quote from Former President Barack Obama that I'm absolutely in love with. It communicates the same idea, but from a different perspective: "Better is Good." Our guy might not be perfect. He might not be everything you wanted. But is he better than the other guy? Because Better is good. It's certainly a hell of a lot better than Worse.

We can't give you Perfect tomorrow, but if we can just keep doing Better, each and every day, picking Better and Better candidates and enacting Better and Better policies, we might just get to Perfect one day.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Jul 20th 2018 at 9:54:40 AM

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#249688: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:53:14 AM

The world is a complex place. Moving anything in the direction of 'better' deserves a lot of praise.

Raptorslash Since: Oct, 2010
#249689: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:55:54 AM

The Trumps' hunting is an ego thing more than anything else. They don't do it for food or to support their families, they don't do it fairly, they don't do it to protect people, and the species they hunt are large, charismatic, and in trouble, and they don't seem to care at all about the last part.

Edited by Raptorslash on Jul 20th 2018 at 11:56:06 AM

tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
Professional Forum Ninja
#249690: Jul 20th 2018 at 8:58:17 AM

Politico: McConnell is threatening to move the confirmation of Kavanaugh to right before the election if Democrats continue to push for documents concerning Kavanaugh.

    Article 
Mitch Mc Connell has a warning for Democrats demanding copious documents on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh: Be careful what you wish for.

The Senate majority leader privately told senior Republicans on Wednesday that if Democrats keep pushing for access to upwards of a million pages in records from President Donald Trump’s high court pick, he’s prepared to let Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote slip until just before November’s midterm elections, according to multiple sources.

Delaying the vote past September would serve a dual purpose for Mc Connell, keeping vulnerable red-state Democrats off the campaign trail while potentially forcing anti-Kavanaugh liberals to swallow a demoralizing defeat just ahead of the midterms. Senators said Mc Connell believes the Democratic base will be “deflated” if they raise hopes of defeating Kavanaugh only to lose just days before the election.

Democrats have no intention of backing down in their call for maximum transparency about Kavanaugh’s record, but the GOP is betting that they’ll start to sweat the Supreme Court timeline as the summer wears on.

“To me, it’s in their best interest to have that vote done for a lot of their red-state senators who are facing their voters,” GOP Conference Chairman John Thune said.

The South Dakotan listed two reasons for Democrats to dread a delay: “One is, you’re stuck here, you can’t get home. And two, the vote is going to be of significant consequence in a lot of those races. I don’t know how it’s to their benefit to drag it out.”

Mc Connell and his party prefer to confirm Kavanaugh by Oct. 1, so the conservative appellate judge can be seated on the nation’s highest court when its annual term begins on the first Monday of that month.

But with Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and his caucus clamoring for the full set of documents from Kavanaugh’s time in the George W. Bush White House, Mc Connell is making clear that he’s prepared to call Democrats’ bluff — believing their request is a politically-motivated effort to delay the nomination until after they have a shot at the majority.

The Senate typically recesses for much if not all of October during election years, giving members battling for reelection a chance to campaign back in their home states. Should Mc Connell meet Democratic document demands by staying in session longer before confirming Kavanaugh, a half-dozen of the minority’s senators battling for survival in Trump-won states could lose out on valuable time to make their case to voters.

“We’re witnessing historic obstructionism here,” Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.) said of Democratic resistance to Trump’s judicial picks and decrying “unreasonable requests for information by people who have already said publicly they’ve made a decision” on Kavanaugh.

Perdue, one of several conservatives who successfully urged Mc Connell to cancel part of the Senate’s long-running August recess, added that delaying the Supreme Court vote into October is “one option he has. He’s done it before.”

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Democrats on his committee, led by California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, are currently locked in tough negotiations over how broad a swath of documents the panel can get from Kavanaugh’s five years in the Bush administration.

During his tenure, Trump’s Supreme Court pick was involved in multiple contentious issues, from post-9/11 security decisions to the confirmation of other high-profile nominees to the federal bench. Kavanaugh also was involved in a discussion about how retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy, the man he’s been tapped to replace, would rule on giving detained terrorist suspects access to counsel.

Grassley warned on Thursday that “you’d better ask me in two weeks” about when Kavanaugh’s hearings could even get scheduled, given the intensity of the talks on releasing records.

“I would love to have him on the court the first day of the new term,” Grassley said. “But I can’t even guarantee that at this point, because of the fact that we have a constitutional responsibility to do a thorough and fair hearing.”

Democrats insist that they’re holding Kavanaugh to the same standard that governed the release of an estimated 170,000 documents on Justice Elena Kagan’s record before her Supreme Court confirmation. But Republicans protest that Schumer is slowing down Kavanaugh to an extent that they never imposed on Kagan, with the New York Democrat refusing to even meet with Trump’s pick before a document deal is reached.

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), a Judiciary panel member, said that his party is seeking relevant documents and not crafting a fishing expedition designed to drag out Kavanaugh’s final confirmation. Yet he also indicated that Democrats would make their requests regardless of the GOP’s preferred Oct. 1 confirmation deadline.

“I can’t tell you whether a million or [1.2 million pages] will mean it’s Oct. 1 or Oct. 2” that Kavanaugh gets a vote, Durbin said. “Nobody knows that. All we can do is ask that.”

Democrats say they have new confidence in their push for more Kavanaugh disclosures after the stunning Thursday withdrawal of appellate court nominee Ryan Bounds over his racially incendiary writings during his college years.

Bounds faced universal Democratic opposition and rare GOP dissent in the narrowly divided Senate. With Sen. John Mc Cain (R-Ariz.) absent, the Republicans' 51-49 majority has effectively shrunk to 50-49, bringing Democrats tantalizingly close to sinking Kavanaugh if they can stick together.

Even some of Democrats’ most vulnerable red-state residents met Mc Connell’s warning about a Supreme Court vote closer to the election with little worry.

“It doesn’t bother me either way, whatever they do,” Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said. “The vote’s going to be taken, sooner or later.”

Asked about being kept from campaigning against GOP challenger Patrick Morrisey in his home state, Manchin replied, “I think they want to go as bad as we want to go on the trail, so we’ll see what happens.”

Even Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), who's challenging endangered Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) this fall, cast doubt on the merits of forcing her to squirm over Kavanaugh's confirmation well into October. "I don't have any doubt in my mind that she's going to vote for him," Cramer said.

The possibility that Kavanaugh's final confirmation might slip into October first came up during a closed-door lunch for GOP senators on Tuesday; Mc Connell raised the prospect again Wednesday during a meeting with GOP committee chairman, sources said.

The Kentucky Republican and the Trump White House continue to press ahead with Oct. 1 as their goal for confirmation, and Kavanaugh is seen as likely to prevail given his GOP establishment credentials and the political pressure on red-state Democrats who voted for Justice Neil Gorsuch last year.

Still, for outside liberal activists aiding the Democrats’ bid to defeat Kavanaugh, the prospect of a confirmation delay until the edge of the midterm vote seemed to have far more upside than downside.

Former Schumer aide Brian Fallon, who now helms the group Demand Justice to fight Trump’s judicial nominees, argued that Mc Connell would take “a loss” if Kavanaugh isn’t on the nation’s highest court by the time its term starts.

Mc Connell knows better than anyone that the longer this nomination drags out, the more time it gives for pressure to mount on the pro-choice moderates in his caucus,” Fallon said.

Senate Minority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas), a senior member of the Judiciary panel, insisted Thursday that Mc Connell wouldn't "allow unreasonable delay" and that Oct. 1 remains the party's cutoff for confirming Kavanaugh.

However, Cornyn acknowledged, "it could" slip.

This is a high risk, high reward situation for Mc Connell.

Edited by tclittle on Jul 20th 2018 at 10:58:09 AM

"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#249691: Jul 20th 2018 at 9:04:27 AM

Hunters tend to love nature.

I can't imagine Trump and company could spend five minutes in a forest without wanting to burn it down.

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.
#249692: Jul 20th 2018 at 9:06:54 AM

Hunters out in search of a tiger pelt generally aren't conservationists, no matter how many trees they hug.

"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."
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#249693: Jul 20th 2018 at 9:10:09 AM

I have nothing but contempt for people who think going out to shoot an elephant or a leopard is somehow sharing a bond with them.

If you pay to kill an elephant, lion or the like for fun? I can't consider you anything but an asshole.

Kaiseror Since: Jul, 2016
#249694: Jul 20th 2018 at 9:20:07 AM

Y'know when Captain Planet and Ferngully came out people complained that the villains were unrealistic and one-dimensional yet look what we have now.

DingoWalley1 Asgore Adopts Noelle Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Can't buy me love
Asgore Adopts Noelle
#249695: Jul 20th 2018 at 9:22:51 AM

[up]x5 Does McConnell not realize that doing that obvious political play would enrage Democrats and Independents to the point that they come out to vote in even larger droves then they already are (or at least, appear to)? It wouldn't deflate them; if anything, it would deflate Republicans who would think that this defeat would deflate the Dems for some reason.

It would also be a boon to Red State Dems; as POS Greg Gianforte has shown, it'd be too late for many people to change their mind and vote and they'd vote for Red State Democrats thinking they'd still be willing to compromise with Republicans. Manchin, for instance, has a 10-20 point lead over his opponent that would only drop to 1 if he voted against Kavanaugh; if he voted against Kavanaugh the week of the Election, it wouldn't be enough time to change many people's minds and they'd still vote for him.

Edited by DingoWalley1 on Jul 20th 2018 at 12:22:42 PM

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#249696: Jul 20th 2018 at 9:23:27 AM

Hoggish Greedly as President would be entirely believable.

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#249697: Jul 20th 2018 at 9:38:54 AM

@Crimson Zephyr: There are some people like that (Teddy Roosevelt was one such) but yeah.

CharlesPhipps Since: Jan, 2001
#249698: Jul 20th 2018 at 10:06:31 AM

I'm sorry, but you cannot just say "Bill Clinton" in a vacuum. Nixon started the war on drugs and demonized black rights with calls for law and order. Reagan made it worse. The GOP congress were the ones who demanded harsh measures for sentencing to pass the crime bill, which had tons of things wrapped up in it. The idea of "Bill Clinton is the father of minimum mandatories" is deceptive.

If you go back to Nixon then you are screwing over your argument because that just means that the Democrats are the party of segregation and racism. They're not, though, because modern political dynamics have changed. I cite Bill Clinton because centrism in the Democrats is still there and a toxic influence that needs to be purged. I want to vote for them. I want them to go left and represent my views in the house.

I voted for someone I didn't believe in because it was better than the alternative. But we need to rise up, to make it clear that the Democrats are not entitled to our votes. That they have to move Left and fight the culture war.

And the idea that voters have no agency and everything is down to one candidate who 'inspires' is just one I reject offhand. Hillary Clinton was the first female presidential nominee, a role model to million of young women and men alike. She inspired millions to vote for her. But it doesn't count for some reason when you don't inspire the right people, or enough people?

Trump, also, sure as hell inspired a ton of white people of the upper income bracket to vote for him even while being (or because of being) a repellent human being.

My issues with Hillary Clinton are the fact I didn't approve of the continued ineffectual War on Terror policies, a lack of strong economic vision, and generally other issues. She's a politician who long since transcended her sex to be someone who should have been focused on issue-wise.

Mind you, yes, absolutely she is better than Trump but I did support Sanders.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jul 20th 2018 at 10:12:34 AM

Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#249699: Jul 20th 2018 at 10:09:27 AM

If you go back to Nixon then you are fucking over your argument because that just means that the Democrats are the party of segregation and racism. They're not, though, because modern political dynamics have changed. I cite Bill Clinton because centrism in the Democrats is still there and a toxic influence that needs to be purged. I want to vote for them. I want them to go left and represent my views in the house.

What nonsense, Third Way centrism is not a strong force in the Democratic Party and that would be obvious if you actually paid attention to the party's current positions on things like infrastructure and healthcare.

Democratic Neoliberalism is dead and it's nothing more than delusion to pretend that it's still a potent force. It wasn't strong in 2016 and it's not strong in 2018.

I voted for someone I didn't believe in because it was better than the alternative. But we need to rise up, to make it clear that the Democrats are not entitled to our votes. That they have to move Left and fight the culture war.

Fight the culture war? What the hell has their support for Gay Marriage and LGBT rights if not fighting the culture war? Or pro choice positions?

Your Windmill crusade against some shadowy group of Democrats who want to bring us back to 90's politics is naught but a waste of time and energy.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Jul 20th 2018 at 1:11:02 PM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
Wryte Since: Jul, 2010
#249700: Jul 20th 2018 at 10:10:48 AM

To toss two more cents on the pile of pennies regarding not voting for "the lesser of two evils:"

When you refuse to vote for either candidate, one of two things happens.

Either A) the candidate loses, and is in no position to do anything you want them to, or B) they win, and by refusing to vote for them all you've done is prove that they don't need you to win. Not voting is an entirely self-defeating act.

The way you influence politicians isn't by not voting for them until you get a perfect one; it's by voting for them even if they aren't perfect, and then saying "I won't vote for you next time unless..."


Total posts: 417,856
Top