The General American Politics Thread

[Tani Coyote]

I'm just amazed she hasn't tried to put the Clinton brand name to work. As fun as it is to mock Trump's utter stupidity and inexperience (let's be honest, a "Donald Trump looking at stuff" blog would probably soon join the "Kim Jong Un looking at stuff" blogs out there), she has her own personal accomplishments to fall back on.

Everyone likes to grill her about supporting the Iraq War, for example, so why doesn't she whip out something positive that she has done? Then again, given her massive faux pas "where was Sanders when I was fighting for universal healthcare?!" when he was literally behind her in photos from the time, she probably doesn't remember much of the past.

Looking forward is good, gooey stuff to talk about, but people prefer low-risk options. She needs to prove that she's done good for us in the past, and can be expected to do the same in the future.

A lot of Trump's ideas (like the vast majority of right-wing ideas) sound fantastic to someone with minimal background on the issues, so she really needs to step up her game. Trump's insane, impractical ideas of building border walls and dragging jobs back from China sound amazing, just as Obama's many proposals did 8 years ago. She has to do something similarly grand.

Unfortunately, being fairly conservative, she's not really able to promise the same radical changes that Sanders could.

Which is actually fairly weird, given she agreed to take on a lot of Sanders' different ideas. She should be milking that.

[-Robin-]

Gary Johnson is not going to do anything to fight climate change because "The sun is going to engulf the world anyways, why try to stop it?"

 

You know, in case you needed a reason why Johnson's terrible. Now excuse me, I'm gonna go sell all my possessions and rot in a street alley, because the sun is going to engulf the world anyways.

[Tani Coyote]

18 hours ago, -Robin- said:

Gary Johnson is not going to do anything to fight climate change because "The sun is going to engulf the world anyways, why try to stop it?"

 

You know, in case you needed a reason why Johnson's terrible. Now excuse me, I'm gonna go sell all my possessions and rot in a street alley, because the sun is going to engulf the world anyways.

Well.

It's fantastic to know that Johnson is just as clueless on science as Stein, being unable to tell the difference between Ozone depletion and the Sun expanding over the course of countless generations.

Maybe it's for the best the United States doesn't have a multi-party system, if the alternatives are either crazy or dipshits. Not that Trump is much better, but he might be an aberration.

[Nepenthe]

A multiparty system and more proportional representation is something we could definitely use.

But yeah, the two major alternatives we have are either the Libertarian Party (libertarian politics are fundamentally garbage) or the Green Party (anti-science/anti-vaccine nutcases). So even if I didn't want to vote for Hillary, I'd still have no viable alternative anyway. Literally everyone is worse.

[PSI Wind]

On 9/21/2016 at 3:23 PM, Raccoonatic Ogilvie said:

Let's compare the Parties: Cruz, Romney, H.W. Bush and several other notables are not backing Trump. But Sanders is backing Clinton. That really says something.

Yeaaaaah, about that.......

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ted-cruz-donald-trump-endorsement_us_57e56d3be4b0e28b2b53cb44?section=&

Zodiac Killer must be a masochist. He also probably hates his family and even wife. Who knows :V

[-Robin-]

The man who intentionally held the government hostage in 2013 and attempted it again the following year is now endorsing a candidate whose core message was partly on uncovering the "political establishment".

 

Go fucking figure. It honestly was just a matter of time before he caved.

[Dizcrybe]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/09/20/you-can-sleep-tonight-knowing-the-klan-is-awake-fliers-like-these-are-showing-up-on-lawns-across-the-u-s/?tid=sm_fb

Are you tired of those pesky niggers infesting your neighborhood? Well, the Ku Klux Klan might be able to help.

[SenEDDtor Missile]

1 hour ago, Dizcrybe said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/09/20/you-can-sleep-tonight-knowing-the-klan-is-awake-fliers-like-these-are-showing-up-on-lawns-across-the-u-s/?tid=sm_fb

Are you tired of those pesky niggers infesting your neighborhood? Well, the Ku Klux Klan might be able to help.

It's stuff like this that makes me wonder why anyone would want to be an American (obvious exceptions aside). We claim to be the land of the free and big believers in diversity and equality, but we allow trash like these people to exist.

[Dizcrybe]

1 hour ago, SenEDtor Missile said:

It's stuff like this that makes me wonder why anyone would want to be an American (obvious exceptions aside). We claim to be the land of the free and big believers in diversity and equality, but we allow trash like these people to exist.

That free speech is a massive double-edged sword. On one hand, it gives us the right to call out our government on its bullcrap. On the other hand, it also allows people to spew their hate speech whenever they feel like it.

[Tani Coyote]

17 hours ago, PSI Wind said:

Yeaaaaah, about that.......

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ted-cruz-donald-trump-endorsement_us_57e56d3be4b0e28b2b53cb44?section=&

Zodiac Killer must be a masochist. He also probably hates his family and even wife. Who knows :V

Good Lord.

I never thought I'd see the day where I thought Romney was a beacon of hope.

Going to pray that McCain, Cruz, et. al. pay for their endorsement big time in the general election. That obstruction tactic McConnell championed is going to help enormously in crippling the GOP for a while, given the majority of Americans are displeased with it.

8 hours ago, Dizcrybe said:

That free speech is a massive double-edged sword. On one hand, it gives us the right to call out our government on its bullcrap. On the other hand, it also allows people to spew their hate speech whenever they feel like it.

Well said.

We have to protect the bad in order to protect the good. It's the same reason we sometimes let criminals walk due to technicalities. It's for the greater good that we don't start making exceptions for the sake of convenience.

Similarly, it's why we can't just call for a blanket ban on Muslims a la Trump, even though radicalism is hardly a non-issue within Islam. There needs to be an immediate threat for the state to remove free speech protections.

[KHCast]

I really can't understand the hoops trump supports have to go through to make themselves believe and argue that trump ISNT racist or homophobic and that we're taking things out of context or the media is just blowing things out of proportion. (Going to the lengths to say trump never said he'd want to overturn the same sex law if he could, or that he doesn't endorse and support homophobes and is fine with gay camps) How is what he's said over the last year not that bad regarding Muslims, gays and women? How are they just fucking jokes. 

[Tani Coyote]

Cognitive dissonance is a powerful thing. Especially on the right.

Here's a gem from my mother, for example:

"Why does the world hate America?! We give out so much in aid!"

"Well, the whole 'toppling business-unfriendly governments, stationing troops where they're not wanted, turning a blind eye to corporations exploiting third world countries' thing probably has a hand in it..."

"BUT WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR INTERESTS!"

"Sure, but that means people will dislike us."

"BUT WE GIVE SO MUCH IN AID."

And so on. It's ridiculous.

[KHCast]

I'd also think it's a sense to nationalism to an extent. Much like racism, many just don't want to believe that homobia and sexism are still things in modern day America, and will do anything to argue against it. America is perfect, and can do no wrong, and it loves everyone after all

[Dizcrybe]

Denial has to be part of the equation as well. We know full well this country has problems out the woodwork, we just don't wanna admit it because it makes us feel bad.

[Tani Coyote]

40 minutes ago, Dizcrybe said:

Denial has to be part of the equation as well. We know full well this country has problems out the woodwork, we just don't wanna admit it because it makes us feel bad.

That cult of individualism is strong. The idea of succeeding or failing because of things beyond one's control is hard to fathom.

...on the other hand. A lot of people are happy to embrace the idea discrimination exists if it favors them.

For example. I've seen no shortage of white women who love to play up sexism as an issue for them, but they scoff at the "victim complex" of black Americans. Another case: I've noticed no shortage of kneejerk sympathy (that is, "oh, those poor people!" instead of something substantial, like extensive government programs for them) for Indians by white people, but an instinctive eyeroll whenever issues faced by blacks are discussed.

Isn't it awfully convenient prejudice is only real when one is a victim of it?

It really is amazing cognitive dissonance. You'd think understanding that one is a victim of some form of prejudice would open one's eyes to the idea that others are a victim of a different form.

[KHCast]

Quote

 

And marriage is not a civil right. Equal protection is, and homosexual couples should be given the same benefits of a married couple (Which ideally the government shouldn't be giving any benefits for just being married). Trump is not opposed to gay marriage, despite what Huffington Post says, he is opposed to the feds coming in and ruling on a states issue.

I had a debate with this guy after he posted this(essentially a bunch of what ifs about the government abusing their power since they "bent" the rules with this), but my god, we're back to this now? His argument following was that marriage, not just gay, should be a state issue, but I never saw anyone fight it before gay started fighting for equality. 

and Trump is still pretty homophobic either way. Being "k with the gays" doesn't exactly mean you're an equality loving Saint. When you back known homophobes and don't fight their homophobic ideals, and have policies hurting and not helping the group, you're gonna be consider homophobic. Doesn't matter if they have other shared ideals, LGBT people are part of this country, and a big deal, so shouldn't let that shit slide with people.

[Tani Coyote]

6 hours ago, KHCast said:

I had a debate with this guy after he posted this(essentially a bunch of what ifs about the government abusing their power since they "bent" the rules with this), but my god, we're back to this now? His argument following was that marriage, not just gay, should be a state issue, but I never saw anyone fight it before gay started fighting for equality. 

As a Historian who has also dabbled in sociology and political science, I feel I should clarify something.

Whenever someone mentions making something a "state issue"... it is 90% of the time a veil for discrimination.

Seriously, compare a map of the states which had miscegenation laws, and which ones had the strongest bans on gay marriage. The overlap is absurd.

Now compare a political map. You'll notice the states' rights loving GOP overlaps nicely with it as well. Just a coincidence, I'm sure.

American government has evolved the way it has for a reason. We realized that federal supremacy was an excellent way to protect minorities of any kind - racial, political, religious, etc. There's hysteria over tyranny, but that's easily diffused with transparency (which, strangely enough, the people most fearful of tyranny are often against).

Quote

and Trump is still pretty homophobic either way. Being "k with the gays" doesn't exactly mean you're an equality loving Saint.

This. It's key to remember that one of the biggest spokesmen for the alt right (which is filled with sexists and racists) is a gay man. Granted, he's an internalized homophobe, having said he would "cure" his homosexuality if he could, but... it's still a point you can be a minority or friendly towards a minority and be a gigantic douchelord.

[KHCast]

Add onto the fact that the states when they had power over same sex marriage laws and bans got nowhere with that, hence why the government stepped in. Reversing the law and giving power back to the states to handle issues like this is gonna just end up being a bad time for minorities like it was before.

essentially, the government was Robin Hood. Giving the poor(minorities) the gold(rights) when the king was stealing and hording it all(the states taking rights away and not doing anything.)

[Patticus]

The first debate is over!

Clinton won it for me, easily: Her mastery over policy was obvious, she handled the e-mail issue very well, all things considered, she was never really rattled or put on the back foot and was able to take the fight to Donald while simultaneously communicating her own vision for America. I thought she looked as presidential as she could get, and handled Trump well, getting in some great comebacks.

Meanwhile, Trump was regularly interjecting in her segments, and getting into arguments with the moderator (he even flat out said that the moderator was wrong at one point!), he was raising his voice and telling some really obvious lies - which were thankfully getting called out. He even had the gall to say that tax returns don't reveal all that much information, carrying on with the tax audit bullshit, and proudly admitted to paying no income tax. Later, he missed a glaringly obvious opportunity to hammer Clinton on her e-mails when cyber-security came up. And to top it off, he claimed to have the best temperament for president, which got a roaring laugh from the crowd and made Clinton very happy.

Holt was a bit weak at controlling the debate, but considering that he was faced with controlling Donald Trump, I think he did pretty well, and it was nice to see him calling out a few of Trump's lies. That he didn't check Clinton so much is likely down to the fact that she just didn't go on lying like Trump did.

 

 

[Nepenthe]

Hillary won by way of actually having some actual fucking policy proposals (and not shitting on black people like Trump did; to think we got institutional racism to be discussed in a presidential debate). All Trump did was say that things were horrible in the country without substantially answering a way to address things, and he got more unhinged and pissed off as the debate went on. He was defensive and took all of her bait the entire time.

[KHCast]

Yeah pretty much.

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

I'm not voting for anyone. Don't like Trump, don't like Hillary. Can't trust neither. I'll let America decide.

[Tani Coyote]

Good to see Clinton utterly destroyed him. I missed most of the debate, but there seems to be a pretty broad consensus that finally face to face, she exposed him for the clueless idiot he is. In true Republican fashion, Trump is great at saying "no" to a lot of things, but not very good at coming up with alternatives. For being called alt-right, he sure veers close to reactionary with that sort of perspective.

Even if Trump wasn't a liar or a bigot, he's clearly inexperienced and lacks the demeanor necessary for the leader of the world's sole superpower. This isn't some local organization. This is one of the most powerful offices in the entire world. The President controls millions of soldiers, thousands of nukes, and can easily change life in America with his control over millions of federal workers and his relations with Congress and world leaders.

It's not a position that someone this unqualified should fill. The fact it's even CONSIDERED is mind boggling.

29 minutes ago, Ming Ming Kanon said:

I'm not voting for anyone. Don't like Trump, don't like Hillary. Can't trust neither. I'll let America decide.

But there is objectively going to be one option that is better than the others. Why not do your part to put that option in power?

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

You know, this debate was all about attacking Trump...they haven't gone and really attacked Clinton at this point...I think Trump is saving that for later. I mean the e-mail server was barely discussed, and even then she admitted it was wrong...therefore, why isn't she in jail? Anyone who would attempt that would be in prison.

17 minutes ago, Raccoonatic Ogilvie said:

But there is objectively going to be one option that is better than the others. Why not do your part to put that option in power?

You can say that. But do I trust that said person to deliver? The answer is no. These candidates are so flawed. Just because Trump is the worst, doesn't mean I should automatically vote for the 2nd worst. I'm doing my part, taking a stand that I won't vote for these idiots who I don't believe in.

[Tani Coyote]

33 minutes ago, Ming Ming Kanon said:

You can say that. But do I trust that said person to deliver? The answer is no. These candidates are so flawed. Just because Trump is the worst, doesn't mean I should automatically vote for the 2nd worst. I'm doing my part, taking a stand that I won't vote for these idiots who I don't believe in.

It's less about delivery and more about not fucking everything up at this point, honestly.

I understand that feeling that one is making things better by not participating, but you're really not. You are complicit in making things worse if you choose to forego the ability to avoid making them worse.

This isn't a run of the mill election, where it doesn't really matter who wins. Clinton is simply infinitely more qualified than Trump, and while she's not going to be any sort of marvel, her decades of experience means she is a much better choice. Trump has zero experience in politics, and even if he meant well, he'd probably end up breaking a lot of things by extension. Clinton might not make things much better, but she probably won't make them worse either; she has a stake in the status quo and will at the very least uphold it. Trump might just drive this country off a cliff.

Plus, if you don't trust candidates to deliver, you shouldn't participate in elections ever. Checks and balances do their part to keep a great deal of political platforms from being passed.