The General American Politics Thread

[Hyp3hat]

I mean, in any other circumstance, that article makes sense, but President Trump could damage America not only in terms of it's world standing, but actually for its citizens in a lasting and devastating manner. He's not Mitt Romney. Quasi-fascist border policy, a queasy cozying up to Russia (who definitely would like having a sycophantic, insecure blowhard in the presidency as opposed to, y'know, anyone connected to reality), a campaign of vitriol, bigotry and tantrums anchored by only a vague grasp of reality... it's nightmarish.

President Hilary just won't damage the entire political process as much as Trump or Cruz, the latter of which is not going to happen. Cruz seems notable (and hilarious) for the fact that he is so unlikeable that he will never be President unless lightning strikes the entire line of succession until the Senator from Texas is the only guy left. The National Review had to run a retraction earlier on in the campaign because they printed that some of his fellow Senators were going to endorse him.... and none did. The guy just effortlessly inspires loathing, he's some amazing specimen.

Speaking as someone in England, but I'm a political animal and this stuff affects us too, special relationship and all that. 

[Patticus]

It's a damn risky strategy to adopt, considering that we don't know what kind of presidency he will end up having. All we have to go on are his past statements - flip-flopping all over the bloody place. He has probably taken every position on every major subject out there. We don't know who he is, not really, and that's scary shit considering his presumptive nominee status, how close he is to getting those nuclear launch codes, getting to re-writing those libel laws so he can fuck up anyone who says anything remotely negative about him.

Were the nominee anyone else, I don't know, I'd probably still be against it, but this a dangerous, unquantified and unpredictable force we're toying with here.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Yeah, I love the logic behind it, but Trump is way too potentially destructive to consider that. You know how much damage a bad president can do in four years? Especially in this day and age when we have a rising Russia and China, who's trying to strong arm the South China Sea as it's own private lake?

And that's not even getting into what he'll do domestically, which considering his supporters, is not something I'm willing to risk. Give Hoover and Bush credit - they had some idea of what they were doing, even if it went badly. Trump just says whatever sounds good to his supporters - almost like Clinton, except without any political experience.

[TailsTellsTales]

I have thought of Clinton most likely being a one term president especially since given that she does not want to pursue big goals. Trump could actually win the election. I still hoping for Sanders even though it does not seem likely but until it is guaranteed I will keep my hopes up. Either way Sanders could always run in 2020 or 2024 at least and yes it is possible. By the way the meanest teacher I ever had looks very similar to Ms. Clinton lol.

[Conando]

I'll have to parrot other opinions and say this would make sense...if it not for Trump being the one that would be in the Oval Office for those 4 years. There's always the possibility that gridlock could stop him from doing anything too damaging but, it's not something I myself would want to risk. He's just unpredictable enough to be terrifying.

[-Robin-]

Gotta remember that being president also means being commander-in-chief. If this supposed strategy to let Trump be a 1 term president to get Senate and the House in control of the Democrats in the midterms goes ahead, that still leaves two years for a GOP controlled legislature to allow for any confrontational scenario Trump could imagine.

 

It would only be two years, sure. But two years is all he would need to devastate foreign relations with the U.S. for generations.

[Nepenthe]

It is honestly impossible to say how Trump would fare in a presidential situation because he has no political experience nor any ironclad positions he has repeated aside from maybe leave transgender people alone, since he's just saying whatever is convenient at the moment to whip up his base. He's a complete and total wildcard. At best, all I can perhaps glean from him is that he'll cater to corporate interests due to being a CEO (why the fuck do people think this would be a good thing for the country?), which is honestly what any Democrat would do, but a Democrat at least has the added benefits of not completely shitting the bed when it comes to social issues like modern GOP candidates. He's still way too risky to allow anywhere near the White House.

[Candescence]

14 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

At best, all I can perhaps glean from him is that he'll cater to corporate interests due to being a CEO (why the fuck do people think this would be a good thing for the country?), which is honestly what any Democrat would do

Not true, there's Sanders and Senator Warren at least. The neoliberalistic portion of the Democrats are still the establishment, but with all the blue dogs wiped out over a few previous elections, the party is shifting left gradually. Even Clinton is being pulled to the left by Sanders, and the fact that he's still got a lot of support gives him a lot of leverage at the convention regardless of who wins the nomination. Unlike the GOP establishment, the Democrat apparatus is much less hostile to Sanders' presence and probably knows all too well that he's the herald of an inevitable shift in the party's direction, especially since he basically has the youth vote on lockdown, and while they're not entirely comfortable with that, unlike the GOP establishment (who are screeching about Drumpf not adhering to "conservative values"), they're not exactly freaking out about it too much.

[Nepenthe]

Well, Sanders isn't going to win at this point and neither would Warren, so they're moot points. I'm concerning specifically viable Democratic candidates who will be in the White House, and while the Democratic convention isn't hostile to Sanders in any notable capacity I get a feeling that it's because he's relatively harmless, especially compared to Trump who has completely upended the entire party through his shenanigans.

[shdowhunt60]

5 hours ago, Nepenthe said:

Well, Sanders isn't going to win at this point and neither would Warren, so they're moot points. I'm concerning specifically viable Democratic candidates who will be in the White House, and while the Democratic convention isn't hostile to Sanders in any notable capacity I get a feeling that it's because he's relatively harmless, especially compared to Trump who has completely upended the entire party through his shenanigans.

Honestly, that alone makes me want to vote for him. Just because I know that it would spite the establishment GOP.

[Nepenthe]

It's all fun and games until enough people spite their candidate into the White House, especially after he's run on hateful social rhetoric the GOP has been fueling for years anyway. Seriously, half the reason Trump is such a problem for them is that he's just blatantly saying everything they were implying, destroying the decorum surrounding traditional Southern Strategy maneuvers while also demonstrating just how backwards the GOP is to the country at large. Honestly, the biggest thing I see a win for Trump doing is emboldening the already brazen racists and nationalists, and fuck that noise.

[Milo]

2 hours ago, Nepenthe said:

It's all fun and games until enough people spite their candidate into the White House, especially after he's run on hateful social rhetoric the GOP has been fueling for years anyway. Seriously, half the reason Trump is such a problem for them is that he's just blatantly saying everything they were implying, destroying the decorum surrounding traditional Southern Strategy maneuvers while also demonstrating just how backwards the GOP is to the country at large. Honestly, the biggest thing I see a win for Trump doing is emboldening the already brazen racists and nationalists, and fuck that noise.

Yeah, it really needs to be underlined that a fair amount of Trump's controversial policies and claims are actually supported by many GOP members and their candidates. It's just up until Trump entered the picture, they have learned to keep their views on certain issues at their dinner tables or have learned to present them in public in a mostly hidden manner.

Unfortunately for them, Trump's bombastic nature holds no pretenses whatsoever, and he's consequently telling a lot of his voters and fans everything they've wanted to hear out in the blue, instead of using dogwhistles like other GOP members have been doing over the past few decades. Hence a recurring answer from people who vouch their support for Trump when interviewed on camera is because "he tells it like it is."

[shdowhunt60]

8 hours ago, Nepenthe said:

It's all fun and games until enough people spite their candidate into the White House, especially after he's run on hateful social rhetoric the GOP has been fueling for years anyway. Seriously, half the reason Trump is such a problem for them is that he's just blatantly saying everything they were implying, destroying the decorum surrounding traditional Southern Strategy maneuvers while also demonstrating just how backwards the GOP is to the country at large. Honestly, the biggest thing I see a win for Trump doing is emboldening the already brazen racists and nationalists, and fuck that noise.

The racists and the nationalists? Since when? I agree that Trump is tackier than suburban dwellings, but the big draw I see for him is that he's not a weak-kneed moderate like the past several candidates the GOP has been putting up? Or are you operating on the impetus that conservatives must be racist once again?

[Nepenthe]

1 hour ago, shdowhunt60 said:

The racists and the nationalists? Since when? I agree that Trump is tackier than suburban dwellings, but the big draw I see for him is that he's not a weak-kneed moderate like the past several candidates the GOP has been putting up? Or are you operating on the impetus that conservatives must be racist once again?

I'm operating on the impetus that he's said racist things and thus is drawing white nationalists and general racists to his troupe along with people who like him because he just says whatever he feels will garner him more support that given day.

[shdowhunt60]

Just now, Nepenthe said:

racist things

Citation needed.

[Nepenthe]

2 minutes ago, shdowhunt60 said:

Citation needed.

For fuck's sake.

 

[KHCast]

4 minutes ago, shdowhunt60 said:

Citation needed.

Are you a trump supporter by any chance? Or just empathize with him and disagree with the allegations made against him for some reason?

[shdowhunt60]

2 minutes ago, KHCast said:

Are you a trump supporter by any chance? Or just empathize with him and disagree with the allegations made against him for some reason?

Not particularly, no. Other than a vehicle to smash through the political correctness machine and to destroy the establishment GOP, I think the man is more of a comedy machine than anything. He's unabashedly tactless, and would be a disastrously bad leader, but who isn't out of the entire lineup?

[Tani Coyote]

I'm seeing a lot of memes and the like that basically say "Trump is Hitler and if he enters the Presidency he'll take us down the path of Nazi Germany."

Certainly, he is an ignorant, racist shitlord who I can't blame people for finding similar to Hitler with similar messages.

On the other hand, it gives him far too much credit.

Hitler didn't just walk into the Chancellory after a landslide and shout "EIN VOLK, EIN REICH, EIN FUEHRER!" with 12 years of Hell ensuing.

Depression-era Germany was in turmoil. The government was pursuing austerity (cutting the supply of money), which made issues worse. The inability of the Republic to handle the Depression, coupled with the memory of how poorly the Republic had handled the hyperinflation less than a decade prior, undermined confidence in the whole idea. Remember, Germany had spent most of its history ruled by strongmen and a parliament that rubberstamped whatever the Emperor put before it.

At the same time, a gentleman named Stresemann, a center right politician, had recently died at the start of the Depression. He had kept Germany's multi-party system together by helping moderate relations between the center-left and center-right parties. With his death... it all broke down. The Social Democrats were excluded from Government, and eventually even the conservative factions started bickering with each other. President Hindenburg had to appoint Chancellors of his own choosing, because nobody could obtain the majority in the Reichstag needed to suggest a new Chancellor. These Chancellors ruled by decree because the Reichstag was ineffective.

The damage was done. The German people voted to put Communists and Nazis in power, both of whom never voted in the Reichstag except on votes of no confidence. They kept dissolving the Government and forcing new elections. Eventually, the Nazis gained about 1/3 of the seats, and were able to arrange Hitler's ascension to the Chancellory. Still not a dictatorship, however.

Hitler was crafty, though. He arranged to have Nazis put in as both the German and the Prussian Interior Ministers... who controlled the police. The police promptly harassed the Communist leadership, so when the next few elections were called, the Nazis gained more and more power, until they were able to secure a majority and turn over all power to Hitler (helped in part by the Reichstag fire).

Why am I giving this impromptu history lesson? To illustrate the United States is in a completely different economic, political and cultural situation than Weimar Germany.

For all our flaws, we have been a democracy for 200+ years, and we value this; the Germans were okay with killing the Republic. We are going against the grain with nominee choices, but we still believe in the fundamental electoral structure; the Germans voted in the two Parties whose sole purpose was to destroy the Republic and create a dictatorship. Our economy is meh, but okay all things considered; Germany was in the Great Depression. Our federal tradition is very strong; Germany's federal government was able to take over state governments. Never mind, we are a two-party Presidential system, whereas Germany was a multi-party Parliamentary system and this is a key factor in the Weimar Republic's downfall.

I don't know. I guess I just needed to rant about this hysteria somewhere.

[Hyp3hat]

Donald Trump already has spited the GOP, by becoming the presumptive nominee. Trump has made enemies of women, Muslim, and Hispanic Americans, which are demographics that after 2008 and 2012 the GOP recognised they needed to court because their traditional older white male demo was shrinking - Rubio was one example of them trying to right this. Young people think he's a joke, too, and young people helped get Barack Obama elected.

Trump is going to be absolutely obliterated in the general because all Hilary has to do is let Donald Trump go and say something stupid, to which his base will say 'Take That, PC Brigade', and everyone else will go 'What a fucking asshole' and vote for Clinton. You can't win an election by explicitly appealing to white racist people, the GOP know this, and Trump doesn't give a fuck. Trump losing will probably fuck up the GOP's credibility for years. They're the guys who nominated a fucking idiot to be President, a TV star with a trail of lawsuits and failed businesses behind him, a guy who sexualises his own daughter and doesn't mind being supported by the Klan. He's the Republicans worst nightmare.

You're essentially saying 'I'm voting Trump because I hate the Republicans', which is... the Republicans are already in crisis, dude. The President Bushes won't endorse Trump (they won't even refer to him by name), the House Speaker won't endorse him, John McCain, Mitt Romney, and other establishment Reps hate him. John McCain said that his next Senate election for Arizona (a state with a 30% Hispanic population) will be the toughest race of his career because he's down the ticket from Trump. Lots of Republicans are now fearing for their seats because of Trump.

You want to fuck up the GOP? Vote Democrat in the Presidential and Midterm Elections and crush them. Don't vote Trump for the lols. 

[Tornado]

A couple things need to be noted.

1. It's probably safe to say that most of the shit Trump has said he doesn't have an institutional belief in. He's a windbag, almost psychotically vain and probably ultra extreme in American exceptionalism. But very few of his "views" have been established in a way that I think shows Trump actually believes any of them.

2. 36 minutes ago, Hyp3hat said:

    They're the guys who nominated a fucking idiot to be President

   They can't not nominate him when he's the only candidate left in the race; and they can't prevent him from running in the first place. Yeah, there's the "actively courting elements of the voter base the GOP has been trying to silently appeal to" bit, but they deserve a bit of credit here. They've tried everything they could to keep him from running and gaining popularity.

[Hyp3hat]

1 hour ago, Tornado said:

1. They can't not nominate him when he's the only candidate left in the race; and they can't prevent him from running in the first place. Yeah, there's the "actively courting elements of the voter base the GOP has been trying to silently appeal to" bit, but they deserve a bit of credit here. They've tried everything they could to keep him from running and gaining popularity.

That's fair. I was more thinking of how they'd be perceived in the future, and especially if they unite around him (a long shot). It's not going to be a fondly remembered time in Republican history, either way.

 

Why did that get posted twice in a row.

[shdowhunt60]

2 hours ago, Hyp3hat said:

That's fair. I was more thinking of how they'd be perceived in the future, and especially if they unite around him (a long shot). It's not going to be a fondly remembered time in Republican history, either way.

Good. Maybe they'll kill over and make way for libertarians.

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

I do have a question; how long would I have to be live/be a citizen of the US before I could vote? 

And also, I do wonder if leaning to the right in Japan equates to leaning in the right in the US, as they seem similar but I am not sure. Being right wing in Japan is pretty much a more conservaitive approach though other conservatives are different such as not having a sense of nationalism etc 

[shdowhunt60]

16 minutes ago, Sonikku Mikyeong said:

I do have a question; how long would I have to be live/be a citizen of the US before I could vote? 

And also, I do wonder if leaning to the right in Japan equates to leaning in the right in the US, as they seem similar but I am not sure. Being right wing in Japan is pretty much a more conservaitive approach though other conservatives are different such as not having a sense of nationalism etc 

It would have to be a year at least, I think.

I hate the left and right dichotomy though. It's so nebulous and vague, so you have people trying to argue that Hitler was right wing despite the fact that he was a Socialist, wanted to remove class inequality, implemented gun control and socialized health care and welfare programs, etc.