Make the US Politics Thread Great Again


What the hell? The Dems pretty much sacrificed control of government in 2012 due to pushing through the health care change. Have a look at their position on climate change and the treaties Obama was signing up to before Trump ripped them up, and compare those positions to Bush/Trump. Obama if anything went too far on being nice for the global alliances. And it was the Dems who passed the automatic rifle restrictions which the Republicans took away.

They may not do as much as some on the left want, but they’re clearly doing heaps on these issues, and the gap between them and the Republicans is HUGE.

He was already an independent senator. The only reason he was even able to run as a Dem was he switched his “team” so he could. In any other democracy in the world he’d have been excluded. And the Dems didn’t rig the primaries, the rules were all there before he even started running.


Yeah, nah


I’m freaking terrible at this quoting malarkey…but anyway I’ll deal with your comment about the Dems not rigging their primaries.

Are you for real? Elizabeth Warren says yay whilst Donna Brazile, the DNC chair has admitted as much.


I had a phone hook-up this morning with my Partners in Texas. As business is going well, it was a happy and spirited discussion. These Texans are conservative, church-going and staunch Republicans; we do talk about politics, and they state that Trump is great for business and their local economy, especially that the oil & gas market is booming. They all (3 guys) are in the middle age and have young daughters at College, and they all agreed that they would rather have tougher business conditions that a society that degrades women, and all think Trump is a stain on the moral fibre of their nation, and that this is reflected in their wider group of friends.


It will be interesting to see how far people are willing overlook the feeling that he is a stain on the moral fibre of their nation for either party loyalty or self-interest (particulalry where it also creates a conflict of interest as you have described re business is good vs don’t want my daughter growing up in a world like this).

At what point do people say “I agree with x and y, buuuuut a, b and c are just too much”?


Well, to use us as a guide, we are still voting for the liberals, so I wouldn’t hold out any great hope for a sudden outburst of moral outrage/decency to change US voting habits.


Fair point.


With voluntary voting, enthusiasm matters. If you aren’t passionate about your party, very likely you don’t bother to vote. I don’t expect many to switch parties, but I expect many Republicans to stay home.


I feel like the US media is more decentralised than here.
And if Australia had a New York Times or Washington Post and so on, then the Libs would be currently polling at about 20%.


These Texans would never vote for a Democrat. But as they dont seem to like Trump’s morals they just might not vote.

However, while they may show some outrage for the sake of their daughters future, I always get the gut feeling that while most Texans will state family is everything, probably they mean after business.

What is your take on the Business Imperative @DonMania ?


Same as the Wentworth demo, will reason that if they’re getting looked after business/religion wise can afford to give their daughters the best in life and ensure they don’t need to get close to the lower rungs. “I’m alright Jack but yes it’s all rather unsavoury”.


Please quote them.

Did the Dem organisation work against Bernie? Sure. Did they rig things? No.


When the dem organisation (who’s meant to be a neutral broker over the nomination process) is actively working in favour of Clinton by feeing her debate questikns in advance and nobbling Sanders’ access to the DNC network, literal rigging of the votes is kinda academic.

But this is far from the only reason Sanders lost. Clinton crushed him among black voters & in southern states, for instance.


I think it is a strong point. Texas has the 2nd largest economy in the US and it is driven largely by an entrepreneurial (including oil tycoons) mindset. A couple of important points to note are that Texas thrives on exports AND has some of the lowest taxes in the US. Now, the former is under attack by Trump’s tariffs but the latter is very much in the Republican wheelhouse.

I also get the sense that they don’t care much for Cruz so yes, they might just decide to stay home.

For me, the biggest thing is going to be the Hispanic and African-American turnout for O’Rourke given how much under attack minority voting rights have been in the state.


Given he was an independent from 1979 to 2015, when he switched solely to run as the Dem nominee, I think the Democratic network has a pretty good right to say “stuff you, we’re backing the actual party member”. Its just a quirk of US politics that individuals, not the party, can decide which party they align for and then run for them.

Its like that Nazi (and I meant that literally, he acknowledges he’s for the nazis) in the safe Dem seat who keeps being the Republican nominee. The Republicans themselves have previously sued him to keep him off the ballot because he made a technical error. But since nobody else can be bothered running for the seat, he’s their official nominee for these mid-terms. Should the Repubs suddenly have to treat him equally as everyone else? Hell no.


Problem is, getting fewer votes doesn’t necessarily cost you the race.


Getting fewer votes than the opposition is a guaranteed way to lose an election.




If only this were true.

Edit: it’s not even true here.


Touché! Was thinking in relation to house and senate races. The Presidency is a farce.