| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
MJG
United Kingdom1451 Posts
Trump's former national security adviser, John Bolton, is being indicted on charges relating to improper handling of classified information. This feels like more of Trump's "pot calling the kettle black" routine, and I'm sure it has nothing to do with John Bolton being a vocal critic of Trump in recent years. Criticise the dear leader? Straight to jail! | ||
|
Taelshin
Canada420 Posts
| ||
|
MJG
United Kingdom1451 Posts
On October 17 2025 16:31 Taelshin wrote: yeah, John Bolton is a really nice guy. You can find many people here defending him in the past and hopefully in the future to come. the JB hill is the one I'd die on for sure :D I don't know where you got the impression that I'm defending the guy. I just find the multitude of ironies delicious. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10960 Posts
On the other side it's terrifying that this is obviously done due to Bolton not licking Trumps ass enough. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22630 Posts
On October 17 2025 16:31 Taelshin wrote: I can dislike someone and still not wish for them to be prosecuted just because they didn't deepthroat the supreme leaders dick hard enough.yeah, John Bolton is a really nice guy. You can find many people here defending him in the past and hopefully in the future to come. the JB hill is the one I'd die on for sure :D Doesn't matter if they are Comey or Bolton. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22630 Posts
On October 17 2025 08:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:It's super scummy that Cuomo is running as an independent, which could theoretically be a spoiler candidate for the Democratic nominee, Mamdani. Democrats fear progressives replacing them more then they fear Republicans winning.Nothing new. | ||
|
blomsterjohn
Norway474 Posts
| ||
|
EnDeR_
Spain2944 Posts
On October 17 2025 18:08 Gorsameth wrote: Democrats fear progressives replacing them more then they fear Republicans winning. Nothing new. This is just bullshit. I'm not informed enough about this, but is the DNC doing anything about this at all? As in, are they running ads for Mamdani and shitting on Cuomo, or what's the deal here? | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46480 Posts
On October 17 2025 18:52 EnDeR_ wrote: This is just bullshit. I'm not informed enough about this, but is the DNC doing anything about this at all? As in, are they running ads for Mamdani and shitting on Cuomo, or what's the deal here? I'm not sure if the DNC is saying/doing anything at all, in which case it could be seen as tactic approval of Cuomo trying to undermine Mamdani for the sake of perpetuating the establishment. I did just read about this though: "In United States politics, a sore loser law is a law prohibiting the loser in a primary election from then running as an independent or representing another political party in the general election, thus basically blocking them from appearing on the general election ballot (though sometimes they may still run as a write-in candidate).[1][2] Some states accomplish the same goal by having simultaneous registration dates for the primary and the general election. Only the states of Connecticut and New York have neither a sore loser law nor simultaneous registration deadlines.[3]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sore_loser_law | ||
|
Legan
Finland597 Posts
On October 17 2025 19:06 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I'm not sure if the DNC is saying/doing anything at all, in which case it could be seen as tactic approval of Cuomo trying to undermine Mamdani for the sake of perpetuating the establishment. I did just read about this though: "In United States politics, a sore loser law is a law prohibiting the loser in a primary election from then running as an independent or representing another political party in the general election, thus basically blocking them from appearing on the general election ballot (though sometimes they may still run as a write-in candidate).[1][2] Some states accomplish the same goal by having simultaneous registration dates for the primary and the general election. Only the states of Connecticut and New York have neither a sore loser law nor simultaneous registration deadlines.[3]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sore_loser_law That kind of law is baffling. If a very popular candidate were manoeuvred out by the party, they could not force a challenge in the same election. This hinders changing political parties. If you try to go through the in-party process for the change, you are forced to wait years for the next one in case that party plays dirty. If you run outside the party, you are easily labelled as a useful idiot who is acting as a spoiler. Parties are, of course, allowed to kick people out for running as independents and block funding. However, I honestly believe that the threat of a popular candidate splitting from the party is the only way the two parties will change. Especially in situations where the party has a very large tent and is willing to ignore people because they have no other options. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46480 Posts
On October 17 2025 20:30 Legan wrote: That kind of law is baffling. If a very popular candidate were manoeuvred out by the party, they could not force a challenge in the same election. This hinders changing political parties. If you try to go through the in-party process for the change, you are forced to wait years for the next one in case that party plays dirty. If you run outside the party, you are easily labelled as a useful idiot who is acting as a spoiler. Parties are, of course, allowed to kick people out for running as independents and block funding. However, I honestly believe that the threat of a popular candidate splitting from the party is the only way the two parties will change. Especially in situations where the party has a very large tent and is willing to ignore people because they have no other options. I'm not really baffled by it, as it's trying to address a potential situation that's hard to navigate. On one hand, a party could sabotage a candidate they don't like, and make it so that the candidate can't truly run; on the other hand, a second-place candidate could single-handedly sabotage the election if they hold a grudge. Both scenarios are alarming to me, since they require all candidates and all parties to approach elections in good faith. I don't really know if one of these scenarios is more worrisome (or significantly more likely) than the other, for the average state election. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24369 Posts
On October 17 2025 18:52 EnDeR_ wrote: This is just bullshit. I'm not informed enough about this, but is the DNC doing anything about this at all? As in, are they running ads for Mamdani and shitting on Cuomo, or what's the deal here? The Democrat's leader in the House, that happens to serve a district in NYC where Mamdani is running, still hasn't even endorsed his party's nominee (Mamdani). Neither has the Democrat leader in the Senate, that also happens to be representing New York. That's Democrat leadership in a nutshell. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46480 Posts
On October 17 2025 21:40 GreenHorizons wrote: The Democrat's leader in the House, that happens to serve a district in NYC where Mamdani is running, still hasn't even endorsed his party's nominee (Mamdani). Neither has the Democrat leader in the Senate, that also happens to be representing New York. That's Democrat leadership in a nutshell. The New York governor, Kathy Hochul (Democrat), did endorse him though, which might mean more to New York voters than a Congressional endorsement. She's the leader / Democratic leader of the state, so hopefully that counts for something! | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8760 Posts
watched a bit of the NYC debate... oh boy. gerontocracy is real if not for the "dangerous Hamas loving Muslim" lol. who somehow is still very much electable for NY jews. funny that. Sliwa being the best Republicans can come up with also speaks volumes. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14211 Posts
On October 17 2025 23:51 Doublemint wrote: given how unpopular Dems are - and Schumer/Jeffries are the faces of this unpopularity - this is a clear plus for Mamdani. watched a bit of the NYC debate... oh boy. gerontocracy is real if not for the "dangerous Hamas loving Muslim" lol. who somehow is still very much electable for NY jews. funny that. Sliwa being the best Republicans can come up with also speaks volumes. Yeah I mean Mamdani's shtick I don't think is helped by having establishment dems in his corner. Hes already up by double digits and running great guns on his campaign. He ran a scavenger hunt throughout new york's public transit. That shit is what social media craves. His promos on social media have been great and such a wild contrast to politics as normal. He stated that new yorkers were not ready for a 33 year old mayor, so he resolved to become 34 this weekend. | ||
|
oBlade
United States6539 Posts
On October 17 2025 11:57 RenSC2 wrote: Republicans controlling both halves of Congress and the Presidency and blaming the Democrats for the shutdown seems very odd. How exactly does that work? Why would anyone buy that excuse? Why is it the responsibility of the Democrats to vote for the Republican's shitty bill? The Republicans did not negotiate at all with the Democrats, so they get 0 Democrat support. They wrote their own bill based on Trump's desires and then demanded the Democrats vote for it. No, that's not how negotiations work and if the Republicans can't understand that, then they shouldn't be in charge of anything. This shutdown is 100% on them. Having said that, they could continue to totally ignore the Democrats and just get rid of the filibuster or change it to giving Senators time to talk on the floor as originally intended. It should never have been a permanent block that requires 60 votes to overcome, merely a time for everyone to have their say. I'm totally okay with that and think the filibuster should go back to its original intention. Then the Democrats can actually pass some legislation when they get back in power with slim margins. This bill as far as I can see does little or no "shitty" things, even from the perspective of Senate Democrats, who might classify shitty as things only Republicans want to do, especially Republicans since the age of Trump. The bill they keep trying to vote on in the Senate is called HR 5371. It's a "continuing resolution" which Congress passes when Congress couldn't do its job of funding the government through normal bills. It's called "continuing" because they largely maintain the status quo. They keep funding at essentially current levels. "Current levels" that I understand are basically the same as the levels of the last CR that passed in March, which in turn was basically funding the government the same as it was under Biden. I read the whole bill and tried to understand it, and I read the Library of Congress's nonpartisan summary of it to check each section. I didn't find any huge tricks hidden in plain sight, not that I'm perfect. It might also be worth spinning the text through some LLMs to see if they find any hidden tricks. https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/5371 + Show Spoiler + This bill provides continuing FY2026 appropriations for federal agencies, provides additional funding for security for federal officials, and extends various expiring programs and authorities. Specifically, the bill provides continuing FY2026 appropriations to federal agencies through the earlier of November 21, 2025, or the enactment of the applicable appropriations act. It is known as a continuing resolution (CR) and prevents a government shutdown that would otherwise occur if the FY2026 appropriations bills have not been enacted when FY2026 begins on October 1, 2025. The CR funds most programs and activities at the FY2025 levels with several exceptions that provide funding flexibility and additional appropriations for various programs. For example, the CR provides additional funding for security for Members of Congress, Supreme Court Justices, and executive branch officials. It also authorizes the District of Columbia to spend local funds at the rates included in its FY2026 local budget. In addition, the bill extends several expiring programs and authorities, including several public health, Medicare, and Medicaid authorities and programs; various programs and authorities related to veterans; the U.S. Grain Standards Act; the Department of Agriculture livestock mandatory price reporting program; several Department of Homeland Security (DHS) programs related to cybersecurity; authorities for DHS and the Department of Justice to take actions to mitigate a credible threat from an unmanned aircraft system; the special assessment on nonindigent persons or entities convicted of certain offenses involving sexual abuse or human trafficking; authorities related to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission whistleblower program; and the Defense Production Act of 1950. Can you share your perspective on what things are objectionable/shitty in the bill? Democrats don't even have to vote for it in order for it to pass. Some of them would simply have to vote yes on allowing a final vote on it. If it were quadrupling ICE funding again for example, I could immediately see why they would want to block any vote on it. + Show Spoiler + The previous big legislation of 2025, the law that like tripled DHS or ICE funding, Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill, was able to pass narrowly because it used the process of budget reconciliation, which circumvents the filibuster. Democrats might want Republicans to be the ones to break with norms and abolish the filibuster here, because it would conceivably give them carte blanche if they regained power in 2028 - but that also doesn't seem wise because with no need for 60 votes for cloture the Republicans could easily undo districting that favors Democrats, mail-in-voting, stack SCOTUS and basically make sure Democrats couldn't win in 2028 to get their "turn." Kennedy was not optimistic, he just predicted this will be the longest shutdown to date. Suggesting his colleagues won't budge as they feel un-negotiated with as you say. But as DPB's insurance source noted, regardless of what either side hopes, realistically it seems like the ship has already sailed though because insurers are preparing for hikes and adjusting under the assumption that subsidies won't be around next year, because enrollment for 2026 plans already starts right at the beginning of November. There's no time left, it's just 2 weeks away. And I want to add there's ~25 million uninsured (health) in the country. If I were letting the government shut down over healthcare/health insurance, I'd go all-in with subsidies for all of THEM too, or Medicare for All - which would be more pure than funneling taxpayer money through and to insurance companies, or at LEAST close the Medicaid gap nationally. Not just redo the 2021 premium tax subsidies which helped increase Marketplace enrollment by a million or two. That's such peanuts in comparison to shutting down the entire federal government. | ||
KwarK
United States44352 Posts
| ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8760 Posts
| ||
|
micronesia
United States24801 Posts
On October 17 2025 23:51 Doublemint wrote: Sliwa being the best Republicans can come up with also speaks volumes. Setting aside the dearth of highly qualified politicians in the Republican party to begin with... there aren't many who would be willing to try to win in NYC and I can't really blame them. | ||
|
Wala.Revolution
7584 Posts
www.washingtonpost.com | ||
| ||
The PiG Daily
Best Games of SC
BASILISK vs T1
Maru vs Clem
Serral vs herO
Clem vs SHIN
PiGStarcraft309
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
CranKy Ducklings
Online Event
FEL
AI Arena Tournament
BSL: Ladder Tournament
Sparkling Tuna Cup
INu's Battles
herO vs Classic
Percival vs Rogue
BSL Open Qualifier
BSL Open Qualifier
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
