American Politics Discussion Thread

[superdeath]

The Democrats or at least those leaning more left, being in favor of allowing kids to not only dress up as say, a cat at school. But DEMAND that they be given a litterbox ect.. thats going too far.

This is a hoax and never happened. It even has a wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litter_box...hools_hoax)

Good that its a hoax.

[Tarkeel]

The Democrats or at least those leaning more left, being in favor of allowing kids to not only dress up as say, a cat at school. But DEMAND that they be given a litterbox ect.. thats going too far.

This is a hoax and never happened. It even has a wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litter_box...hools_hoax)

I think it was Ben Collins that dug deep into this story, and found some cases of litterboxes.. Intended for emergency use during school shooting lockdowns. So yes, the furry part is a hoax.

[Charriu]

The Democrats or at least those leaning more left, being in favor of allowing kids to not only dress up as say, a cat at school. But DEMAND that they be given a litterbox ect.. thats going too far.

This is a hoax and never happened. It even has a wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litter_box...hools_hoax)

I think it was Ben Collins that dug deep into this story, and found some cases of litterboxes.. Intended for emergency use during school shooting lockdowns. So yes, the furry part is a hoax.

Yes, this is mentioned in the wiki article:

"The only known official instance of kitty litter being placed in school classrooms for potential use by students was in the late 2010s by the Jefferson County Public School District in Colorado, where the 1999 Columbine High School massacre took place. Some teachers were given "go buckets" that contained kitty litter for use in an emergency lockdown situation, such as during a mass shooting event.[39][6][40]"

[Jowy]

Don't throw out overturning Democracy. EVER. Again, even if you think Republicans were right on EVERYTHING else, you should vote Democrat on this one thing.

Sure 1 vote doesn't make a difference, but that is why you need A LOT. Its not like anyone would expect Georgia to go purple 10 years ago. That took WORK. It took convincing a lot of people like you, that you know what you should vote. And man is there a lot of voter suppression to work through in Georgia. BUT they did it, at least for some very key senate races multiple times now. If you look at the end of last gilded age, it took WORK. People think there is just some natural progression towards freedom and democracy and that isn't at all the case. People have died and are dying for the right to have a vote, don't take it for granted.

Do Democrats hate freedom of speech or do they just hate hate speech? Because usually when republicans complain of getting "cancelled" ask what they were saying (and of course as you can still hear them clearly they still have freedom of speech and its just SHOCKINGLY companies don't want themselves associated with hate speech and not actual Democrat led gov intervention.

As far as Democrats being too progressive, in California in some areas yes. Everywhere else they are basically the conservative party of every other first world democracy.

When you live in a state that has the majority of their voters being older folks (who imo shouldnt be able to vote after X age) They happen to have all the free time in the world to go vote on non-issues, while the rest of us have to work. For WHATEVER reason, we dont have a national "Go VOTE day" of some kind.


The definition of what is considered hate speech keeps getting moved. Im going to sound like a god damn boomer, but back in my day it wasnt nearly as bad. People didnt get offended by every word that came out of someone's mouth. People could joke and if someone didnt like it, OH WELL. Not every joke is for everyone. Now, im obviously not FOR hate speech. I just hate (lol) that the culture has become overly PC. Listen to Doug Stanhope or George Carlin to basically get my point of view.

The Democrats or at least those leaning more left, being in favor of allowing kids to not only dress up as say, a cat at school. But DEMAND that they be given a litterbox ect.. thats going too far. I dont care what someone does once they are an adult. One of my best friends is a bi-sexual furry whom i was his best man/+1 at his courthouse wedding. I support his right to be into that. Kids are different. They are highly impressionable (talking about the furry stuff here). Hence why i believe that our military budget should be cut in half and that money ALL be given to the education system (bit of a stretch but keep following along), some of my more.. chaotic? views are that it should be illegal to indoctrinate kids into religion. (or anything else that is fairly common sense)

The following is a short clip from Doug Stanhope on 1 such word that i personally believe shouldnt be offensive (when used as directed, and not against)

Again, i mean no offense to anyone in my post(s) just stating how i feel on these issues.

The refusal to stop using slurs is way more offensive than the slur itself. Not using a slur is not a big deal. It takes so so so little effort that it's basically a free action. If you refuse to do such an infinitely easy change to make those groups of people more comfortable, are you really being a good person?

Sometimes a single vote matters.

Anyway I agree with you that both parties are terrible, but one of them is at a cartoon villain level and very transparently so. It's not a hard choice. Voting should be fast and simple, and if it isn't for you, you know who to blame. Imo the only acceptable reason to not vote is to just ignore the politics brainrot and live your life in blissful ignorance. Can I go back to those days too?

[Mjmd]

There is a reason the most basic form of voter suppression is just to create lines in urban areas and just assume the math on people turned away favor you. My county had a referendum to try to put on statewide ballot to change our constitution to basically create lines in urban areas. Many Republcian states already have this and much worse. 

You spread lies and hate and maybe people overall support Democrats, but then "culture issues" and long lines make them go "eh its not worth it". The whole litter box thing was a major talking point of some Republicans when running. Total lie, but even if people aren't going to vote FOR Republicans because of it, they may decided NOT to vote Democrat (same with other "culture war" issues). SD gave it as a major reason to note vote Democrat. The whole "your vote doesn't matter" you can find various versions for all over social media prior to elections. You see lots of tu quoque ahead of elections as well (ie both sides are shit), but again, equality is never addressed. This is not an accident. The easier job is to get the good chunk of citizens that sit at home to stay at home. This favors Republicans. Its a lot harder to get them off their asses and vote.

[superdeath]

The refusal to stop using slurs is way more offensive than the slur itself. Not using a slur is not a big deal. It takes so so so little effort that it's basically a free action. If you refuse to do such an infinitely easy change to make those groups of people more comfortable, are you really being a good person?

Sometimes a single vote matters.

Anyway I agree with you that both parties are terrible, but one of them is at a cartoon villain level and very transparently so. It's not a hard choice. Voting should be fast and simple, and if it isn't for you, you know who to blame. Imo the only acceptable reason to not vote is to just ignore the politics brainrot and live your life in blissful ignorance. Can I go back to those days too?

Did you listen to the video? Also, WHEN does it stop? How many words/phrases ect do we have to get rid of because someone got offended? I can be a good person, and still make jokes. I can be a good person and still call my buddy a X or an X ect and not be hating on any group.


i will say a part of the reason i dont vote IS the "ignore political brainrot" part of things, but one side being slightly/more than slightly terrible doesnt mean i should automatically vote for the other one. When one side is a giant douche and the other a turd sandwich, why choose a side? Id rather it all either burn, or an independent gets in office.

[Charriu]

The bigger question is: How to get out of the two party system into a more representative one? Does anybody know any (historic) examples where this happened?

[superdeath]

[Mjmd]

but one side being slightly/more than slightly terrible doesnt mean i should automatically vote for the other one. When one side is a giant douche and the other a turd sandwich, why choose a side? Id rather it all either burn, or an independent gets in office.

If it was ONLY slightly I would agree, its not. It not even close and again that is just on the whole maintaining our democracy portion. I also think after that it isn't particularly close even after that. 

Part of why I harp on the current republican party getting crushed and forced to reform is to hopefully have either A) at worst two normally bad options or B) hopefully if the public actually votes in large numbers (especially in primaries / we move towarded ranked voting) we get something better.

[Cyneheard]

The bigger question is: How to get out of the two party system into a more representative one? Does anybody know any (historic) examples where this happened?

A lot of Westminster-system countries with multiple parties have a lot of regional parties - think Canada's Bloc Québécois and the UK's Northern Ireland parties, SNP, and Plaid Cymru - which wouldn't make sense in an American context. Those are first-pass-the-post systems like the US, but the US doesn't have the level of regionalism you'd need for, say, a Texas Party.

The NDP in Canada became the Official Opposition in 2011, winning 103 out of 308 seats - there's room for some electoral success in FPP systems, but it's hard, and there's relatively few examples of those parties getting into government. 

But if the US had more parties you'd likely end up with 4 parties - you'd have the MAGA/Trump Party, the Old School Republicans (Romney, moderate GOP govs), the Biden/Mainstream Dems, and the Bernie/AOC left. How different would that really look from today? Would the Old School Republicans be big enough to form a coalition with the Biden Dems without the Bernie/AOC left? Would they be willing to work with both of those parties if they had to?