381–390 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might want to see how this election turns out, first.
Election results don't change what people believe and value. The current situation in the US has been a long time coming, and it will take a long time to resolve.
Hell, a senator beat the shit out of another senator back in the 1850’s. In the senate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stop with these kind of comments. Do you honestly think the Supreme Court would allow a President to win a 3rd term? “We can all be certain” should be translated to “I feel like making a crazy rant here”. “Experiment is over” - the election is in 7 weeks, let’s hold off on the “get out while you can” comments until it’s over. How confident are you in your statement that the “American experiment is over”? Care to bet…
What's crazy about that rant? Trump already has his reasoning for wanting a third term. Two remaining lines of defense for the American people were (1) Elections and (2) the Supreme Court. 2 is now gone. Republicans (Aka trump) are working hard on 1. By the way, what happens when election results are contested? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As much as I respected and admired RBG, even she would’ve known it’s at best a wish and nothing else. If things weren’t so polarized, they absolutely should spare no time in replacing the seat, as is their duty. But we know it’ll be yet another cynical and dishonest process as it was last time.
Just like Obama's nomination was blocked for more than a year to "let the voters decide"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Precisely. There is a desire, specifically and especially on the left, to get so caught up in their principles that people believe it is the primary source of change. For example: What should be the first acts and priorities be of a democratic administration? Healthcare? Nope. Climate change? Nope. A federal holiday for election days? Yes. Passing legislation mandating mail-in ballots? Yes. That’s how you think about…
Being embarrassed about wanting to be in power is a perpetual problem for leftism (It's understandable - it involves saying yes to the institutions you probably want to reform). Consider Corbyn in the UK - Awful polling from day 1, doesn't help much with Brexit, loses 2 elections (One meh, one disaster) but the lessons learned is that they won the "argument" and it's all good?
> According to her granddaughter Clara Spera, Ginsburg said, “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/13071014175225610...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Theres a sliding scale of it though. The disinformation and anti-intellectual campaigns are generally weaker in mainland Europe and as a consequence the governments are less broken. The US is at the point where 30-40% of the country would drink bleach and shoot their neighbor at the presidents command while probably similar numbers are functionally illiterate. Not to say the democracy has been functioning, but you ca…
With all due respect, you're engaging in the same zealotry yourself here. Trump is an idiot, but his ramblings about disinfecting the lungs do not mean "30-40% of the country would drink bleach" or that his voters are "functionally illiterate".
I don’t think it panned out, but it is a real thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Precisely. There is a desire, specifically and especially on the left, to get so caught up in their principles that people believe it is the primary source of change. For example: What should be the first acts and priorities be of a democratic administration? Healthcare? Nope. Climate change? Nope. A federal holiday for election days? Yes. Passing legislation mandating mail-in ballots? Yes. That’s how you think about…
Voting and gerrymandering are the metagame. We should pay people to vote, that would help turnout (up to about as much as it would ever get).
If it weren't to the stigma of "literacy" tests and how the were historically used, I'd be fully in favor of "licensing" voters.
Due to a really old technicality in our electoral system, we keep putting people in the presidency that the American people didn't actually vote for. Both Bush and Trump were not elected by a popular vote. The majority of American are being held hostage by a minority of voters with a disproportionate amount of political power. These un-elected presidents have had such incredibly far-reaching influences on the America…
Absolutely. My family is feverishly working on how to leave this hellscape of a country we’re in. The United States is dead.
I’m sad to say you may find the grass is always greener on the other side - government corruption exists everywhere that government exists.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Precisely. There is a desire, specifically and especially on the left, to get so caught up in their principles that people believe it is the primary source of change. For example: What should be the first acts and priorities be of a democratic administration? Healthcare? Nope. Climate change? Nope. A federal holiday for election days? Yes. Passing legislation mandating mail-in ballots? Yes. That’s how you think about…
Having more people able to vote in winner-takes-all elections in gerrymandered districts won't help as much as you'd like.
But in terms of direct action that democrats could pass in the first week (the bills exist already), those are my picks.
Gerrymandering would take a constitutional amendment. Yes, it would help more, but that’s a moot point if the people we’re talking about can’t do it.