American Politics XII: We Can Do Bad All By Ourselves

[San Lumen]

Blackmailed by who?

Trump or someone connected to him. he probably has dirt on quite a few people.

I don't think Garland would take kindly to that or let that stand.

[San Lumen]

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3544860-officer-injured-on-jan-6-weve-seen-ample-probable-cause-suggesting-trump-committed-crimes/

Officer injured on Jan. 6: ‘We’ve seen ample probable cause’ suggesting Trump committed crimes

unless trump is hauled off to jail, persecuted, convicted, and executed for being the mortal threat to humanity that he is, their words mean nothing

I still think Fulton County is our best bet of seeing him indicted.

[Diuhon]

unless trump is hauled off to jail, persecuted, convicted, and executed for being the mortal threat to humanity that he is, their words mean nothing

I still think Fulton County is our best bet of seeing him indicted.

blah blah blah propriety

[USS Monitor]

Also, can we just take a moment to appreciate how fucked up the squeezed middle is as an idea. I don't know if you've got it in the US, but you hear it all the time here. I mean, what kind of mind decides the poor are teaming up with the upper class to squeeze everyone else?

The phrase "squeezed middle" isn't something I've really heard in the US, but we do have a problem with people pushing for "targeted aid" that leaves low-wage workers completely screwed over because "Oh, but you have a JOB!!!! You don't need help!!!" -- even if their income from their job is less that what the government would pay in benefits to an unemployed person.

[Zurkerx]

Right… to get back on the plane of the 2024 republican primary, I think a primary battle between DeSantis and Trump is going to be an absolute bloodbath. It will make the 2008 democratic party primary look like T-ball. I would even bet there’s going to be all out fist fights between supporters during the primary debates

Speaking of DeSantis, there's a civics training program (State sponsored) for public school teachers in Florida that's essentially saying there's a “misconception” that “the founders desired strict separation of church and state.” It's also pushing that Washington and Jefferson were against slavery. Both are a lie as two Founding Fathers had slaves and, well, Jefferson specifically pushed that there was a "separation of church and state". For someone that decries indoctrination, he seems to have no problem doing it himself.

[Zurkerx]

Wake me up when Merrick Garland says it.

I have already come to the conclusion that Merrick Garland isn’t gonna do jack shit. He is either being blackmailed or he thinks they prosecuting Trump would further damage the Republic

Blackmailed? I'm not convinced. The latter? Yes: Garland is not someone who is strong. That said, if a majority of the DOJ threatened to resign in mass if they feel Garland should pursue charges, then either Garland prosecutes, resigns because he lost faith or recuses himself and let's his Deputy take over. I feel that's going to be the only way we see the DOJ go after Trump: either we resign or you prosecute.

[Catholic America]

theres a deeper problem in america. apparently 1 in 10 americans is notbaware that the bird is the word.

[Catholic America]

i for one dream of an america where evervody knows that the bird is the word

[Sauros]

i for one dream of an america where evervody knows that the bird is the word

What is "the Bird"
Edit: I was reminded of what it is

[Shazbotdom]

i for one dream of an america where evervody knows that the bird is the word

What is "the Bird"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gc4QTqslN4

[Sauros]

What is "the Bird"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gc4QTqslN4

Thanks for reminding me. That really lightened my mood lmao.

[Eahland]

Wake me up when Merrick Garland says it.

I have already come to the conclusion that Merrick Garland isn’t gonna do jack shit. He is either being blackmailed or he thinks they prosecuting Trump would further damage the Republic

I don't think it's anything that dramatic. Garland, and his boss, have no courage of their convictions, if indeed they have any convictions at all. They'll be talking about "bipartisan" and "compromise" right up until the MAGA mobs pull the trap on the gallows.

[Senkaku]

I have already come to the conclusion that Merrick Garland isn’t gonna do jack shit. He is either being blackmailed or he thinks they prosecuting Trump would further damage the Republic

I don't think it's anything that dramatic. Garland, and his boss, have no courage of their convictions, if indeed they have any convictions at all. They'll be talking about "bipartisan" and "compromise" right up until the MAGA mobs pull the trap on the gallows.

I don’t think it’s possible to be so weak-willed without having deluded yourself into believing some kind of institutionalist claptrap, most people don’t go into work every day thinking “I have no convictions.” The incentives thus far have just been for Garland’s, and Biden’s, convictions to be that prosecuting will cause irreparable damage to the republic and that they just have to keep working within our institutional constraints— that’s how they’ve achieved and maintained power in their careers, why should they have taken away any other lesson?

[Senkaku]

I have already come to the conclusion that Merrick Garland isn’t gonna do jack shit. He is either being blackmailed or he thinks they prosecuting Trump would further damage the Republic

Blackmailed? I'm not convinced. The latter? Yes: Garland is not someone who is strong. That said, if a majority of the DOJ threatened to resign in mass if they feel Garland should pursue charges, then either Garland prosecutes, resigns because he lost faith or recuses himself and let's his Deputy take over. I feel that's going to be the only way we see the DOJ go after Trump: either we resign or you prosecute.

DOJ has enough slimeballs who want to see futures for themselves under “whoever the next administration is,” and many of them are self-confident enough to have convinced themselves that either things won’t be as bad under Trump as people say, that they’ll be able to make a go of it and still achieve good things despite it all, or that he won’t return to power, so the whole mass resignation thing feels like a reach.

[Prima Scriptura]

I don't think it's anything that dramatic. Garland, and his boss, have no courage of their convictions, if indeed they have any convictions at all. They'll be talking about "bipartisan" and "compromise" right up until the MAGA mobs pull the trap on the gallows.

I don’t think it’s possible to be so weak-willed without having deluded yourself into believing some kind of institutionalist claptrap, most people don’t go into work every day thinking “I have no convictions.” The incentives thus far have just been for Garland’s, and Biden’s, convictions to be that prosecuting will cause irreparable damage to the republic and that they just have to keep working within our institutional constraints— that’s how they’ve achieved and maintained power in their careers, why should they have taken away any other lesson?

I think we just have to accept that Donald Trump isn’t going to receive an indictment from Merrick Garland.

[Senkaku]

I don’t think it’s possible to be so weak-willed without having deluded yourself into believing some kind of institutionalist claptrap, most people don’t go into work every day thinking “I have no convictions.” The incentives thus far have just been for Garland’s, and Biden’s, convictions to be that prosecuting will cause irreparable damage to the republic and that they just have to keep working within our institutional constraints— that’s how they’ve achieved and maintained power in their careers, why should they have taken away any other lesson?

I think we just have to accept that Donald Trump isn’t going to receive an indictment from Merrick Garland.

I’m semi-prepared to be surprised, and hopeful that we will be, especially given how many people seem to think it’s become more likely… but yeah, even if any indictments start coming in, it doesn’t seem like it’s going to start with DOJ and will most likely never come from them.

[American Legionaries]

Also, can we just take a moment to appreciate how fucked up the squeezed middle is as an idea. I don't know if you've got it in the US, but you hear it all the time here. I mean, what kind of mind decides the poor are teaming up with the upper class to squeeze everyone else?

The phrase "squeezed middle" isn't something I've really heard in the US, but we do have a problem with people pushing for "targeted aid" that leaves low-wage workers completely screwed over because "Oh, but you have a JOB!!!! You don't need help!!!" -- even if their income from their job is less that what the government would pay in benefits to an unemployed person.

Having spent a significant portion of my life in and around that "squeezed middle" it can definitely be a problem. There are a fair few pitfalls where making more money can easily put someone in worse financial situations.

[Concejos Unidos]

I would be with anti-government but pro-republic democrats.

If you mean liberal democracy, then that didn't exist. Unlike other groups, the liberal democrats of the Second Spanish Republic never broke off into their own faction since the Stalinists sort of just subsumed them. Of course, there were also the anti-government and very broadly Republican-oriented democratic libertarian socialist groups.

[Forsher]

The phrase "squeezed middle" isn't something I've really heard in the US, but we do have a problem with people pushing for "targeted aid" that leaves low-wage workers completely screwed over because "Oh, but you have a JOB!!!! You don't need help!!!" -- even if their income from their job is less that what the government would pay in benefits to an unemployed person.

Having spent a significant portion of my life in and around that "squeezed middle" it can definitely be a problem. There are a fair few pitfalls where making more money can easily put someone in worse financial situations.

Oh?

This is the part where you try to explain how having to declare bankruptcy due to poor fiscal management is better than choosing between keeping the lights on and going to the doctor. Though, of course, in the US, you can be quite wealthy and still be unable to afford healthcare without employer provided insurance... essentially tying you to the job.

Also, the problem isn't so much that I am unsympathetic to the concerns of the middle class (obviously, I am) but that the squeezed middle is a really insidious rhetorical device designed to excuse middle class welfare and conflate the concerns affecting the worse off with those affecting the middle class, leading to policies which are often actively bad for the poor and working class being passed to nominally help them. Consider, for example, targeting fuel costs as inflation relief. The US is notorious for being a country where the (urban) poor don't drive, so who does the policy help? And are the poor really benefitting from fuel costs capturing the conversation? Not at all. But ideas like the squeezed middle are rhetorical devices designed to make the middle class into the biggest victims and most worse off.

To the extent that the middle class needs welfare specifically, it needs to be justified with language other than "squeezed middle".

[Cannot think of a name]

I have already come to the conclusion that Merrick Garland isn’t gonna do jack shit. He is either being blackmailed or he thinks they prosecuting Trump would further damage the Republic

I don't think it's anything that dramatic. Garland, and his boss, have no courage of their convictions, if indeed they have any convictions at all. They'll be talking about "bipartisan" and "compromise" right up until the MAGA mobs pull the trap on the gallows.

Could just be that it's a literal case of 'if you come at the king, don't miss.' If he prosecutes and fails he might as well set everything on fire himself. He might just be taking the time to make sure it's a lock, because they have to know the consequences of inaction as well. But they are not as dire as failure.

Though that's why I expect a Scooter Libby or Oliver North or G Gordon LIddy to emerge and take the bullet, as is the custom. Which will be effectively nothing. No one wants someone they've never heard of to go to jail.

The committee is still doing its thing. Though he'll have to move before the midterms because he won't have the committee after that.

[Thomasi]

We need a constitutional convention, but one where everyone is under 40 years old, and a mixture of conservatives and liberal to flesh out issues.

Ideally we change the United States from a country to an international trade union made up of 57 (50 states 6 territories and DC) sovereign nations.

Turning the federal government into diplomatic negotiations. Everyone uses the same currency, and there is freedom of movement, but all 57 nations have their own citizenships, passports (along side the federal one) customs at airports, and the freedom to enter into relations with other nations. Each government is completely independant to make whatever decisions it wishes for its citizens, and are only obligated to follow 2 rules 1. That they will have free and fair elections for at least the legislature, and 2. That everyone will have a fair trial.

No more wealth redistribution from rich to poor states. The US becomes more like the EU.

The "United Sovereign States of America" would become its new name.

Also Ideally this would be done in secret behind the governments back and then lobbied to each state to get it on the ballot and have people adopt it.

[San Lumen]

We need a constitutional convention, but one where everyone is under 40 years old, and a mixture of conservatives and liberal to flesh out issues.

Ideally we change the United States from a country to an international trade union made up of 57 (50 states 6 territories and DC) sovereign nations.

Turning the federal government into diplomatic negotiations. Everyone uses the same currency, and there is freedom of movement, but all 57 nations have their own citizenships, passports (along side the federal one) customs at airports, and the freedom to enter into relations with other nations. Each government is completely independant to make whatever decisions it wishes for its citizens, and are only obligated to follow 2 rules 1. That they will have free and fair elections for at least the legislature, and 2. That everyone will have a fair trial.

No more wealth redistribution from rich to poor states. The US becomes more like the EU.

The "United Sovereign States of America" would become its new name.

Also Ideally this would be done in secret behind the governments back and then lobbied to each state to get it on the ballot and have people adopt it.

No to all of this except free and fair elections and fair trials.

Plus some states do not allow for citizen initiated referendums.

[Thomasi]

We need a constitutional convention, but one where everyone is under 40 years old, and a mixture of conservatives and liberal to flesh out issues.

Ideally we change the United States from a country to an international trade union made up of 57 (50 states 6 territories and DC) sovereign nations.

Turning the federal government into diplomatic negotiations. Everyone uses the same currency, and there is freedom of movement, but all 57 nations have their own citizenships, passports (along side the federal one) customs at airports, and the freedom to enter into relations with other nations. Each government is completely independant to make whatever decisions it wishes for its citizens, and are only obligated to follow 2 rules 1. That they will have free and fair elections for at least the legislature, and 2. That everyone will have a fair trial.

No more wealth redistribution from rich to poor states. The US becomes more like the EU.

The "United Sovereign States of America" would become its new name.

Also Ideally this would be done in secret behind the governments back and then lobbied to each state to get it on the ballot and have people adopt it.

No to all of this except free and fair elections and fair trials.

Plus some states do not allow for citizen initiated referendums.

That's when you offer juicy campaign donations in return to putting it on the ballot lol.

Also what's wrong with my proposal?

[San Lumen]

No to all of this except free and fair elections and fair trials.

Plus some states do not allow for citizen initiated referendums.

That's when you offer juicy campaign donations in return to putting it on the ballot lol.

Donations to who? In New York only the legislature can place a referendum on the ballot and it must be passed in two consecutive sessions of the legislature.

[The Jamesian Republic]

We need a constitutional convention, but one where everyone is under 40 years old, and a mixture of conservatives and liberal to flesh out issues.

Ideally we change the United States from a country to an international trade union made up of 57 (50 states 6 territories and DC) sovereign nations.

Turning the federal government into diplomatic negotiations. Everyone uses the same currency, and there is freedom of movement, but all 57 nations have their own citizenships, passports (along side the federal one) customs at airports, and the freedom to enter into relations with other nations. Each government is completely independant to make whatever decisions it wishes for its citizens, and are only obligated to follow 2 rules 1. That they will have free and fair elections for at least the legislature, and 2. That everyone will have a fair trial.

No more wealth redistribution from rich to poor states. The US becomes more like the EU.

The "United Sovereign States of America" would become its new name.

Also Ideally this would be done in secret behind the governments back and then lobbied to each state to get it on the ballot and have people adopt it.

Then Alabama becomes the willing client state of the Holy Floridian Empire ruled by Dear Leader Donald Trump.