politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Right - so factual it hasn't managed to pan out in any way beyond absurd hyperbole.
You'd think at some point in the last two decades of the trope, people would have recognized the pattern through which they're being led on.
I suppose that if that were the case, the scam wouldn't keep working.
Member those dudes beating down the door of a barricaded senate that only stopped because one of their zerglings took a bullet to the neck? I watched a live broadcast of the gallows they had set up and the chants of "Hang Mike Pence." Member how a former President is literally facing criminal charges for trying to fix the election in Georgia?
ANY OF THIS RINGING A BELL?!?
Or are you one of those "alternate facts" types? Feel free to join my block list.
Okay, "completely rational and not at all hyperbolic or biased" type.
I don't know how you've detached yourself from reality this badly, but please get help.
Maybe it looks that way if you've only been at this a couple decades. Given how things have changed slowly over the last 40 and relatively abruptly with the Trump era, I think Democracy has been under fire for a long time.
The problems are that: too few have been aware of it, too many have been apathetic about it. Too few have voted, and too few have been involved beyond the absolute bare minimum of voting.
But the real failing is that the growing corruption -- regulatory capture, lobbying, campaign finance, rise of oligopolies in ever more markets, etc. -- has left us with neither major party primarily beholden to anyone but the ultra rich and mega corporations.
So I would argue that our realistic choices (since with our election mechanism, we are essentially locked into a choice between only two parties) are ...
Democratic -- incremental progress socially but mostly status quo economically and little interest in addressing the root problems I mentioned along with failing to address the seriousness of the rising threat of the right wing, loosely similar to the attitude of liberal centrists in the German Weimar Republic of 1930-1933. (I am fully aware that Democratic party is a hodge podge including some left leaning groups but the centrists run the show, I think we can agree)
Republican -- long term (40+ year) plan to undermine education, suppress voters, dismantle government safeguards, challenge (by ignoring) fundamental checks and balances, along with regressive social policies (particularly race, sexual orientation, reproductive freedom, gender expression).
If one is actually aware of the GOP's gerrymandering, active voter suppression, undermining of news media, rejection of the concept of truth and fact, conspiring to overturn the presidential election, anti-intellectualism, stochastic terrorism, active persecution and suppression of marginalized people, criminal activity, and brash corruption, one cannot interpret as anything but a directed, coordinated, doggedly persistent attack on American democracy.
Only one of these two groups severely degraded the operation of the government in the last decade and one of these groups is driven to further establish a theocratic, nationalist, authoritarian, regressive—in short, fascist—rule.
To look at the last twenty years and term "democracy on the ballot" as trope or hyperbole just shows how bad "the new normal" had gotten by the 2000s.
All this has been going on ever since the GOP transformed into a reactionary party in backlash to the Civil Rights era and especially following Nixon's resignation.
There's a canyon of difference between "is under fire" and "is on the ballot".
One of these may be able to be supported through reference and analysis. The other is hyperbolic outrage bait.
A failing which precludes the notion one can simply defend democracy by voting blue.
If you're going to draw arbitrary realistic bars by which to measure, you may as well just stop voting.
I'd argue they're center-right at best, and actively malicious towards the working class.
Every single one of these failings applies to Democrats as well - hence the problem.
Are you still pretending the majority of these don't apply to Democrats?
If you haven't been paying attention to anything but Salon and Vox, sure, I can see how you'd think that.
Alternatively, it highlights the extent to which media has been crying wolf using such tropes to try and drive blue votes where platform has otherwise utterly failed to do so.
I agree that the new normal is bad - I disagree with using irrational outrage-bait to drive votes in such a manner as to perpetuate every problem behind the new normal.
Read up on Trump 2025, if you don't think democracy is at stake in the US. They're planning to turn every election into a republican primary at best.
Again, we've been hearing variations of the same fearmongering for decades, and we've already seen parallels with either party trying the same in Congress.
It's fortunate that we have a system of government which generally prevents authoritarian power-grab e.g. as it generally did last time around. Law is difficult to just ignore and Congress has a rich history of partisan ~~circlejerk~~ deadlock. But that's specific to concentrating executive branch power in the elected individual and seems to entirely miss democratic selection of individual.
This all seems to miss the point, though - even if it was correct this time, the best blue team seems to be able to come up with is the tired rah rah vote for us or vote for fascism crap yet again. It's as if they've recognized they aren't actually going to try to bring anything to the table that voters want, so in order to try and minimize criticism of those failures, they're just tripling down on wedge messaging.
Ok, so you are either ok with this or are another one of their useful idiots.
Alternatively, neither.
Any other bland nonsense you'd like to get off your chest? Some rabble rabble fascist, perhaps? It's amazing how the only defense you can provide to a criticism of your nonsense is mediocre insult.
They literally published a game plan for how they will capture all levels of government and make it almost impossible to lose power, in the same vein as Hungary. It's right in your face.
As I said, if you don't find it extremely concerning, you are either happy about it or you are a useful idiot.
Mike Pence could've (likely illegally) decided to reject the votes from contested states or taken an alternate slate of electors. The President, the highest elected official in the land, told Mike Pence to reject the results of a democratic process even though all legal challenges had been laughed out of court.
I'm sure that happens every election though.
So... could he have, then? You seem not convinced of such a thing itself when you qualify it as a thing not supported by law therefore not binding or enforceable.
Trump is deranged - water is wet and other apparent news at 11:00!
Hyperbolic fear mongering and borderline delusional Presidents does seem to be a trend - one you seem to be perpetuating.