News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Looool leave it half done and then have the next president set it on fire
Next president ROFL!
I think there should be no next president, America needs to stay single for a while
Beter: conclude that going alone hasn't worked. The experiment failed. Back to being English it is.
Welcome home chaps!
If y'all hadn't been dipshits and done a Brexit I'd be all for it
Hehe touche!!
The largest protest in US history, 8 million people, was the No Kings protest last weekend.
That would be extremely ironic
It's "No KingS". They're allowed to have one.
An Elvis impersonator came to our rally..... said there's only room for one king.
Like: "well.. Not THAT king"
Nah, the upper midwest wants to join canada.
They're waiting for a better offer
Isn't Canada still technically a British territory?
Not for quite a while, no. We have a prime minister and everything.
How can you have survived school and know so little about your closest country?
It's part of the commonwealth still, isn't it? The prime minister is chief of state, but head of state is still the king of england, no?
That is just symbolic with the king as head of state. The commonwealth, it does give them some rights. It at least used to let them go to any commonwealth country to work and even live, the UK cut that part out at some point though I hear, something about blowback to jamaicans gangstering about.
It's just symbolic in the UK too, so I don't see what difference that makes.
The head of state is the King of Canada. He just happens to live in England.
No
We really just need to work on ourselves.
Honestly we are going to need a whole new constitution
You're going to need to clean the ketchup stains off of this one.
Or uhhh we could just start enforcing the current one
Its obviously inadequate.
It's flawed and I also think it needs an update, but while people mostly tried to enforce it it made 250 years
I do wonder a bit about the times the parties changed (ie. Whigs party disappearing; see xkcd/1127) since presumably that was a train wreck for the way the US is set up, but the country continued on
Think we should use one of the systems originally proposed but they didn't go with. Like a plural executive system where two or three separately elected individuals comprise a Presidential committee.
This was favored by founders worried about a new monarchy being formed via the Unitary Executive system. Sounds familiar.
If some weird genie wish suddenly granted me the ability to rewrite the American constitution from the ground up, I think my main focus would be to end the two-party system by switching Congress to proportional representation.
After that, a lot depends on the details of the genie wish. If I can impose whatever changes I wanted I'd probably go further - a drastic reduction of presidential power is an obvious step, perhaps have both a president and a prime minister like many European countries do with the duties split between them. Strict term limits might also be good, though I'd want to study that issue a bit more - there are some upsides to having very experienced politicians in government along with the obvious downsides we're seeing.
The Supreme Court needs reform, maybe give the judges a fixed term so that they don't end up stuck with random health conditions determining who gets to appoint who and for how long. More broadly, we're seeing a lot of flaws in the judicial branch and law enforcement that need correcting. Maybe have multiple Department of Justices with separate leadership to keep each other in check? Tricky.
Or just put an AI in charge of it all and see what happens.
If I understand your comment correctly what you are describing is how Congress was originally setup! It was broken by the Re-Apportionment Act of 1912. No need to re-write the Constitution it's "just" a Federal Law.
The President only has as much power as they do because Congress has been steadily handing it over since the 1940s.
We weren't far away from the spirit of that but we broke it in 1804 with the passage of the 12th Amendment.
It's really not SCOTUS that needs reformed it's actually our Constitution. It was simply never meant for the environment in which it now exists, it's unfit for purpose. The easiest way to explain is that the US Constitution wasn't meant to control an all powerful central authority, it was meant to prevent one. SCOTUS twisted that shortly after the Civil War and now here we are trying to manage ourselves by looking at a mirror reflection of our guiding document.
Stupid.
Proportional representation, and no artificial limit on the size of the House. A lot of our current problems are made much worse by the 435 limit created in 1929 in large part because they didn't want to have to keep making the building bigger. Using the same proportions as then we should be at like 1500 House seats now. District sizes should be determined by the smallest district on the country. If the smallest district has 30,000 people, then that's what every district must represent.
Definitely at least 2 heads for the Executive, maybe even make it three. One of the originally proposed systems had 3 executives elected separately operating as a committee.
The Supreme Court matches the number of federal judicial districts, so 12 at the moment. No more than 2 appointments per presidential term. The judicial branch also takes over control of the Marshal service. Separate from the Executive, specifically to enforce Judicial decisions. Relying on the Executive for this was a ridiculous oversight.
I refuse to believe this man won't drop dead someday
He'll die, but will the next ruler be elected or appointed? That's the big question.
Or will he seize power in a coup? Or simply be the only person left alive after all the bombs stop exploding?
The monarchy will continue.
Next premier, then.
This is exactly why the "war powers act" also fails. Because it lets the president start a war if he pinky-swears to ask congress for authorization later.
But no congress is ever going so say "no" at that point since it would be potentially dangerous and wildly unpopular to do so.
Same here - I'll bet stupid money that at least 25% of democrats even vote to allow it to continue rather than be responsible for a gaping hole in the ground.
It truly is easier to beg forgiveness than to ask permission.