Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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
It’s Way Too Easy for a Crook Like Trump FOR EVERYONE TO ALLOW HIM to Pervert Our Legal System
Trump doesn't have any magical powers or a strong personality or even the charisma that people think he does ..... wealthy funders, supporters, backers and financiers are throwing their money at him for the sole reason of wanting to place an arrogant tyrant in place to overthrow democratic norms and make it easier to fleece money from the public.
Fascism is great for buisness, and citizens united means unlimited money for fascists.
Society and politics work only when people agree to abide by the same general set of rules. When a sufficient amount of sociopolitical power stop agreeing to rules, it all falls apart. Most importantly, that sufficient amount is not anywhere near a majority. A large enough minority behaving with disregard to existing rules and norms, and only in their own self-interest, will overwhelm the ability of the rest of us to manage a functioning society. Not only are the disregard of rules and selfish aims a threat, the unpredictability is, too.
This is why we, the voters, need to react to blatant corruption and fascism by voting the offending party out of office. If the dems get a super majority, they can actually oust the corrupt politicians and judges, oust the Trump appointees still causing havoc.
That's how our democracy is supposed to work. If there's rot within, all parties are supposed to band together and cauterize the rot. But the Republicans are entirely taken over at this point, so voters need to rip them from their seats until we have enough dems (or aligned independents, though that's not really plausible) to have a super majority so they actually have the authority to do what needs to be done.
Voting matters. Enough of this bullshit "both sides". One side isn't perfect, but the other side are literal fascists trying to establish a dictatorship.
I don't see that happening with American voters being so apathetic towards our government.
That's why we need to be vocal that your vote matters, that if you participate in democracy, there is an actual avenue to solving the massive problem we're in.
Our democracy has mechanisms to rip power away from bad actors, but it needs a super majority. And since elected Republican officials are unwilling to remove their own, it's up to the voters.
After dems have a super majority and purge the rot, they will undoubtedly split into multiple parties, since dems aren't anywhere close to one mindset. This is actually the path to ranked choice voting that gets touted here repeatedly. Same with the electoral college.
Lemmy is plagued by tankies trying to make it seem like there's no point in voting, that "revolution" is the only way forward. They need to be shut down every time. They breed this apathy you mentioned, and it's simply not true.
=/
I believe that we could someday have a super majority. It's just unrealistic to believe it will happen anytime soon. How do we overcome the current grid lock? Which democrat candidate appeals to all voters?
I like that you get excited for this stuff but we have to face reality.
That’s how our democracy is supposed to work.
Is it, though? The people who put our system in place seemed--through both words and actions--to believe democracy isn't supposed to be an enduring system, but rather something that's supposed to serve passably well until it's inevitably corrupted and has to be overthrown. You know, "the tree of liberty" etc. etc.
The social contract is an implicit agreement we sign when we are born into or under whatever nation/state/government we reside within.
Torching the contract will throw us in mass chaos, mob rule, hyperpartisanship, tribalistic regression, the list goes on.
Used to think it was blown out of proportion in the hyper-reality of social media, but I see it in everyday life now. Small cracks in society form huge wedges between people.
Basic trust in others, society, the government and it's institutions has been eroded. That might not seem like an important thing for daily life to some, but it is essential to work together as social organisms. Restoring that trust is a generational task. Complicating that task are modern problems beyond the wildest dreams of even the wisest philosophers.
If the law has one standard for the rich and powerful and another for the rest of us, it will be hard for ordinary Americans to maintain their faith in democracy.
Yes... Do come join us at the conclusion we reached many decades ago.
"People having faith in democracy" is, at this point, not even remotely close to being on the list of goals for those involved in administering that democracy.
Which is funny because we have laws to make the democracy more important than the people running it.
Oddly enough the people wanting to destroy it see those laws merely as guidelines. Much like how criminals use the world. And the police.
Almost like they should be treated as the criminals they are and not like powerful people...
No shit. People have been complaining about it for decades, centuries probably.
If you have money and/or connections, you do not have to follow the law like average people do.
No, it’s way too easy for someone to be a crook and stay out of prison.
Yay for using archive.org and not one of the archive.today knock offs that poison DNS for various providers.
Yeah, I really wish archive. today wasn't crappy like that because there's a handful of sites that archive.org occasionally chokes on because they're so chock-full of spyware and garbage (see example below), while archive. today somehow is always able to cut through things, but I'm not going to direct other people to a site that does this
On a related note, there are no problems with https://ghostarchive.org/ right? Because that's one I use a lot but don't know anything about
Example of archive.org choking that just happened to me, tried to save
https://news.yahoo.com/james-crumbley-trial-begin-else-184645844.html
but I ended up getting
I know what you mean. Archive.today is functionally better, but only because they're so scummy.