436
The supreme Court says you can just kill them bro
Presidential act
Put the bloated military budget to good use for once.
For once? Are you not familiar with the whole situation in Ukraine?
we're barely using our military there, as a percentage
I agree we should just straight up bomb the fuck out of Russia and assassinate Putin.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Yeah. We should be giving them more. But at least we're giving some.
Guess you don't know what using the military means. We are financing and supplying them only.
The phrase used was bloated military budget, which definitely includes supplying and financing.
No it doesn't. Most are government contracts and funding is from congress. A completely different pot from the defense budget. We don't sell U.S. weapons to foreign countries. We sell them watered down versions.
Wait, so your premise hangs on thinking that synonyms mean different things?
Imagine, for a moment, me waving my hands over my head while bobbling my head back and forth in a syncopated rhythm, as I walk away, muttering. “Oh, but the defense budget isn’t the military budget!” “No, we’re just pretending colloquialisms don’t exist for the purposes of this argument.” “There’s always at least one!”
Five words: I feared for my country
load more comments
(2 replies)
There is zero chance that there is not going to be fairly significant violence from Trump's supporters between November and January.
It will happen, absolutely no matter what.
Either he's going to lose, in which case they're going to engage in retaliatory and/or insurrectionary violence, or he's going to win (or be handed the win by the Supreme Court Rubber-stamping Service), in which case they're going to engage in celebratory, very enthusiastic and likely officially sanctioned violence.
That's it. At this point, there is no third option. Trump, in his pathological narcissism and complete lack of empathy or sound reason, has fostered an atmosphere of anger and hatred, and it's not a question of if it will result in violence and murder, but simply of when and of what specifically will touch it off.
At least trump isn't the incumbent this time, Biden can let the National Guard deal with them. FAFO
Biden is extraordinarily risk-averse.
When Obama was sending the Seals after Obama, Biden was trying to talk him out of it. I mean look at the bag of cement he appointed as AG. Biden won't say boo to a goose.
Third Option: Trump dies this year, and again violence.
or he’s going to win (or be handed the win by the Supreme Court Rubber-stamping Service),
I agree with your comment in general and apologize for what may sound like a bit of a flippant reply, but I actually think what would worry me the most is if it it goes to SCOTUS and they somehow do NOT install Trump. I think the super-faithful deep-state-believers would lose their effing minds at that turn of events - this is where I would expect to see the violence ramping up the fastest.
No. That's a way better option than a fascist dictator actually gaining power.
Oh for sure, and I wasn't suggesting otherwise.
I expect a more immediate and flagrant violent event in that case vs the other two though.
load more comments
(1 replies)
We need a landslide for Kamala - Enough to scare at least a few republican SC members out of giving the win to the GoP out of fear of lynching when a bunch of states inevitably refuse to certify results
Then we need to be prepared for an actual attack on the government and pissed off Trumpers killing citizens
Can't assume anything but worst case and prepare for it as the GoP is in full Hitler's Nazi Party mode
We need a landslide for Kamala
Agreed. Kamala had the start of that during/ before the campaign. Like actually great performance. Since/ during the campaign, she's shifted to the right, focusing mostly on how "good she is for business" and touting Republican endorsements. She refused to engage with the uncommitted movement. Before the convention, her trajectory had her heading into the 50-55% zone by election day. That stalled out with her rightwing shift. She's on track to lose this election.
How do you say she’s in track to lose. All the data I’ve seen makes me optimistic.
Safety for Democrats is leading in national polling by +10. Kamala isn't +5. She needs +5 to be break even due to structural issues like the electoral college and voter suppression. Her trajectory prior to, and through the convention supported her getting into the safety range. I think that because of what we've seen from the supreme court, this needs to be a blow out. We know republicans will be doing everything they can to steal/ cause chaos and confusion around results/ fail to certify etc. If it isn't violently clear from a major victory, this thing goes to Trump.
Its delusional to think that Kamala is on track for that kind of major victory, but as with Biden's performance and likelyhood of winning, self-delusion around their favorite teams ability to actually win seems to be Lemmy's kink.
load more comments
(3 replies)
You don't deserve these down votes.
- Hillary lost despite winning the popular vote by a +2% spread
- Biden won with a 4.5% spread in the popular vote
- Obama won by 7% and reelected by ~4%
It's not just that Democrats need to win big to shut the other side up, they need to win big just to overcome their inherent disadvantage in the electoral college.
With Kamala sitting around 2.2% nationally on average, being within the margin of error of the states she needs to win, and her momentum seemingly stalled for the reasons you listed, Democrats should be worried.
As someone who would vote for her, or just about anyone who is not Donald Trump, I hate this.
Lemmy reacted the same with regards to addressing the reality around Biden's chances of winning and his obvious failings at being able to turn things around. Moderation have cultivated a toxic culture of radical rejection of any kind of criticism of Democrats. There were bans about it.
However, this condition is not unique to Lemmy. Its symptomatic across corporate/ cable news as well. The inability to accurately and faithfully address your own teams performance is absolutely hampering the left/ Democrats ability to be successful in this election. We need to be more critical of the people supposed to represent us because we need them to be actually capable of winning the election. The stakes are too high to leave entire sections of the actually registered Democratic electorate for Harris to be chasing Republicans (when that strategy has been demonstrated to fail for almost 30 years.
We need Harris to do better, not just because its the moral and right thing to do, but because we abso-fucking-lutely can not afford to lose this election. Don't hide a candidates weaknesses, bring them up and force them to address them. Force them to become a stronger, more electable candidate. I mean jesus fucking christ, your opponent is a felon and rapist. Harris can't do better than a 2% spread on DJT? Do fucking better Harris. Stop chasing the fucking Cheney war criminal families endorsement and go apologize to the uncommitted crowd.
Can’t assume anything but worst case and prepare for it
Stock up for a couple months worth of supplies and food. Ensure you have some alternative ways to heat and cook food. Have some self defense strategies/supplies. It is a good idea to prepare for an emergency anyway. Worst case scenario, you are prepared for a natural disaster or power outage or a strike.
And after that, we need a revolution. Everyone appointed by Trump will be given the option of resigning office or being relocated to Gitmo. This has not been politics as normal. This has been an attempt to resurrect the late 19th-century spoils system.
You've got exceptionally broad powers, King Biden. What are you going to do about it?
He’s going to continue aiding the genocide in Gaza, it’s really his focus.
Give it a rest, will ya?
I’m asking the same thing
Wow, so original
Gee, ya think?
I don't doubt there are lots of contingency planning going on, and it's not always good to make those plans public, but I'd sure feel better knowing there are plans to combat the certain fuckery
Main concern is the "Refuse to certify -> Goes to SC -> SC hands the win to the GoP" type fuckery that could happen. No idea what their plans are for that. Outside of that, I assume there will be a lot of military on standby but not obviously so
Leading up to Jan 6th there were weeks of MAGA's posting openly about their plans across social media, then the day came and it turned out there was zero contingency planning.
The most powerful "intelligence" and surveillance apparatus in history just let it happen... I know this, because I live on the opposite side of the planet, and knew a coup attempt was guaranteed from nothing but reddit links to other social media.
Oh man, if only biden knew someone in a position of power that had a responsibility to not let that occur. Oh well. So sick of democrats throwing up their hands and tripping over their dicks. We're going to shrug our way into global fascism.
If I were him, I'd make quiet preparations. Probably he has, because he's had four years to do so. We know military leaders have discussed the issue, right? Which means POTUS has, too. But what actions taken, that we don't know.
Ya know, I kinda feel the same way, based on specific things said and done by the GOP and their candidates. Well, actually it's more of a thought, or belief, based on factual evidence.
Stochastic terrorism. That's what he and Vance are knowingly exercising. That seems like something that should be dealt with, regardless of the political implications. People have died because of Trumps liberal and deliberate use of this form of communication to his batshit legion.
But then again, nothing makes sense any more. The reality that this race is as close as it is sums it all up, I suppose. To quote NOFX, The idiots are taking over.
Why would they resort to violence after the brutal and crippling wrist slaps the J6ers got?
Surely that was enough to deter anyone from going into extreme fits of political violence!
/s
Vance couldn't even bring himself to say Trump lost. So it is clear there won't be a peaceful transfer of power. No how much respect Dems try to show them.
Time for an official act?
It won’t be. Those mouthbreathers are gonna be in for quite the surprise.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
436 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19248 readers
1847 users here now
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS