660
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2024
660 points (99.0% liked)
politics
18637 readers
3740 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.
- 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.
- 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Project 2025 will rob people of their lives.
The thing to remember about Project 2025 is that it has a 180 day execution window. This stuff will happen so fast it'll make your head spin.
Honestly, that 180 day window thing is nominal. The execution of all of that will take way longer with all of the litigation that would happen, and it'll take a couple of years to get it all enacted (slow at first then accelerating as more gets enacted).
Personally, I'd prefer if it were fast. The sudden change would wake people up, and cause way more civil unrest. If it's slow, we end up as frogs slowly boiling. Fewer people will protest or cause issues if things unfold slowly. It's the idea of the frog in the boiling water. If the changes are swift, there's a higher chance of ordinary people taking notice and fighting to reverse them.
The water is already 208 degrees man. This country is the montage in the opening scenes of a dystopian film as it is.
Crumbling infrastructure. Natural disasters. Civil unrest. Disease. Tense international relations. Food costs escalating, and only to get worse due to changing climate.
Except in the experiment that coined the phrase, the frogs jumped out. We ain't jumping. We're acting more like crabs in a bucket.
Not wrong.
We are at 212F on the left side of the phase transition. Still liquid, but there isn’t much hope left.
Hah, there's no way they get all that done in 180 days. I believe they would want to do it, but someone's been hitting Hitler's party drugs if they think Washington can move that fast.
With a Supreme Court in your pocket, literally whats stopping the new president from being a dictator?
Congress isn't captured and they do still need to actually amend the law on all of this. Or else the lower courts will tie it up for years. SCOTUS would have to abandon all procedure and decorum to get stuff moved quicker. And at that point the legitimacy is just gone.
Idk that they care about appearing legitimate
Well they should. Even Hitler cared about that. If you don't maintain that veneer you tend to get tarred and feathered.
Sure, that's assuming this is an internal attack. However, if the goal is to cause our entire country to collapse as an attack from an external enemy, then making the Supreme Court appear blatantly illegitimate is a perfect way to do that.
Aren't you guys noticing how this Republican takeover emulates right-wing takeovers done by the CIA everywhere? The CIA didn't just do this to attack leftwing stuff, they also did this so we could take resources from those countries. Aka there's another country (or group of super wealthy leaders) trying to destabilize us and extract our resources/wealth here.
Stop getting mad at the chess pieces and look at the chess player.
Uhh. The CIA was considerably less subtle. They didn't cause lost elections, they caused coups.
And when the mob reacts to a loss of legitimacy you get Ukraine, not Argentina.
Yes, they caused coups by supporting right wing movements in those countries and making them appear like grassroots movements. Then when the right wing people take control, the country collapses. It's Iran. Have you seen pictures of Iran before it got fucked? Women were going to school, it looked completely different.
Women were going to school under the Shah. I think you've confused the Iranian revolution with the CIA coup.
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/31/690363402/how-the-cia-overthrew-irans-democracy-in-four-days
I'm not disputing the CIA's role in Iranian history. Just the history of women's rights. They didn't go down the shitter until the shah was overthrown in the revolution.
Okay, thank you for the nuance, I appreciate that