Somebody needs to fucking do more than say "hey this should happen! "
I love her so much.
The only Democrat worth their salt.
Fuck yes.
For once, I just want Democrats to take a fucking bold brazen move. Seriously. This is why Democrats never control the narrative because they’re always too gun-shy to do the right thing and stand by their own beliefs.
-
Ditch the 81-year-old clearly suffering cognitive decline; run what would be a viral media frenzy that is an open convention and an American Idol contest for the American people.
-
Or fuck it: AOC will be old enough to be President this year. Even if she can’t get the nomination, she should start campaigning literally today until 2028, just like Trump does.
Edit: Sorry, going to move this to the top of the thread because it’s too important:
Before going forward, let me be clear: I want to be convinced that we’re not fucked. I really do. The past three days I’ve gone into detail about how I think we’re fucked and looking for anyone to make a sound, data-driven argument that shows we are not. I’ve yet to be convinced by one, and bear in mind I voted for Biden once and would vote for a corpse if it meant preventing the convicted felon getting keys to the WH again.
There is ample evidence that a not insignificant amount of swing voters either saw past the old man voice to what he was actually saying and standing for, as well as recognized how badly Trump did, even though literally everyone only focuses on Biden, just like always.
Please show me these! Because these are all the surveys I’ve so far seen:
Post-Debate: “72 Percent Say Biden Unfit Mentally, Cognitively.”
Post-Debate: “Voters think Harris is more fit than Biden to run the country”
Post-Debate: “Swing state voters react to presidential debate, Biden’s weak performance”
Post-Debate Focus Group: “Undecided voter focus group leans toward Trump after debate”
Let’s face reality:
- Biden is 10.5 points nationally below where he was at this time in 2020 in polling versus Trump.
- Biden is currently losing in nearly every single battleground state.
- Biden is losing a significant number of Black and Latino voters compared to his 2020 run.
- Biden’s aggregate approval ratings for Presidency are 37.9% with 56.3% disapproval.
To me I view it as a known loss versus a known risky chance. At this point, personally and given all the data I’ve thus far presented, I am that convinced that we will lose. Polling shows people deeply unsatisfied with the current candidate. I think critical swing-state voters would just be happy to vote for a fresh face that is younger. Like Mehdi Hasan said, “Americans like new shit.”
So I don’t know how how you can say with a straight face that Biden is more successful while simultaneously dodging the obvious fact that there is a significant decline in physical and cognitive performance. So let’s recap:
We can downplay all we want, but this wasn’t “one bad debate,” for it wasn’t even about the debat eitself but the revelation of Biden’s senility piercing through echo-chambers. For the exact same reason Biden ASKED for this debate to reach important voters and show he’s mentally fit (akin to the SOTU) and show Trump is not, it backfired 100% and there will not be another chance to reach 50 million voters at prime-tme. Trump has no obligation to take another debate; ending on that note is all that is needed.
- Biden took this debate because he is currently losing and needed to break the stagnant, steadily-declining polls.
- Biden’s performance is worse than his 2020 run and in fact, worse than Hillary’s losing run in 2016 by every single metric I can find.
- There is a MASSIVE amount of risk that Biden’s condition deteriorates more rapidly between now and November, and following the convention there is no more backing out.
If I was a Republican strategist, I’d be doing everything in my power to keep Biden in the race because I know he’d be the weakest opponent compared to a fresh, younger face. Nate Silver, Ezra Klein, even former Obama/Biden staffers from PSA clearly agree.
Now if you agree with this and you say, “okay I see your points, but how can anyone else do better?” then we’ll move on to that.
-
Okay I say we get behind AOC. This is important. WTF!
Here me out: Supreme Court justices, Seal Team 6, official act. You don’t even have to pack the Court any more.
They won’t do shiiiiiiiit.
Like seriously, I’m tired of whining on the internet about this shit. Where can I go to learn about joining a protest? It’s better that doing fuck all by tut-tutting the establishment hellbent on fucking us over while they count their money.
The statement:
The Supreme Court has become consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control.
Today’s ruling represents an assault on American democracy. It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture.
I intend on filing articles of impeachment upon our return.
This is what leadership is, what voters want, and what wins elections.
Doesn’t matter if it works, it’s trying and highlighting that issues can be fixed. We might not succeed the first time, but we’ll keep fucking trying till we do.
Put the votes on record and show voters where people stand.
AOC is earning my vote.
Imagine having a candidate that got more popular after speaking in public…
We literally haven’t even passed that low of a bar in over a decade. I don’t understand what’s happened to people.
People as a whole are more politically aware than I’ve ever seen, but we’re just wasting it.
During the Hillary vs Bernie times, I was talking with a Bernie supporter in a bar. He told me that the establishment Dems/DNC would promote Hitler himself before they promote an anti-establishment candidate.
Back then I thought he was a case of mentally sick person making it to the bar and having too much drink. As time passes I agree with him more and more.
We have a party entirely dedicated to the ownership class with literally 0 internal conflict, and we have a party almost entirely dedicated to the ownership class with some internal conflict (the squad.)
What we don’t have is a party that gives one solitary fuck about the labor class and actively fights those that get too close to real power. The squad is a useful token to point to and say “see we aren’t all corpo fascists! We allowed them to exist!” (Because there’s only like 5 of them so they have no power whatsoever)
We have to undo decades of policy enacted the much longer politically aware and active owner class. They’ve had a head start on us, so it’s going to take tome to dismantle the political machinery they’ve created while minimizing harm done to the rest of us.
We actually don’t.
A single progressive president means they get to name the DNC chair and a bunch of voting positions.
It’s literally that easy to take over the party.
Obama just didn’t do it because he didn’t need the party after they turned on him for opposing Hillary.
If he’d have rebuilt it, we’d have a functional progressive party planning decades ahead already. And trump would still just be that guy from the Mac Miller song. The SC would be a progressive majority. The situation and Gaza wouldn’t have turned into an open genocide, COVID would have been handled appropriately.
It’s not some insurmountable task, but it gets harder and harder every cycle.
By all rights we should have had protests in the streets calling for Biden and the DNC leadership to step down for stealing NH’s delagets. But not enough people had crossed their personal lines by then.
If we’d have had the fight then, we’d have had a full primary almost to figure shit out.
But we didn’t.
Until we finally do, shit won’t change.
We should have been in streets for Gore.
We should have learned that confidence is the one thing you can’t fake. A candidate can be confident for illogical reasons, but that’s still more convincing than being right but not being confident. It creates this weird effect where once people get too smart, they become less decisive and people perceive that as less confident.
The stereotypical nerd.
Gore probably would have been a top 10 president. But he couldn’t sell himself to voters just a little more. And if memory recalls, he technically didn’t even have to concede. Like, if he had waited I believe the recounts were actively happening. He didn’t even let it run down to the final vote.
But I think its important to note not a single Dem Senator challenged it either which would have been even better than Gore challenging it
Bernie would have most likely, but he wasn’t in yet. Biden could have done it, but he didn’t, same with most of the current Dem leadership.
So Gore should have planted his feet, and voters should have gotten behind, probably would have. But the party didn’t have Gore’s back either. And Gore wasn’t confident enough to try it without the party.
It’s crazy how shit comes so close and has such widespread consequences. Just one Dem senator back then dragging it out till a final count would have done it.
Gore probably would have been a top 10 president. But he couldn’t sell himself to voters just a little more. And if memory recalls, he technically didn’t even have to concede. Like, if he had waited I believe the recounts were actively happening. He didn’t even let it run down to the final vote.
He pushed right up to the deadline. Like, Bush v Gore was decided literally hours before the state deadline to certify the vote.
We’ve had this sort of situation before, FDR was radically progressive on a lot of policy decisions, he made great strides ad pulling us out of the Great Depression, leading us through world war 2, dramatically reduced the wealth disparity and was so popular with the voting public he was elected 4 times. Then the politically connected wanted to make sure that kind of presidency never happened again, so they paid to get the political machinery altered to suit their needs, term limits were introduced, influential think tanks were created to push favorable public policy and install favorable political assets, launched propaganda campaigns to sway public perception and consolidated economic power.
I agree that a single properly progressive president can do a lot to make things better, and a president who actually wields power can make some very important structural changes within the political party but it doesn’t disassemble the political machinery that led us to our current situation in the first place. It doesn’t disassemble the vast propaganda networks and think tanks, it doesn’t stop the flow of dark money into politician pockets. All these positive changes can be undone if the next guy that comes in is a shitbag.
During the Hillary vs Bernie times, I was talking with a Bernie supporter in a bar. He told me that the establishment Dems/DNC would promote Hitler himself before they promote an anti-establishment candidate.
Back then I thought he was a case of mentally sick person making it to the bar and having too much drink. As time passes I agree with him more and more.
Do you think the ownership class was upset when AOC voted to stop the rail union from striking?
Imagine having a candidate that got more popular after speaking in public…
We literally haven’t even passed that low of a bar in over a decade. I don’t understand what’s happened to people.
I’d be happy if we just had an administration where no one in the DOJ, State Department or Cabinet quits in disgust. The last time that happened was what, Bush Sr.?
deleted by creator
I want AOC with vice president Bernie.
That man may be in his final years of politics, and perhaps too old to be at the helm, but dammit, he deserves it.
I saw him speak the other day and he was totally with it. Like that super old person who lives to be 120 and is sharp as fuck right until their body gives up, but until then they are firy and physically fit.
Literally has had one minor mis-step with the railroad union strike, telling them to go back to work, and they still got the deal they wanted in the end. She hasn’t just earned my vote for POTUS should she choose to run, but she’s got my full support. Heck, I might start throwing campaign contributions her way if she makes a POTUS try.
So, not codifying RvW as promised, not protecting voter rights, not protecting civil liberties…
… those aren’t missteps?
and they still got the deal they wanted in the end
Is it in the fucking contract? no? Then they got jack shit.
not codifying RvW as promised, not protecting voter rights, not protecting civil liberties…
Conservatives (including Manchin and Sinema) stopped all of that. I hate the Dem party and despise neoliberals (AKA the other conservatives), but conservatives are fully to blame for those specific issues.
Manchin and Sinema
But… vote blue no matter who!
You don’t get a choice where you get a progressive instead of Manchin. You get Manchin or a far right Republican. I voted for Manchin, for the same reason I voted for Clinton and Biden - they might suck, but holy shit is the alternative WORSE.
deleted by creator
This thread is about AOC. You forgot which Democratic party figure you were supposed to be railing on in this thread.
I hope you understand that it will be reflected on your next performance review.
for the record, I think I must have replied to the wrong thing in my notifications. deleted my comment. (however, I do stand by my criticism of Biden. AoC on the other hand would be freaking phenomenal.)
(by the way. not a fucking bot. might want to hone that paranoia of yours.)
They said AOC not Biden lmao
Do you understand how Congress functions? Do you think they’re fucking dukes and duchesses or some shit?
You apparently don’t understand the difference between being a dictator and actually getting off your ass to stir up support for something.
stop acting like biden is powerless because one body of congress is in republican hands. biden is not powerless. If Biden is so powerless to get shit done in congress, how is it he claims credit for the American Recovery Act and the other big ones early term? that’s right. He did some lifting for it. (he was, however, far from the only person, and a lot of people did a lot of heavy lifting to get that done.)
Have you seen the Republican Congress?
Trying to get anything through them is like preschoolers playing Red Rover against the New England Patriots.
I’m not saying they don’t try. It’s important to try, as long as they immediately call out the opposition at any and every opportunity. And loud. But if it comes from a D, fat chance actually getting it passed.
Who is your pick for POTUS? Wave your magic wand.
I’m not the one waiving a magic wand thinking Biden is a perfect candidate.
You are.
As I’ve said elsewhere, baring Biden himself stepping down it’s suicide for any one to oppose him. So no I’m not going to enter that fucking argument with someone who can’t even see what’s clearly before them.
Especially considering I’m guessing you give credit for the American recovery act to Biden even as you’d scramble to insist Biden doesn’t have the power to pass law.
Removed by mod
Removed, civility.
firstly, I’m not a bot.
Secondly, what I really want is to stop the slow slid into Fascism. Biden is, in my opinion, demonstrably incapable or unwilling of doing that. You’re welcome to share your opinions, and we can have a discussion about it. Though, also in my opinion, you don’t like hearing alternative viewpoints, considering the name calling and accusations.
EDIT: Third, I already have. the argument goes no where. Before the primary it was “Save it for the primary,” during the primary it was “Don’t undermine the incumbent, you idiot”, in now its “name your candidate”. in 2019 it was “learn to compromise”. I’m not interestedin the argument because you- or people like you- are unwilling to listen. Biden is problematic. but you’re not going to be able to shore up his election campaign by digging your head in the sand.
Other “missteps”? Gaza and Immigration feature prominently, too.
If we’re having elections in 28 and she isn’t a candidate. Something is wrong.
AOC will not survive after Trump wins.
“Haven’t you heard it’s a battle of words?”
The poster bearer cried
“Listen, son,” said the man with the gun
“There’s room for you inside”Cool story bro
Hypothetical, yes. Fiction, not anymore.
That’s the thing though, with the Republicans in charge there will NEVER be a vote on this. They won’t allow it.
Yeah. But it’s provocative, it gets the people going.
That translates to more voters and more small donors.
Two things that are kind of important 4 months before a general election.
People will call this sort of thing performative since the legislation will be dead in the water, but you’re spot on. An important part of politics is virtue signaling. You’re telling your supporters what you stand for and that you’re at least trying.
Whether it’s progressive or moderates doing so, it’s an important political tool, and sometimes the only tool at their disposal. Showing people you’re willing to fight, even if you know you’re going to lose, is a big deal.
Is it terrible I always think of Kanye too when I hear it?
George Bush doesn’t care about black people.
The minority party has seized control by eroding the foundation of democracy. The sad part is that most people don’t even realize how fucked we are.
And yet, she’ll never win a presidential election because she’s too polarizing. There’s literally no other way to win here if somebody else steps in. Sad that people try to do good in their job as a public representative for their people, and just fucking can’t.
Edit to say: don’t just take my word for it. Ask Bernie Sanders. Did he win the presidency at some point? I just must have…,…
And yet, she’ll never win a presidential election because she’s too polarizing
Imagine saying that after Obama flipped a bunch of red states and brought in a shit ton of down ballot races.
AOC is polarizing, but not as much as Obama and it’s easier the second time around.
Hell, no body even really mentioned Biden being Catholic in 1988. You should have seen the shit they said about JFK. And similar time-frames passed between.
And strictly police wise, the country is a lot more open to progressive policy than in 08, and again, everyone said Obama was too “polarizing” right up till election results.
I will vote for her so hard given the chance. Unfortunately, I’m still just one vote. I want to agree with you, but I’m not sure I can. I’d sure love to see her give it a real run, with a DNC that supporter her and didn’t drag her to the center or actively undercut her primary chances.
It’s because Obama was polarizing, but he sold himself as progressive convincingly
He literally ran on the promise of change - unfortunately his actions were firmly neo liberal, and he prioritized compromise over meaningful reform
If Obama was a neo liberal in progressive clothing, Clinton was a diehard neo liberal from top to bottom.
Unfortunately, the lesson learned was “people don’t like Hillary” rather than “people want a real progressive”
I don’t understand your point… Obama won two presidential elections in a row. It would seem as though that "selling himself as a progressive convincingly worked out pretty well for him id say.
So you’re saying that the people want a progressive candidate, but the Dems would, at most, give us the option of someone who sells themselves as progressive but is an actual neo-liberal?
Oh, maybe I do get it after all. I was going to say that Gore was pretty progressive and did technically win, but that was 25 years agola
There be the facts, friend. It’s just how it works right now. Any time you figure out a better system you can get implemented, I’m all ears.
There be the facts, friend. It’s just how it works right now
What?
Literally what’s how what works?
Any time you figure out a better system you can get implemented, I’m all ears.
Fair and open primaries, mate.
I’ve been saying it since NH had their delegates stolen.
Well, this cycle, almost a decade now in total. This ain’t exactly a new problem, and it’s not like no one can think of a solution.
It’s just not easy beating corporate money in primaries until enough Dem voters demand the party sets higher standards. And most people only pay atteyonce every 4 years, then they’re too exhausted to care about politics.
Removed by mod
Damn, I didn’t know it was that easy to lose an argument. Bravo
imagine fleeing an argument you’re wrong on this way 🤡
How come Trump gets to be as polarizing as he wants, but nobody to the left of McConnell can?
Because entrenched Democrats are under a ridiculous belief that everyone who isn’t voting for them is conservative. So if you spout “extreme” leftist ideals, you’re too scary to the people they are courting, which is conservative voters who aren’t Trumplicans.
Repubs have spent decades feeding propaganda to their fear-addicted voting base. And they’re still squawking away with Fox and Sinclair. I’d love to see her run but I’m not certain it would be successful.
She’s not polarising. The oligarchy controlled media that constantly paint her as some kind of radical are polarising.
She’s vilified on Fox News as a Boogeyman literally every night of the week. WTF are you even talking about?
Have you seen what they say about Joe Biden?
They’d call trump Joseph Stalin if there was a D by his name.
It literally doesn’t matter how progressive a candidate we run, because they’ll say the same shit about anyone.
Moderates try to defend and talk about how conservative they really are. Alienating their voters. AOC would fucking own that shit and explain how it helps everyone.
What we’re doing isn’t working. And Biden himself keeps saying he’s powerless as president, so why not fucking try what worked for literal decades and there was no rational reason we ever stopped?
You will just be downvoted from here on out because of who you are. Get right with something.
You’re not even trying at this point. Definitely lending yourself to be a troll more than a concerned citizen. Shame
Disgraceful
Because they are afraid of her
I don’t think many fox viewers are voting for any Democrat.
Obama was that bogeyman from 2008 to 2016. Considering that he won two elections during that time, I don’t think Fox News is really relevant to AOC.
So? They aren’t going to vote for a Dem anyway.
But it’s a great excuse for shutting out progressives!
You must be quite young. Everything you are saying about AOC was said, word for word, for Obama. Obama still won.
because she’s too polarizing.
She shares a lot of views with Bernie Sanders, and Berni would almost surely have defeated Trump where Hillary failed.
As I see it, she is not nearly as polarizing as Trump. The only ones strongly against her, are probably extreme Christians and Nazis.Republicans boosted Sanders, not because they liked him. But because they knew it would, and did divide their opposition for the next decade or more. Had Sanders gotten the nomination. They’d have smeared him worse than Clinton.
That’s the thing about Bernie. He’s hard to smear. Unlike, “my husband cheated on me while serving as President” Hillary. You’re delusional.
The fact that they didn’t take the time to really try to smear him doesn’t mean he’s hard to smear. There were a lot of accusations that could have gotten a lot of play Propaganda wise. Like him and his wife honeymooning in Russia. That got bare minimal play during the campaign because it was much more handy to keep the Democrats divided. In fact I think it was probably Democrats that pointed that out. But since they don’t directly control the messaging machine. And the people who do did not want that message out it didn’t get out.
Just to point this out to you since you seem to not understand. Smears don’t have to be true. Often they aren’t. All you need to smear someone successfully is a consistent message driven into them.
Not the point. She’s a Boogeyman for right-wing media.
That doesn’t really make her polarizing, that’s just the right wing media treating her unfairly, as they do with every progressive Democrat, except a bit more, because she is popular.
No, it makes her polarizing because the viewers of certain media thinks she’s a fucking liberal who will literally sweep your house, take you gums, sell them, and give the profit to "illegals’.
This was a literal interpretation about her from ImfoWars. It’s a fucking thing. She won’t win.
People who follow infowars are already radicalized, and will say any moderate is polarizing. They want a Fuhrer, they want to exterminate LGBT and colored people. Their opinion is irrelevant, because there is no talking sense to those people. Just see how the MAGA people threw a fit, because their house leader “compromised” after 8 months of negotiating, and getting everything they asked for!!!
They are beyond reach, and they are the ones polarizing, not rational sensible people like AOC, that actually tries to make life better for most people.If not only wanting to do things for the rich, the white and Christians, makes you polarizing, then a polarizing candidate is the only reasonable option.
Literally, anyone who threatens the interests served by right-wing media is going to see themselves transformed into a bogeyman by right-wing media. That’s how it works. That AOC is “polarizing” according to them is because of the threat she poses to them. If you’re letting right-wing media define the boundaries of who is an acceptable candidate, you will never defeat them.
Show me on this doll where AOC touched you.
That is why she’d be so successful. She’d give them strokes. She’d get constant media coverage. They would give her so much publicity the news would always be about her. She’s good looking and talks well. She’d look badass in the White House.
Which means nothing. Absolutely nothing.
IMHO, the only reason she’s “polarizing” is because the right has chosen to run a smear campaign on her. People like her are a threat to them. She’s young, smart, and charming. She’s like Obama once was, only she’s even younger than he was. She’s still a year too young to run.
the right has chosen to run a smear campaign on her
And they run smear campaigns on EVERYONE with a D in front of their name, regardless of how far to the left they actually are. Democrats are playing a losing game by worrying about how the Republican media are going to portray them.
Just saying that she has extra appeal and potential, so that why she gets extra attention by the right wing media.
Their screaming means nothing anymore. Conservative media will panic-attack absolutely anyone who runs against the GOP with the exact same extreme deception and conspiracy theories.
I really don’t think that’s true. People said the same with Obama, and he really never faced that in voters, the GOP was viciously attacking him and it never stuck. There is a stage big enough, that the most vicious attackers do get lost in the crowd.
Yup, never stuck. They won all the mid terms during his administration handily. Maintaining super majorities in Congress the whole time. Nope, they were never ever shellacked (Obamas phrasing) in the midterms over “obamacare”. No matter how you phrased it obamacare or ACA the publics approval was always the same they adored it right?
Bernie would have won (according to polls) if the DNC hadn’t sabotaged him at every turn. Too polarizing? No, just too left for the Democrats.
And yet, she’ll never win a presidential election because she’s too polarizing.
She’ll never make it through the primaries because she’s a progressive.
No need to. Biden can have the 6 corrupt justices killed. He has the immunity and he can pick new justices. If members of the senate refuse to put the new justices on the bench, have them killed too. No rules anymore.
Strategically speaking liberal politicians are backed into a corner and only have two real options:
-
Seize control preemptively, promoting conservative conspiracy to prophecy, and likely inciting CW2.
-
Hand over full control come January and hope they continue to maintain some privilege under a new regime.
They’re already in check, but more concerned with soliciting large donations and collecting hot stick tips.
We want them to do option 1, but know they are going to choose option 2.
When confronted with fascist Threats liberals always blink. They’ll wade through masses of bodies to destroy what they perceive to be a leftist threat, but they don’t stand up to fascists.
All democracies turn into dictatorships - but not by coup. The people give their democracy to a dictator, whether it’s Julius Caesar or Napoleon or Adolf Hitler. Ultimately, the general population goes along with the idea.
George Lucas
I don’t like sand.
George Lucas
Didn’t Caesar literally march his army into Rome? ‘crossing the rubicon’ - and then there was a thing called the roman civil war
Yeah. There was also the title, literally “dictator”, that was bestowed on individuals in times of crisis (or perceived crisis), and in some cases the power of the dictator was returned to the republic when the crisis was addressed (see Cincinnatus). Rome had an established process for giving power to the dictator.
Alea iacta est
I want to move away so bad
Go. Start some research, and head out. Many countries you can just enter. Call it a vacation for the first year and see if you like it.
Oh boy I can’t wait to get to another capitalist country!
Or … Ya know… Get the votes
Option 2 is suicide. I guess that’s it for American Democracy. Of course, option 3 being that the Democrats win every election until the Republican party collapses. At which point the Democratic party will likely split, with one part becoming a moderate party, and the other half absorbing the remains of the Republican party.
Liberal politicians do not need to be the ones to make sure #1 happens. The second amendment literally exists so the citizens have the capacity to do that ourselves.
200 years ago though, now you’ll get shit stomped by the military. The 2a thing is honestly a joke.
It wasn’t a joke from me. Democracy dies when the good man does nothing. I am a good man and I will fight for this democracy, as fucked up as it is. The right believes the left to be weak pacifists because we choose compromise, tolerance, and acceptance over bigotry, hate, and subjugation. They will need to learn the hard way that we choose that because we know that mutually beneficial social contracts make living better and provide a safe, prosperous world. They obviously do not want to be party to these social contracts with me, so I will not allow them any of the safety or benefits.
Eh, Iraq and Afghanistan went rather poorly for the United States.
What does that have to do with the second amendment?
Second amendment grants the right to bear arms, arms were used by the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.
What does Iraq and Afghanistan have to do with America and taking arms up against our government? You really think a bunch of hillbillies with guns are going to do shit against our military?
But the president has the power to tell the army “Don’t do shit” in complete impunity.
He does, but why would the president tell the army to do nothing when the people are rising up against said president? Nobody is that stupid, any rise up against the government will end with the military curb stomping it in about 15 minutes.
Domestic wars are never pretty, no matter how powerful the military. Most people in the military don’t serve to shoot their own country. Countries don’t want to damage their own infrastructure or enflame their own people. Oligarchs won’t support a war that damages their bottom line. People vastly over simply how easy it would be to stop an armed resistance.
Did you see the police step on people during the blm 2020 marches? They have no problem being fascists
We’re talking about people rising against the Republican side of the government
-
The quickest way to save the country would be for Biden to kill the 6 justices that ruled in favour of immunity (and I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t even mind since they’re the ones that made it legal), install 6 liberal judges and the new court can overturn every ruling the corrupt court made. Which means Biden would probably end up in prison, but hey, it’s a small price to pay for democracy.
Why would he end up in prison? It would not have been a crime when he committed it. That’s what immunity means.
Yep. They made an official ruling, Biden acts on it appropriately, new Justices get appointed in a month (or else), new Court orders a review of every case the six fascists ruled on.
Oh, what do you know, first out the door, no, extrajudicial murder powers aren’t supported by the Constitution!
Whoopsie.
Biden should use the Emergency Alert text system to let every American know what this ruling means, and what’s at stake.
Or, at least break into broadcast programming with an address to inform everyone.
Removed by mod
Just write it up in an executive order. Official as it gets
I guess it depends on whether the court sees it as an official act or not?
How? Wouldn’t what he did be legal when he did it?
I mean he would certainly make a mark as one of the most interesting president’s yet by doing so…
This is the way.
deleted by creator
Who says he can’t? The Supreme Court just said that he’s immune from “official acts” without even defining what that would mean. Who determines what is and isn’t an official act? The President? The Supreme Court? Right now, as this ruling is worded, all bets are off. There’s nothing stopping a sitting President from just arbitrarily declaring someone as a threat to national security and having them picked off by ST6 as an “official act to prevent a terrorist attack against the United States”, then just having the details classified.
Having something criminal declared as an “official act” is piss-easy, especially when you’re in charge of the branch making the decision and you have one of the other branches in your back pocket, possibly both.
Don’t bother with this “user”. Look at their comment history. The person showed up today to defend this obvious act against democracy. My guess is a Russian/Chinese misinformation promoter.
deleted by creator
You’re trying to play it off like a joke, but that should really trigger some introspection.
Good. Fuck off then.
Probably is a total coincidence that you’re saying this here.
deleted by creator
The laws about that were just thrown out the window with this ruling. Everything is an official act as long as he was president when he stated it to he done. Ordering fries from McDonald’s is now an official act as well.
deleted by creator
You just showed us you didn’t lol
If it were, Trump would have been behind bars years ago.
Shoutout to Voyager for implementing Apollo’s new account marker. It makes spotting trolls really easy.
deleted by creator
“Congress may not criminalize the president’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the executive branch under the Constitution” makes pretty much anything fair fucking game.
“The president enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law,”
I don’t understand how you can confuse this sentence. People act like the president can commit any crime they want. That is categorically false. Crimes committed in the name in the highest office of the land are not o in an official capacity.
The U.S. Constitution includes several provisions that limit the powers of the president and prevent the president from committing crimes without consequences:
Article I, Section 2 and Section 3: These sections provide the House of Representatives the power to impeach the president and the Senate the power to try and convict the president. Impeachment is a process by which the president can be removed from office for committing “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Article II, Section 4: This section specifically states that the president, vice president, and all civil officers of the United States can be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 8: The president must take an oath of office to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” This oath implies a legal and ethical obligation to adhere to the law and Constitution.
Checks and Balances: The Constitution establishes a system of checks and balances, whereby the legislative and judicial branches can limit the actions of the executive branch. Congress can pass laws, override presidential vetoes, and control the budget, while the judiciary can review the constitutionality of presidential actions through judicial review.
Together, these provisions and principles ensure that the president is subject to the rule of law and can be held accountable for criminal actions.
Nothing you wrote ensures anything.
Trump was impeached twice with no consequence.
“Official acts” is arbitrary.
deleted by creator
So in other words, Trump can do whatever he wants as long as his cronies vote that it’s okay.
Trumps own legal team has described political assassinations as qualifying as an official act as president
deleted by creator
It is! in the dissenting opinion in which Sotomayor explicitly describes this ruling as granting immunity for political assassinations
There’s some hyperbole in these threads for sure, but not a lot. The president can’t handwave away the bill of rights, because nothing in the constitution gives them that power.
However, the president does have the authority as commander in chief of authorizing lethal force against individuals. If Biden authorized Seal Team 6 to execute Trump, that is in fact an official act that he has the authority to perform. Sure maybe it is technically not legal, but that doesn’t matter since the president has complete immunity from criminal law. The house could still draft articles of impeachment but the senate would be unable to remove the president because the president is immune to criminal proceedings.
And if Trump wants to create an organization to round up and execute all the gays (and the Jews, of course), he has the power to do that; and with today’s ruling, he will never face consequences for doing so.
Irreparable damage has been done to American democracy today.
The Christian Caliphate was birthed today, and Trump will be supreme Ayatollah
deleted by creator
At this point you need to present your evidence that they can’t because SCROTUS literally said they can
At this point you’ve outed yourself as a partisan hack that is stuck in binary thinking.
At this point, you’re a towel.
But as an official act, the president can strip someone of citizenship.
Removed by mod
Removed, civility, ableist slur.
The supreme courtSupreme Court Justices disagree with you, but OK I’ll bite.Why can’t a president kill an american citizen on american soil? Because it’s illegal? Do you understand that that
thatno longer applies to the president?So you are saying he just has to wait until he leaves American soil? You’re right, that’s so inconvenient.
deleted by creator
So the US has never killed someone outside of the US?
The president can’t commit criminal acts and claim it was an official capacity, lol.
What the fuck do you mean “lol”. That is PRECISELY what this ruling does. It removes criminal liability for anything that is done as an official act, which is entirely fucking subjective, and up to the interpretation of a corrupt, coopted judiciary. Get the fuck out of here with that bullshit.
deleted by creator
The stupidity of this statement truly strains belief given the actual verbiage in this ruling. May you suffer the full weight and consequences of that stupidity.
Wow. You are a fucking idiot lol. Ooof. I feel bad for you.
deleted by creator
It was an official act to use a drone on his political opponents.
And who decides how to interpret law and levy consequence? And whose pocket are they in?
A person of power cannot commit a crime and claim it was in official capacity, because the act itself is against the law and cannot be committed without consequence.
This whole ruling is because of a person in power (Trump) who committed a crime (fake electors plot to overturn the 2020 election) and is claiming it as an official capacity of the office. That’s the whole point of the case which was appealed to the Supreme Court.
So what consequence will Trump face for his crimes now based on this ruling?
deleted by creator
You can organize a coup to overthrow the government and claim it’s an official act, there’s absolutely nothing stopping a president from claiming assassinations are an official act now. Hell, the commander in chief already organizes assassinations on foreign targets.
The Democrats might not abuse this, but the Republicans will, and they have given themselves carte blanche to start killing political dissidents.
Is this fascism yet, or are we waiting for the trains to run on time?
I think we all know that one of those two things will never happen in the land of the free and home of the mass-produced automobile.
Trainspotters are going to storm the capital when Biden loses.
But he can commit official acts that happen to be criminal. Semantics are fun!
deleted by creator
Your logic doesn’t even follow. Why would the president need immunity for a non-criminal act? Think about it for like 2 seconds dude.
deleted by creator
Supreme court literally just said he could by saying Jan 6 was fine for President to incite
Have you been living under a rock?
Al-Aulaqi v. Obama made kill lists for Americans legal.
If they are traitors and terrorists, he may have to send them to Guantanamo.
deleted by creator
That was yesterday.
Guess you missed Trump’s entire presidency.
While i agree with you, it’s a huge grey area. Like Biden could have trump assassinated and then claim that his constitutional duties require him to protect the cotus from enemies both foreign and domestic.
Official act or not?
deleted by creator
Please cite where in the ruling it says charges would be brought against him.
In fact, it would have to be the DoJ or Congress that did so - Biden could order the DoJ to stop, and arguably could have anyone in Congress killed or jailed without trial by stating that they presented a clear danger to democracy by trying to impeach him.
This is the sane and rational thing to do. Look forward to seeing what comes of it, keep fighting AOC!
Short of federal troops literally kicking down doors as oFFiCiAl aCtS it won’t happen. The Republicans want their dictatorship and they’re not going to vote against it.
AOC should team up with King Joe to make it happen.
Still. This wild “acting in the public’s interests” thing will get more progressives in positions to make such a thing even possible.
Why does Biden not simply EAT the Justices as an Official Presidential Act?
This one is from Omicron-Persei 8
Because eating poisonous animals is dangerous and we all know that Thomas and Kavanaugh have the most toxic blood possible while being able to pass as human from a medical point of view.
Removed by mod
She wont be able to do anything. The reason supreme court decided to move forward with this decision is because they are 100% confident that Trump will win presidency and republicans will control both the house and the Senate. After seeing Biden in the last debate, I believe they are right.
