What exactly do you mean by “a vaccine mandate”? Holding someone down and jabbing them?
It’s only because you’re NBZ that I feel the need to ask.
For
Overpopulation? More welfare recipients?
I’m willing to see people forcibly jabbed, but I’ll settle for making it a requirement for employment.
That part was assumed.
So, that’s a yes on the forcible jabbings? How much force are we good with here? Sedating them if they fight too much? Jail time? Anything else?
I don’t think those would carry the day in this particular situation.
Well, to be fair, that is a higher bar than merely identifying them.
But what was she wearing?
1 Like
AOC’s response involves specifics and clearly-defined goals, not fucking poems. It’s unfortunate that it’s so refreshing to see a path of actions that aren’t just “vote harder” and “it’ll get worse if you don’t vote harder.”
7 Likes
-
i obviously just googled for something and this came up that included the tweets. i literally only glanced the tweets, i don’t read anything else on the site.
-
obviously, that’s exactly what i meant by the deeper iseas don’t fit on a bumper sticker.
-
exactly, there’s no consensus on the left what to do about the court. that’s why it’s important for biden not to try this by decree.
-
which of those idea wins out? or is even worth getting behind or jettisoning? like bringing number of justices and circuits to be equal. yeah it will increase scotus today, but it would make creation of new circuits more difficult in the future.
-
no, taking something seriously is not putting it on the back burner. in fact, wrto judicial reforms, doing something quickly has the almost exclusive record of bending the courts to the will of authoritarians. if you zoom out to judiciaries in the world, you’ll find forceful reforms without debate destroyed democratic movements in hungary, russia, turkey, even in the us you will find examples at state level and immigration courts.
-
ok i’ll be more careful at reposting links. as for my screenname, sorry it triggers you, although let me just point out that half the country believes clinton and pelosi are socialists. so i have grown to love that it can also be read that way, rather than eg supporting only aoc.
Yeah the problem is that the class identity of “capital owners” is powerful and self-asserting and it is difficult to generate a class identity in opposition to that other than by doing it through labor relations. Particularly since that class identity has to be powerful enough to cut across racial and cultural identities. The Democrats are trying to do it with being the party of the genteel educated, you know, uniting people with “In This House We Believe” signs basically, and that might even work for a while if it wasn’t for the fact that rural deplorables have a structural advantage in the US system. I think in the long term it is doomed to devolve back into serving the interests of capital owners, as in the Victorian era where the class of “good manners, well educated” was simply synonymous with the capital class.
There’s no consensus on the left on anything. But Biden is firmly against expanding the court.
Any/all of them. Anything beats the slow march towards a right wing theocratic ethnostate.
Lol this is the last chance to act and they passed on doing anything. They did some bullshit don’t rock the boat study.
it is not even close to the last chance to act. and that’s not what the study concluded at all, if you can say it concluded anything it would be who has the authority to act (it’s congress). so lining up ideas for which there’s at least a plurality of support is important. who cares what biden believes, it would be impossible for him to go out on a limb and veto his own party if it came to that.
again, i want scotus expansion as much as anything. but i don’t want it to come by simply increasing president’s and majority leader’s power, we will bd in for a world of hurt in the next conservative cycle. it’s authoritarian af, and we are going to run into an authoritarian power grabs from here on out.
i would explore ideas like, set timeframe for nomination and confirmation because running out the clock is dirty as fuck. i would welcome putting confirmations and/or impeachments and recalls on the public ballots. making recalls binding. but IANAL not a scholar. i’m just a guy on the internet who is pissed off but no actual constitutional understanding beyond talking on a forum. i am not qualified to recommend those changes
Putting confirmations, impeachments, and recalls for federal offices on public ballots will require a constitutional amendment.
i hear there’s a constitutional convention that can happen at any time
Yeah it pretty much is. Biden is going to be a one term president and the GOP is retaking the House at a minimum this year. They’ll likely get a trifecta after 2024, and voter suppression is getting cranked to 11. Never mind what they’ll do in states to avoid ever having to certify a Dem win again. This democracy hangs by a thread.
He’s the leader of the party, so…
You fail to recognize that the filibuster fundamentally works in the Republicans’ favor, and every cycle that goes by without nuking it is a gift to them.
Voter suppression was a lot worse at many points in the country’s past. Nothing about bad things happening means there isn’t an opportunity to make things better, for better things to happen.
Lol Republicans have the lead, they’re running out the clock, and three regs here want to go into the four corners offense for them to preserve future opportunities. Amazing!
