TechyDad @ TechyDad @lemmy.world

Posts

3

Comments

1,018

Joined

2 yr. ago

I think it would balance out because those idiots might be more numerous, but they would have less power. So maybe a few Representatives would be looney, but they wouldn't be able to get much done against the even larger ranks of sane members.

I feel like the biggest chance we had to change was after Sandy Hook Elementary. There were 26 dead kids and teachers. This should have been the moment that kickstarted a discussion and movement on gun control legislation.

Instead, we got a lot of "thoughts and prayers" and politicians (along with groups like the NRA) killing any gun control efforts. And that's not even getting into guys like Alex Jones spreading conspiracy theories and harassing grieving families while saying that they were lying about their kids being dead. (I really hope Jones fails at hiding his money, gets every last dime seized by the families that won lawsuits against him, and ends up penniless.)

I think it's more of a case of the dog chasing the car but having no clue what to do when it catches the car.

For example, Dobbs repealing Roe vs Wade. The right won. Abortion could be banned. The dog has the car's bumper firmly in its mouth. Now what?

Some Republicans said it should be left up to the states. Some said that they wanted a national law. Some said ban abortion at 15 weeks. Some said 6 weeks. Some said, don't charge the women. Some said arrest any woman whose pregnancy doesn't end with a baby and try her for murder unless she can prove it wasn't her doing.

The dog caught the car but suddenly had no clue what to do.

If the Republicans catch the "Christian nation car," they'll likely be similarly splintered. Some might want to respect our religions even though Christianity would be favored. Others would want to force everyone to convert or else. The former might wind up being just a codification of current society (which absolutely prioritizes Christianity over all others) into law, but the latter would be horrific for anyone not in the favored religious group. I'm not sure where that "dog catches car" would end up, but I don't want to find out.

And we didn't even say that the right had "Obama Derangement Syndrome" even though they were clearly deranged by a black guy being in the Oval Office.

Heck, Obama has been out of office for almost 7 years now (this January) and the right STILL brings up Obama.

For a way too large group, his being unhinged bigoted rants are a selling point, not a liability.

For way too many others, they don't care about his unhinged rants because he's pledging to hurt OTHER people, not them.

The former are bad, but aren't enough to sweep Trump into power. The latter, though, could help Trump attain power and then will act shocked when they get targeted.

Steven Cheung, a Trump campaign spokesperson, responded to the backlash by calling critics “snowflakes” and promising that “their existence will be crushed” by Trump. In a statement to The Washington Post, Cheung said: “Those who try to make that ridiculous assertion are clearly snowflakes grasping for anything because they are suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome and their entire existence will be crushed when President Trump returns to the White House.”

Cheung later clarified to The Post that he meant to say their “sad, miserable existence” rather than their “entire existence.”

Oh, that's much better. Thanks for the clarification!

In all seriousness, though, it's never a good sign when the clarification of a candidate going Hitler is to double down on the Hitler. There are going to be scary times ahead if Trump is allowed anywhere near the White House again.

Here's a paywall free link: https://archive.ph/POh4K

Set aside for the moment that the Founding Fathers absolutely wanted there to be a separation between church and state because they had just come from a land (England) where the ruler (the King) was the leader of the church (Church of England) and where they saw the abuses this caused.

Would Johnson and all the other "no separation" folks really be fine with the government meddling with their faith? After all, if there's no separation between church and state then not only can the church influence the state, but the state can influence the church. Get rid of the separation and the federal government could decide which holidays you observe and in which ways. It could proclaim what the contents of the prayer books are and when/how you pray.

Would they be fine with all this?

Of course, they assume that they will be writing the rules, but would they accept it if someone else was? Perhaps I, a Jew, would declare that they can't eat pig products. (In reality, I'd never impose my religious beliefs on others, but let's say I did hypothetically speaking.) Perhaps a Muslim Government Religious Committee Member would add a few rules. As would a Buddhist. Heck, let's get atheists and satanists involved as well. I'm sure they would love to write some "religious rules" that the Christians nationalists would need to follow. Would Johnson and company happily go along with this because "no separation between church and state?"

Plus, do you know who wins hangs around labs? SCIENTISTS!!!

Now, if this was church grown meat...

The "one vote to vote to eject the Speaker" rule is still in play.

By "pull a McCarthy," I meant vote to kick him out because he worked with the Democrats to keep the government open. It sounds like the Freedom Caucus isn't going to kick Johnson out for this.

Exactly. If you're I'm not happy that people in your party are copying Nazis, but refuse to denounce them, guess what? You're a Nazi also. Maybe you're a Nazi who is willing to oppose this in as mild a manner as possible that doesn't lose you political power, but that's not really a good distinction.

They're going to vote against it, but won't "pull a McCarthy" on Johnson over it.

During the last shutdown threat (the one that resulted in McCarthy working with Democrats to kick the can down the road and ended with McCarthy kicked out), the Senate put forward a proposal that I think could end all this. If a budget isn't agreed upon, then current spending levels remain in place until a new budget is agreed upon.

In other words, say an agency gets $100,000 a month. Right now, if there is no budget, the government shuts down and the agency gets $0. WTH the proposal, though, the agency would keep getting $100,000 until something else was agreed upon.

This would take "government shutdown" off the table. Members of Congress couldn't sabotage the government by refusing to enact a budget. The best they could do is freeze all spending at current levels.

It's the Trump candidacy, presidency, and aftermath were a TV series, we'd be yelling at the writers to make it more realistic.

Trump’s lawyers also showed a slide claiming the Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas is 64 stories. But an architectural drawing shows it likely has fewer levels because the floor numbers jump from eight to 16.

We can do that? Okay. My house is actually five stories. I've labeled the ground floor 1 and the upper story 5.

For tax purposes, though, the ground floor is -1 and the upper floor is 0 so it's a zero story house.

They get paid AFTER the federal government reopens. Until then, they need to go without pay. Unfortunately, they can't just "shut down" their bills. They still need to pay for food, housing, medical expenses, etc. The lender on their auto loan won't accept "I can't pay because my paychecks are being held up" as an excuse for non-payment.

How long would you be able to survive if your job required you to keep working, but didn't pay you for an indeterminate period of time? I'm lucky and could probably go for about 6 months before things got really hairy, but many people aren't as well off as I am (and I'm not even that well off to be honest).

For people living paycheck to paycheck, having to do without pay for who-knows-how-long, this could be financially disastrous.

I can just imagine him trying this.

Trump's lawyers appear in court: "We're saddened to announce that our client passed away last night. He died peacefully in his sleep and..."

Bing

Prosecutor: "Um, your honor? The 'late' Donald Trump just posted on Truth Social. 'I'm very much alive and in much better shape than crooked Joe Biden. My lawyers are going to argue that I'm dead to stop this WITCH HUNT and ensure that we can MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!'"

Trump's lawyers: "That was likely a pre-scheduled post."

Prosecutor (continuing to read): "This is not a pre-scheduled post."

Trump's lawyers: "President Trump wouldn't fake his death just to avoid charges. That's not who he is."

Prosecutor (continuing to read): "I would ABSOLUTELY fake my own death to avoid charges. This is exactly who I am."

(And, yes, I channeled a certain Austin Powers scene when imagining this.)

"Just remember, what you are seeing and what you are reading is not what's happening."

-

While I hope you're right, we also can't get complacent. I remember thinking Trump had no chance in 2016 also.

Slightly. Trump seems to be ramping up the rhetoric. He's getting more and more comfortable emulating Nazi speech. And each step along the way, the media normalizes it by reporting "oh, that wacky Trump said something crazy again!"

At this rate, he'll be posting in September 2024 about a final solution to rid this country of his political enemies and all Jews and the NYT will report "Trump Puts Forward Plan To Unite Washington."