I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If Bernie actually got the presidency, his base would have abandoned him within 2 years.
Bernie would not have been able to implement his idealist utopia. Every step of the way, both Dems and Reps would have forced compromise. Whatever reached his desk to sign would have been so watered down that his fanatic progressive following would have thrown him under the bus like every other progressive hero to date.
I liked Bernie well enough, and would have preferred him to Hillary, because I thought he was a bit more electable. But he wasn't the homerun that people made him out to be, and I suspect he would have been largely ineffective if elected. Because in the end, it takes a lot more than strong principles and good intentions to make things happen in DC.
Yeah, the best case scenario was Biden not running for 2024 from the beginning so we could have proper primaries, and align behind the winner. That's how it should have been handled.
But it's too late. None of the candidates you mentioned are strong enough to rally behind this late in the race. Each state would need to figure out a makeshift primary and then align, or DNC would have to choose, which would make it Harris by default. It would be an absolute disaster.
A friend went through the army program starting at med school around 20 years ago. She just got her Oncology surgeon cert, which is ridiculously deep in the medical doctor qualifications.
Seems like the program was effective to me. She had to move around quite a bit, but she also got access to the best hospital programs.
I definitely was dubious about the entire idea of signing with the army, but it worked for her.
There wasn't a "dumb" one in that one. But there was massive hypocrisy from the GOP because Romney is the embodiment of the Elite, while they tirelessly touted Bush Jr as an everydayman ("dumb") while villifying the Elite.
I liked it. The guardian is awful. Like the huffington post. It's the other side of the coin from Fox News, etc. Lemmy just doesn't like being reminded that progressives have biased news sources too.
I don't always notice the source at first, so this was a good reminder.
It puts a magnifying glass on the people obstructing the fight against blatant corruption. Which is a good start, and really the only thing that can be done with a simple majority.
Biden could also just start assassinating the nay sayers until the point gets through, too.
We need a solution right now more than we need a perfect plan of execution.
I agree. But IMO, the proposed solutions don't have a chance in hell of being passed, because of the reality of needing a super majority. Either to impeach a SCOTUS judge, or to reform the SCOTUS rules.
And I think the messaging should focus on the need for a super majority to impeach these corrupt judges, as well as pass reform. The messaging should highlight the republican representatives refusing to cross the aisle to fight this blatant corruption.
And most importantly, highlight what can be done if voters give the Dems a super majority.
Yeah, it's not going to happen, but instead of AOC and Bernie just floating impossible ideas, we need to focus on how voters can give the Dems the power to actually fix these problems. And without that super majority, there is very little that can be done.
Because the current approach makes the Dems seem ineffective and only serves to disenfranchise voters, when we really need to put a fire under voters to put a fire under the Republican half of our government to either cross the aisle or GTFO.
I thought that eliminating the filibuster took a 3/5th vote in the senate. That's 60 votes. We are nowhere close, though I support holding it to a vote to put it on the record, to highlight the hypocrisy later.
They have the luxury of saying things should change without providing an actual plausible path to achieving that change.
AOC championed expanding SCOTUS without worrying about how it could actually be done, or what the consequences would be 10 years down the line.
Bernie does the same. His public statements frequently gloss over the massive hurdles that make such idealistic ideas implausible, like requiring a super majority which is functionally impossible in today's political climate.
To be fair, I do think that it's important that idealists voice how things could be in a political utopia, if they also include a pragmatic breakdown of what it would take.
However, virtue signaling in itself without acknowledging reality is also dangerous.
Lemmy is a perfect example of it. Lots of dissatisfaction with the status quo, and a whole lot of impossible ideas floating around like "there are obvious solutions that establishment politicians just refuse to consider", when they just aren't feasible.
Most people would design a very similar app if asked to design a weather app. Due diligence would be looking at existing apps in the space and making a decision on how much you want to deviate from the norm.
I once had to make an EPG for a TV app. EPGs are the channel schedules on any cable box interface.
It was stupidly complicated getting the navigation down solid. Took a long time. My boss asked at the end "this is great. Can we patent anything from it?"
Uh, no. Anyone with the same problem (navigating multiple channel schedules at once via arrow keys) is going to come up with something similar.
Same with weather apps. And Apple even has guidelines on app layouts for scrolling vs drilling down nested pages.
Seems like the AI did exactly what a human would do.
There's no time to step aside. Primaries are over. Trying to squeeze primaries in now would be a disaster.
The time for Biden to step aside was a year ago. And honestly, as much as I have liked his policy (excluding Isreal), and still trust his administration to execute on even if he's incapable of leading it himself, that debate was terrible for his campaign.
There are only two options now. Continue running himself and try to salvage the situation, or hand the reigns to Kamala. Neither is a good choice, campaign wise.
But I believe the concern, and the entire reason prosecutors are allowing the delay, is that all evidence from the time Trump was president has become "privileged" and now may need to be
individually approved as admissible.
This evidence was signing hush money checks while he was president, apparently.
The president cannot impeach them unilaterally, and is explicitly out of his power.
He could, however, potentially send them to a blacksite as a prisoner or conveniently kill them as part of that arrest. They could claim collusion with domestic terror groups, espionage, corruption, etc, as very plausible justification for arrest, and that would probably qualify as official duties, at least how this SCOTUS would classify the same actions if executed by a republican president.
Trump and his MAGA cult are a clear and present danger to our democracy and its citizens.
The SCOTUS is majority controlled by corrupt federalists openly colluding with lower courts and federalist donors to bypass our elected lawmakers (congress/senate/potus) to effectively unilaterally write policy. This is a clear and present danger to our democracy.
Biden has justification to clean house under official pretext.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If Bernie actually got the presidency, his base would have abandoned him within 2 years.
Bernie would not have been able to implement his idealist utopia. Every step of the way, both Dems and Reps would have forced compromise. Whatever reached his desk to sign would have been so watered down that his fanatic progressive following would have thrown him under the bus like every other progressive hero to date.
I liked Bernie well enough, and would have preferred him to Hillary, because I thought he was a bit more electable. But he wasn't the homerun that people made him out to be, and I suspect he would have been largely ineffective if elected. Because in the end, it takes a lot more than strong principles and good intentions to make things happen in DC.