Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[hector13]

Max having an opinion on what was on-topic in the thread is derailing the thread?

You’ve got no obligation to engage with him, you know. There’s also the ignore list in your profile if you feel that strongly about it.

Democrats should be using this time to push the idea that Trump will be using this decision to protect himself from prosecution if elected again, not trying to force out their own candidate because he had one bad showing at a debate and have no heir-apparent to step in to the void.

If Trump isn’t president, it won’t be a problem.

[femmelf]

The derail is flatly just telling everyone they're wrong, they're lying or they're being lied to with 0 proof while ignoring everything. It is when an opinion leads to taking over the thread, driving people out, shouting down any other opinion as conspiracy theory lies despite having multiple respectable sources and doing that. I didn't even know there was an ignore list here. Now that I know, I'll take your advice.
Thank you.

[Frumple]

Yeah, buddies/ignore list in the profile. It's helpful for folks you've found are consistently kinda' miserable posters. It's trivial to press the button to see what they're saying if you actually want to try to engage that day, or it's a thread subject they're less shit on, but it's nice as, at a minimum, a reminder that's probably not going to make your day or the discussion better.

[Folly]

An important part of civil discourse is acknowledging that you won't always be able to persuade everyone to your own way of thinking. People will do their best to present their views in a way that is clear and convincing, but ultimately we have to be prepared to let other people have their own way of looking at the world.

And maybe sometimes try to see things from their point of view. Even if you disagree, understanding where they are coming from might help you get through to them.

[feelotraveller]

If Trump isn’t president, it won’t be a problem.

I think that's very short-sighted.  Sure if Trump loses, and stays loser despite the incessant and potentially violent shenanigans, there won't be a problem next year.  But it's a problem just waiting to happen in 5 or 9, or whatever, years time when another hardcore shithead does become president.  (A loaded gun lying there, if you will, just waiting for someone to pick it up.)

I think the problem with the Democrats is a reflection of the negativity of current politics.* They are united by their opposition to the gingerbread man and their response is about finding someone who people aren't so opposed to.  The current motivation for voters is to say who will not get elected rather than who will.  Democracy as we know it is about getting rid of bad leaders rather than selecting good ones, or more exactly, electing the lesser of two evils, from a forced choice of two bad to worse options.


*This is also a response to your question from the bunker thread, people didn't vote for labour they voted the tories out.

[Lord Shonus]

If Trump isn’t president, it won’t be a problem.

I think that's very short-sighted.  Sure if Trump loses, and stays loser despite the incessant and potentially violent shenanigans, there won't be a problem next year.  But it's a problem just waiting to happen in 5 or 9, or whatever, years time when another hardcore shithead does become president.  (A loaded gun lying there, if you will, just waiting for someone to pick it up.)

Decisions like this generally get eroded pretty quickly, because it's genuinely badly written. As long as Trump loses in November, it is nearly certain that this decision will be "clarified" into irrelevance before it ever comes up again. Remember that only twice in more than 25 decades has the "can we prosecute the President" ever come up.

[Folly]

I think the problem with the Democrats is a reflection of the negativity of current politics.* They are united by their opposition to the gingerbread man and their response is about finding someone who people aren't so opposed to.  The current motivation for voters is to say who will not get elected rather than who will.  Democracy as we know it is about getting rid of bad leaders rather than selecting good ones, or more exactly, electing the lesser of two evils, from a forced choice of two bad to worse options.

Once again, I believe it all comes back to Big Money.
Democrats don't want to force the public to choose between bad and worse, neither do Republicans. But giving people a better option would mean campaigning, which costs a lot of money. And the people/groups who have the money don't see any incentive to invest in a new candidate, when they already have two terrible candidates on very short leashes.

[Maximum Spin]

Once again, I believe it all comes back to Big Money.
Democrats don't want to force the public to choose between bad and worse, neither do Republicans. But giving people a better option would mean campaigning, which costs a lot of money. And the people/groups who have the money don't see any incentive to invest in a new candidate, when they already have two terrible candidates on very short leashes.

I don't think this is entirely true. I'm hearing that a lot of the people who have the money are pulling out of the Biden campaign because they don't see him as electable anymore, but instead of investing in a new candidate, they're focusing on down-ballot races instead. That probably implies they wouldn't mind investing in a new candidate if they thought there was one with a good chance.

[feelotraveller]

If Trump isn’t president, it won’t be a problem.

I think that's very short-sighted.  Sure if Trump loses, and stays loser despite the incessant and potentially violent shenanigans, there won't be a problem next year.  But it's a problem just waiting to happen in 5 or 9, or whatever, years time when another hardcore shithead does become president.  (A loaded gun lying there, if you will, just waiting for someone to pick it up.)

Decisions like this generally get eroded pretty quickly, because it's genuinely badly written. As long as Trump loses in November, it is nearly certain that this decision will be "clarified" into irrelevance before it ever comes up again. Remember that only twice in more than 25 decades has the "can we prosecute the President" ever come up.

Oh, it is different from my country then.  Here it needs an actual case to be judged and then appealed (specifically, one that tries to invoke presidential immunity)  to get to the equivalent of the SCOTUS. There may be additional steps. Which means someone attempting to exercise that power before any clarification can happen.  And my unstated assumption is that Biden, at least, won't try to invoke it.  (Although I guess Trump attempting to invoke it for all the cases he is currently embroiled in may do that...?)

Separately - and yeah weird machinery/structure of the world we live in that I would give airtime to this and him - John Brennan the ex-CIA director had something to say about this.  Make of it what you will:
I've worked for six presidents. Here's what upsets me most about the immunity ruling.

[Maximum Spin]

Oh, it is different from my country then.  Here it needs an actual case to be judged and then appealed (specifically, one that tries to invoke presidential immunity)  to get to the equivalent of the SCOTUS. There may be additional steps. Which means someone attempting to exercise that power before any clarification can happen.  And my unstated assumption is that Biden, at least, won't try to invoke it.  (Although I guess Trump attempting to invoke it for all the cases he is currently embroiled in may do that...?)

That's how it would work here as well.

[Folly]

the things they're saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Anything they do, I wish them luck.

 

[nenjin]

Iiiiiinnnnnnnteresting.

[StrawBarrel]

Rep. Adam Smith calls on Biden to drop out of the race
https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/08/politics/video/the-lead-adam-smith-president-biden-race-drop-out-democrats-jake-tapper

It seems like there is a fair amount of division on who should run for president. It will be interesting to see who it develops.
Biden gives closely watched speech at NATO summit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccMB2KvGQ44

Nothing special with this speech from Biden in my opinion. I suppose the good news is that Biden looks relatively normal. The highlight for me was the end when the guy gets the medal at the end. That was a nice surprise.
edit july 9

The President has the power to issue orders to the executive branch, but he cannot legally order the FBI, the Secret Service, or even the military to arrest Congress and prevent them from meeting, because that would be interfering with the powers of a coequal branch of government. If a President did that, the people receiving those orders would be legally obligated to refuse to follow them, and the courts would uphold that obligation. This applies no matter what the reason for arresting Congress may be, even if the President believes that Congress are committing crimes or acting in bad faith. It's not up to him to decide, it's up to the voters.

Except, now they can.

President declares Congress meeting is an act of sedition and treason.
President states that defending the United States from sedition and treason is a "core power."
President orders the FBI, Secret Service and Military to arrest Congress.
Both refuse.
President removes all the heads of the FBI and Secret Service (the military already serves at the pleasure of the President) and appoints his own immediately. (Thanks to the rule change Trump did right before leaving office that allows him to reclassify 80% of Federal employees and move them to a group that he has the privilege of appointing or dismissing.)
New heads of the FBI, Secret Service or any other agency immediately do as the President demands, thereby setting the precedent that these agencies can be directly ordered by the President to do what they want.
Everyone sues the President.
The President says "the undefined scope of "core powers" means this is within my official duties, and therefore has presumptive immunity, and you cannot use the facts of what I did in my official duties to make the case for criminally or constitutionally violating the law."
Everyone eats shit.

You keep talking about what "was." Start thinking about what is.

Very well put. Those are the dangers of having the president be above the law. The Republican party is paving the path towards fascism.
Yeah the conservative supreme court has been so damaging the US.

[ggamer]

I've been talking about the supreme court stuff with family and a couple comrades. For my money if the District Court decides that the actions Donald Trump took to ferment insurrection are Official Action, the clock to begin organizing and prepping to paint the town red starts at T minus four years, maybe even less. Opening the door for any president to be legally allowed to use the government as a tool to commit high treason would be the last straw. That's the only thing I have to say on the topic.

Nothing surprises me about the Biden debacle. Democratic leadership does not wish to run a primary for a new candidate, because once Biden croaks they know Harris will double down on the Gaza Genocide, and the defense industry in America has become so bloated that we need to constantly feed it profit or that whole sector of the economy is going to collapse down to a much less project-our-imperial-power-globally form. This is intolerable for any current American politican that claims membership in either party, because they know we've stolen from the rest of the world and they're ready to get it back in blood. The rest of the dross learned in high school civics that incumbents tend to win more elections, and are currently allowing leadership to convince them that rather than this being a statistical tendency it's actual literal campaign & election law. They will eat this up because the alternative is caring about politics and they will never care when they don't need to change a world that suits them. That is why it's hilarious to call AOC and Sanders socialists; At their most radical AOC is  very slightly center left and believes that implementing social protections for minorities will remedy society's ills, and Sanders is a classic Liberal Democrat who would be perfectly happy if we returned to the Imperialist superpower we were in the 50's pre-segregation. The overton window has shifted so far to the right in the past 40 - 50 years that merely advocating for capitalist labor unions marks you as a dangerous far left radical to any modern administration, when 50 years ago this would be the most moderate possible issue in any platform.

The platform of the two parties for the past fifty years has been thus: the Republicans shift the lens of political discourse to the right, and the Democrats enable and allow them to while complaining loudly about how it isn't fair (because no one will fight to change a world that suits them). The reason people are catching it now is because the masks are coming off.

[Lord Shonus]

Ignoring that the entire "Biden must step down" thing was largely manufactured, the primary reason not to have Biden step down is that if he leaves the race for any reason except possibly death it will be taken by the electorate as proof of weakness. Which would hand Trump the election on a silver platter. There's no need to manufacture crises to "feed the defense industry profit" - besides needing to buy huge quantities of material to replace that sent to an ally fighting the largest shooting war in Europe since 1945, a huge portion of America's military is aging and badly in need of replacement. Many of our aircraft are approaching "the wings might fall off" stage, and large portions of our naval fleet is in similar straits. Merely replacing the worn out and obsolescent equipment in service is enough to keep the defense industry going for the rest of the century - a big problem the US is facing is that our defense industry is too small to meet the needs of our military even in normal operation, not that we need to manufacture reasons to feed a "bloated" industry.