this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2024
314 points (96.4% liked)

politics

19120 readers
3013 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Forty-four men have succeeded Washington so far. Some became titans; others finished their terms without distinction; a few ended their service to the nation in ignominy. But each of them knew that the day would come when it would be their duty and honor to return the presidency to the people.

All but one, that is.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 98 points 1 month ago (18 children)

the fact that trump happened in the first place, that the GOP stole the supreme court, that NO ONE is doing anything about the blatant broad daylight corruption of the supreme court, that election boards are allowed to be overtaken by blatantly partisan GOP operatives--it all shows how fragile this country always was, held together by some nebulous nowhere-defined "honor system"

which trump threw out the window forever

even if trump loses this november, some other bloviating GOP gasbag will take his place, and it's going to be the same story every election, until there are no more elections. this has been in the works for many years

[–] silence7 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The problem with the Supreme Court is that you need the Senate to be on board with any kind of action. Two approaches:

  • Add additional justices to make the Republicans there a minority. None of the Republicans is willing to vote for this, and nor are Manchin and Sinema, which would leave no more than 49/100 votes in favor of adding new ones. So you can't do it
  • Remove the crooks. This requires 67/100 votes. None of the Republicans is willing to vote for this, so you can't do it.

Making something meaningful happen here requires actually electing enough Democrats to the Senate to act.

[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I've always wondered why, if democrats could and did "pack the court," Republicans wouldn't do the same? The supreme court would end up bigger than the senate, and its composition would then always reflect the party in power. Seems like a pretty short-sighted solution. If you've got the senate numbers to pack the court, you've got the senate numbers to appoint a partisan nomination.

[–] silence7 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The Republicans might, but would have a much harder time being in a position to do so, since the Democrats would:

  • add PR and DC as states
  • Enable every American to vote every time
  • End state-level gerrymandering nationally
[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago
load more comments (16 replies)