this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2023
452 points (97.1% liked)

World News

32347 readers
127 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Spacebar 41 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Vote! Encourage those around you to vote. Help drive someone to the polls. If you know a young person who's never voted, get them to vote.

Don't care who they vote for, just get them to the ballot box.

The more people vote, the better things turn out for the majority.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

I know this will likely upset many Dems but:

Dems have the Senate and the Presidency and are completely within their power to pack the Supreme Court and basically alter all of the terrible rulings the Supreme Court has made lately. The problem is that many Dems do not think it is worth packing the court for women, students, or the environment. You can't just vote your way out of this as you would literally have to pack up and move to West Virginia to vote for a Senator who would be ultimately determining this.

The system is ultimately flawed and just voting isn't enough.

Addition after some research:

It looks like the Supreme Court is set in size by law and FDR had some of the same problems so it would be likely that this would take an act of congress and not just the Senate.

Ultimately I feel this is certainly more difficult and makes my criticism of inaction now invalid as Dems do not hold enough of a majority to pass legislation; however I do still see them as responsible for inaction when majorities have been held throughout my lifetime.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

A) They need 50 senators willing to entertain that notion. They only have 49. B) If there were one action that I think would be most likely to kick off Civil War 2, it would be packing the court.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

That's a very selective way of saying the Dems aren't responsible because Dems wont support students, the environment, or women's rights.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Civil War 2 is already happening, you must not be paying attention.

It's time to rip off the fucking band-aid and do something about it instead of letting the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters, and others run around terrorizing the country through wanton violence and death.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

With that being said, you’re also correct that voting is NOT enough. Protesting and direct action, mutual aid, and more are all required!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They are not completely within their power to pack the court, sadly. They would have done so already if this were the case. They need 60 in the senate as well as a majority in the house and the presidency. Then they could.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I like how when Democrats are in power, they're unable to do anything...

But when Republicans are in power, they break the law at lightning speed, do things they're not supposed to do, and nobody stops them because actually the only thing staying in their way are "rules" and "decorum" and not "laws" and yet mysteriously the Democrats are always beholden to "laws" that prevent them from doing the same. Also it seems like Democrats hands are tied at actually bringing criminal charges against Republicans because that would be "partisan."^1 Just look at how they've slow-walked Trump's prosecution and only went for it when it became clear he would never comply.

It's a fucking farce.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Voting put three justices in-place with last president.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Yeah 3 million fewer votes too. Just vote your way out of an oligarchy guys! The ruling class totally will let you and wont gerrymander or make constitutional amendments to give term limits to only Presidents...

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Wouldn't the Rs just do the same thing next time they have power? I get what you're saying, but isn't setting that precedent dangerous?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're saying that as if the Rs won't do the same thing anyway without prior provocation. They've literally already broken the law to pack the court and the Democrats sat on their hands. They denied Obama picking a justice because it was "too close to an election" when the election was like six months away, but let Trump pick one when an election was already underway.

Take off the fucking blinders, the Republicans already do these kind of things.

They already set the precedent, motherfucker.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Republicans are channeling full fucking fascism and you think the only thing keeping them from packing the already packed republican court is because Dems haven't done it first?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yes- the court is an illegitimate anti-democratic institution and the long-term goal should be its abolishment.

It is the final tool of the American oligarchs to prevent needed structural change in the country.

Anything to highlight this is a good thing. Playing ping-pong with court expansion would be great to accelerate its necessary demise.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

R's don't care about precedent. That's why they actually get what they want. If Democrats actually got things done, they would consistently win elections and it would be be an issue anyway.

It's not going to happen anyway, though.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Of course it upsets the Dems knowing that they're on the only side that has to govern well and we honest.

But the alternative is for our side to be as much of a malignant tumor on the country as the other side is.

I'll take this version of the Democratic party, despite the fact the Republicans are trying to destroy the US and rebuild it in their own image.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Our side?

I'm sorry, I don't side with oligarchs.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don’t side with oligarchs.

Joe Manchin sure does. Nancy Pelosi sure does. Chuck Schumer sure does.

Oopsie poopsie.

EDIT: I triggered some Democrats by reminding them that the same hands that feed the Republicans feed the Democrats, apparently. Get over yourselves.

In Nancy's Own Fucking Words

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Gotta make sure your investments are safe by being a member of congress.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Without a socialist party (as in, completely purged and free of all bourgeois influence), there's isn't a whole lot worth voting for at the federal level. Democrats repeatedly show that they are incapable of resisting the Republicans and take L's constantly (see here).

I encourage everyone to instead organize with local political orgs that can eventually build this power. The DSA being the largest currently available (and just as flawed as the other options one may have, ofc)

[–] Spacebar 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you don't feel it's worth keeping as many Rs out of Federal roles, then no amount of examples are going to change your mind.

You can't ignore the federal level because the Dems aren't liberal enough.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Here's an example. More Rs can make it a whole lot more difficult to organize any counter movements, labor, political or otherwise.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your see here link is empty and you accidentally double-posted this comment, friend.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah just fixed that, "see here" was meant to refer to this student debt situation in the OP

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Damn, I was hoping for a well documented compendium of Democrat L's that have been taken because they're too cowardly to stand up for their constituents.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

(in case anyone wants a summary off the top of my head)

  • Failed to protect gay marriage (until the Supreme Court stepped in and did it for them, could be easily reversed any time by those dipshits)
  • Failed to protect abortion rights (left it to the Supreme Court, and here we are)
  • Failed to abolish any student debt
  • Failed to reduce wealth inequality by any meaningful measure.
  • Failed to promote a peaceful foreign policy (Obama and Biden)
  • Failed to implement card check
  • Failed to win elections with obvious unforced errors like running Hillary Clinton, probably the only political figure more despised than Donald Trump.
  • Failed to deschedule marijuana, and other drugs that aren't particularly harmful
  • Failed to meaningfully reduce healthcare costs, instead implementing a rebranded "Romneycare" access to insurance reform.