I agree with the first sentence! I think that has to be independent of any electoral calculation. Even if they think picking fights will mobilize infinite cash from Musk and end their careers, they should be fucking picking fights.
We are the bad guys until we impose control over our lawless government and restore some semblance of virtue. We don't have to be the bad guys. We are responsible for ensuring that our government acts well.
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
Something that makes the motherfucker very unpopular. It's not like this administration is proceeding with caution. Something might break. At that moment, we've got to be very clear who the fuck broke it and how much justice and our national survival demand accountability.
I'm sympathetic to your perspective. But she could prove us fucking wrong. Maybe not about the Republican-lite campaign (from DNC onward), we all saw that. But about her character. I'd like that. I'm eager to rise in support of the People's Prosecutor.
Suppose the President and Vice President and Speaker of the House were impeached and removed. 1/
Under a somber President Chuck Grassley, there comes a change of leadership at DOJ, eager to restore rule of law, and to vigorously hold to account people who violated the law from positions of trust. 2/
With an assertive DOJ looking at violations in labor law, classified material handling, privacy law, etc, how many years of prison, how many dollars of fines would Elon Musk + his young minions, former cabinet secretaries + their deputies, other advisors and political appointees be liable for? /fin
impeach, convict, remove, rinse, repeat. impeach, convict, remove, rinse, repeat. impeach, convict, remove, rinse, repeat. impeach, convict, remove, rinse, repeat. impeach, convict, remove, rinse, repeat.
i find it a bit weird how little we hear from Kamala Harris or Joe Biden. Biden is old, i guess. but Harris could be at the rhetorical ramparts. i think it would help. the quiet of the people we supposed our leaders is devastating. thank you aoc, pritzker, bernie. more, more, more.
they’d be looking for returns from ingratiating the god emperor.
not long 'til blue states start making an official holiday of the ides of march.
I'd rather we engineered circumstances that render careerism irrelevant to people above a certain level in politics. But all that stuff seems like pipe dreams at the moment, dreaming of better pistons for the Titanic while it sinks.
Kamala getting a speaking gig was irrelevant, she hadn't done it then. But it plays into a sense that Democratic electeds are malleable careerists, not reliable fighters on "our" behalf. 1/
It's not fair that Trump gets to be an absolute self-dealing piece of shit openly, and his fans admire him for that while much of the D coalition would condemn and never vote for someone who played it that way. It's not fair but it's real. /fin
yes, certainly. these hypotheses are not mutually exclusive.
look. before i made the promise you advised me not to make the promise. so why are you acting like i'm doing something wrong if now i break the promise?
the marginal voter is not policy centered. the marginal voter has to be excited by the candidate on an emotional, "gut" level. 1/
the policy stuff sets a bias — the election was in a sense Kamala's to lose because her policies were more popular and policy-focused voters gave her a lead. 2/
but that lead was small. it always is — each party concedes the other party's position if it weighs them down too much. Trump became pretty close to pro-choice to neutralize the issue of abortion. 3/
policy differences create a bias towards one candidate or another, but usually a pretty small one. then the election is actually decided by enthusiasm, "vibes", "beer primares", "gut", emotion. 4/
that's the way our Presidential contests are structured. ask any campaign operative and they'll tell you it's the emotion stuff, not the policy stuff, that ultimately decides. 5/
perhaps we should restructure how we elect presidents, or the role of the presidency, all kinds of stuff. but here we are. /fin
no. they stay home. this election was lost not because more people voted for donald trump than previously, but because people who tend to vote for democrats if they vote shrugged instead.
all things are possible now in America.
why do voters mistrust Democrats? despite all the talk about bread and butter issues, why do many working class people feel like Democratic elected just don't get them, might sell them out without even knowing it? why do they find it hard to get excited and turn out? xcancel.com/Variety/stat...
Screenshot of tweet from Variety. "Former Vice President Kamala Harris has signed with CAA for representation in all areas, with a focus on speaking engagements and publishing."
"The United States has no need to 'partner' with Russia economically. But President Trump wants to partner with Putin’s Russia morally and politically—against Ukraine, and against liberal democracy. The…president is on Putin’s side." @billkristolbulwark.bsky.social www.thebulwark.com/i/157461733/...
The Cruelty Isn’t the Point. It’s the Pleasure.
Link Preview: The Cruelty Isn’t the Point. It’s the Pleasure.: Trump 2.0 is a shared sensual experience in hurting other people.
"Never underestimate the destructive power of stupidity." Or perfidy. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
Loading quoted Bluesky post...