Having problems registering on Coin Return? Please email support@coin-return.org, and include your PA username and PIN.
For those who don't know, forums.penny-arcade.com will be closing soon. However, we're doing the same kind of stuff over at coin-return.org with (almost) all the same faces! Please do feel welcome to join us.
For those who don't know, forums.penny-arcade.com will be closing soon. However, we're doing the same kind of stuff over at coin-return.org with (almost) all the same faces! Please do feel welcome to join us.
For those who don't know, forums.penny-arcade.com will be closing soon. However, we're doing the same kind of stuff over at coin-return.org with (almost) all the same faces! Please do feel welcome to join us.
For those who don't know, forums.penny-arcade.com will be closing soon. However, we're doing the same kind of stuff over at coin-return.org with (almost) all the same faces! Please do feel welcome to join us.

Let's Save the Democratic Party, Sponsored by Arby's

1717273747577»

Posts

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    Okay, just realized this isn't the Trump thread, and whether or not Trump can fire California or Canada doesn't really have much to do with saving the democratic party, so I'll drop it.

    Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?

    Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
  • AmberAmber Registered User regular
    Lanz wrote: »
    I do not think US State Sovereignty is going to stand up to federal overreach as well as say, French sovereignty would.

    Even if it’s not Trump marching in troops into California, they’ve demonstrated they’re more than willing to unilaterally fuck with federal money as it is, so they can readily just use that as their cudgel to enforce state obedience.

    it's straightforwardly illegal for the feds to financially coerce a state, but obviously you shouldn't bet on that case law holding up

  • useruser Registered User regular
    edited March 27
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Which is why I have zero confidence that the laws that say the fed doesn't get to influence state electoral processes will mean anything more to them than the laws that say you can't override the budget or dismantle a department with an EO. They have already been allowed to do things entirely outside the bounds of their authority. I still do not see why this would be any different.

    Okay, serious question that sounds dumb:

    Are you concerned that Trump is going to start firing people in the French government? Presumably no. Because how would that even work? He isn't going to not fire people in France because it's illegal, he's going to not fire people in France because there is no physical way for him to even do that.

    This is also what keeps him from firing people in state governments. Not that it's illegal, but because there's no meaningful way for him to do that. He has no more control over state governments than he does the French government. He could send in troops to try to enforce his will in California in the same way he could send troops into France, and then we have a war. But we're not there yet.

    Please take a look at the full-Fed attack on Maine for their governor deigning to stand up for the trans students in their state for a clear-eyed look at how, yes, in fact it is wholly possible for the Administration to impose their desires on a state that doesn't fall in line.

    edit to provide a summary video, if you want to nitpick sources then check it against whatever you wish https://youtu.be/RUM8zYH-0q8?si=VOvtDJwPW8LjHnxP

    user on
  • DrascinDrascin Registered User regular
    Far as I can tell, there are some serious sticks the federal government can use to force a state to comply with things even if officially they can’t order them to do so.

    Now, basically all of them are extremely illegal and deal significant damage to the entire connective tissue of the whole “United States” thing, and arguably cause a nonzero increase in the progress-towards-civil-war-o-meter, which is why they’re generally not an option. But Republicans have the advantage that since a lot of the people supposed to be enforcing the law and judicial decisions about how they can't do this are a bunch of pigs who are on their side they have to care a lot less about illegality (as I've said sometimes in threads about what to do about the police, if you have laws but you don't have people whose job it is to enforce those laws, you do not actually have laws, you have wishes - and, in this case, if the people who are supposed to enforce the laws are suborned by the people actively breaking the laws, you do not actually have people whose job is to enforce the laws), and they don’t actually care if they blow up the country - in fact, that’s probably a bonus, as far as they’re concerned.

    Oh, and they are also extremely stupid and perfectly willing to stick their fingers on the "fuck everything up" wall socket without even understanding it's an issue.

    So, overall, it's hard to not be worried!

    Steam ID: Right here.
  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    Like the 12 billion in healthcare funding we just cut.

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    Just to be clear, I never meant to imply that the fed has no avenues by which to fuck with states. Obviously they do.

    Anyway, last I'll say on that in here, the Save the Whales Dems thread.

    Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?

    Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
  • Death of RatsDeath of Rats Registered User regular
    I will point out that in order to save the Dems it is important to be honest with ourselves at what threat we are actually facing here, so if Trump can influence the state run elections seems perfectly in line with the goal of the thread from here.

    Like, if that's not addressed then the whole topic is pretty much wasted, doesn't matter what the Dems do if they don't play offense with voting rights.

    No I don't.
  • RatherDashingRatherDashing Registered User regular
    Yeah I definitely got off topic with some of my comments there, but in the end I do think it is a relevant point to what sort of actions the party needs to be taking now. Notably, that "win the 2026 elections" is not a viable strategy because without direct action being taken now, the chances that enough elections remain legitimate by 2026 to actually get Congress back are extremely slim. Democratic politicians who want to save the country need to be thinking in terms of what they can do now instead of thinking in terms of how they can make themselves electable.

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    I will point out that in order to save the Dems it is important to be honest with ourselves at what threat we are actually facing here, so if Trump can influence the state run elections seems perfectly in line with the goal of the thread from here.

    Like, if that's not addressed then the whole topic is pretty much wasted, doesn't matter what the Dems do if they don't play offense with voting rights.

    Yeah, that's absolutely fair.

    Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?

    Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
  • NobeardNobeard North Carolina: Failed StateRegistered User regular
    edited March 27
    It is a necessary assumption to even have this conversation that elections will happen and they will matter. It’s not certain that will happen, but it's not certain it won't either. This isn't naive optimism, just rational appraisal that we are in bugnut crazy times. Predicting the future is foolish, but we can predict potential futures, and one in which Republicans lose Congress and we can meaningfully stop Trump is plausible, IMO.

    The future in which it's war, soldiers and militia shooting each other, is also plausible, but that's a separate topic that violates forum rules and I wouldn't discuss it here in this publicly indexed forum anyway.

    Edit: I absolutely agree that this potential for violence is worth bringing up in context of motivating Democrats to stop sucking.

    Nobeard on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    Yeah, the entire premise of this thread is "elections continue to matter," with the caveat that Dems need to be proactively doing things to ensure that they actually do.

    Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?

    Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Yeah, the entire premise of this thread is "elections continue to matter," with the caveat that Dems need to be proactively doing things to ensure that they actually do.

    Do you mean at the state level? Because any state they can, they don’t need to.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    The Democrats need to come out vociferously against the Trump administration disappearing people and deporting them for engaging political speech they don't like.

    There's no "middle ground" for violating people's Constitutional rights - rights which apply to everyone here, not just US citizens.

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Yeah, the entire premise of this thread is "elections continue to matter," with the caveat that Dems need to be proactively doing things to ensure that they actually do.

    Do you mean at the state level? Because any state they can, they don’t need to.

    I'm not an expert on election law, but I do think there are things the fed can do to monkey around with elections. The extent to which they can do damage is, indeed, dependent on how much control Dems have, and so the bluest states are probably the least at risk. But I suspect in some of the purpler states, there may be some struggle to keep things running. And even in blue states, you're going to have red areas where maybe the folks handling elections are going to try to fuck things up.

    Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?

    Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited March 28
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    The Democrats need to come out vociferously against the Trump administration disappearing people and deporting them for engaging political speech they don't like.

    There's no "middle ground" for violating people's Constitutional rights - rights which apply to everyone here, not just US citizens.

    This morning a letter jointly-signed by a total of 10 senators and 18 House members has been published, demanding answers about the process by which the administration has been targeting students.
    “We are working very closely with Tufts University and local authorities to get answers. She is not charged with a crime. The fact that she was taken off the streets and we are not exactly sure of her location, is something that should be deeply concerning to everyone who cares about our rights of free speech," U. S. Rep. Katherine Clark, D, Mass. 5th District, said.

    Full text of letter available via NBC Boston

    Note: Neither Schumer or Jefferies are signatories.

    DarkPrimus on
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    The Democrats need to come out vociferously against the Trump administration disappearing people and deporting them for engaging political speech they don't like.

    There's no "middle ground" for violating people's Constitutional rights - rights which apply to everyone here, not just US citizens.

    This morning a letter jointly-signed by a total of 10 senators and 18 House members has been published, demanding answers about the process by which the administration has been targeting students.
    “We are working very closely with Tufts University and local authorities to get answers. She is not charged with a crime. The fact that she was taken off the streets and we are not exactly sure of her location, is something that should be deeply concerning to everyone who cares about our rights of free speech," U. S. Rep. Katherine Clark, D, Mass. 5th District, said.

    Full text of letter available via NBC Boston

    Note: Neither Schumer or Jefferies are signatories.

    Good, though I rather expect the administration's response will be a lot of wharrgarbl that boils down to "we don't gotta tell you ****", and the bipartisan response to that response will be a shrug and "well, we tried". :\

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    The Democrats need to come out vociferously against the Trump administration disappearing people and deporting them for engaging political speech they don't like.

    There's no "middle ground" for violating people's Constitutional rights - rights which apply to everyone here, not just US citizens.

    This morning a letter jointly-signed by a total of 10 senators and 18 House members has been published, demanding answers about the process by which the administration has been targeting students.
    “We are working very closely with Tufts University and local authorities to get answers. She is not charged with a crime. The fact that she was taken off the streets and we are not exactly sure of her location, is something that should be deeply concerning to everyone who cares about our rights of free speech," U. S. Rep. Katherine Clark, D, Mass. 5th District, said.

    Full text of letter available via NBC Boston

    Note: Neither Schumer or Jefferies are signatories.

    Good to see Schiff is on there. Disappointed that Padilla isn't.

    Time to poke Padilla again, I guess.

    Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?

    Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
  • USBPoetUSBPoet Stuck in the permafrost Chicago, ILRegistered User regular
    “We are working very closely with Tufts University and local authorities to get answers. She is not charged with a crime. The fact that she was taken off the streets and we are not exactly sure of her location, is something that should be deeply concerning to everyone who cares about our rights of free speech," U. S. Rep. Katherine Clark, D, Mass. 5th District, said.

    Full text of letter available via NBC Boston

    Note: Neither Schumer or Jefferies are signatories.


    No Duckworth or Durbin, of course. When will the IL Senators finally step down and let someone who's smarter and younger finally take the stage?

    bqujhi1171qx.png
  • KyouguKyougu Registered User regular
    Tim Walz is out there saying what a lot of us have been saying , that Democrats lost because they let conservatives define DEI, woke, and diversity.

    Explicitly says that Democrats should be leading on those issues.

  • useruser Registered User regular
    Why is it so few Dems signing onto that letter? Is the rest of the party Gestapo good actually, or is AIPAC just that insidious and pervasive that they're keeping mum out of their own naked self-interest?

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    user wrote: »
    Why is it so few Dems signing onto that letter? Is the rest of the party Gestapo good actually, or is AIPAC just that insidious and pervasive that they're keeping mum out of their own naked self-interest?

    The clock is ticking for everyone else to make a public statement, because remaining silent on the issue just means you don't give a damn, and that's unacceptable.

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    user wrote: »
    Why is it so few Dems signing onto that letter? Is the rest of the party Gestapo good actually, or is AIPAC just that insidious and pervasive that they're keeping mum out of their own naked self-interest?

    I can see some people not wanting to make waves, but not 40 members of the Senate and 200 members of the House. I would wager someone wanted to get this out ASAP and just didn't have time to collected hundreds of signatures so they went with a few high profile names and whoever was quickly accessible.

    I agree more names would be better, and other people need to get on board, but this isn't a case that anyone whose name isn't on that list of 28 thinks Trump is totes great.

    Would you say I had a plethora of pinatas?

    Legos are cool, MOCs are cool, check me out on Rebrickable!
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Kyougu wrote: »
    Tim Walz is out there saying what a lot of us have been saying , that Democrats lost because they let conservatives define DEI, woke, and diversity.

    Explicitly says that Democrats should be leading on those issues.

    hmmm I think its probably too soon to conclude that "please dont hit us" is an ineffective strategy

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.