this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2025
621 points (98.9% liked)

politics

19564 readers
1602 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 100 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Doesn't matter now. He's rapidly destroying the regulatory infrastructure and sending his brown shirts out to sow fear and confusion. He is a fascist, the rest of the Republican party are his enablers, and things are going to get super mega shitty before they get better.

If they get better.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 68 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

He’s rapidly destroying the regulatory infrastructure and sending his brown shirts out to sow fear and confusion.

It's literally the playbook from Bush's "Shock and Awe" campaign turned on US citizens (minus the indiscriminate bombing). It amounts to the same thing, though. It's a blitz, do so much so fast it sets everybody off balance and puts them in a state of shock.

Shock and awe (technically known as rapid dominance) is a military strategy based on the use of overwhelming power and spectacular displays of force to paralyze the enemy's perception of the battlefield and destroy their will to fight.

Project 2025 wants to shock people into obedience. The flurry of Executive Orders are part of this shock treatment, as are the deportations, and roadblocks suddenly thrown up in front of government agencies. They intend to shock us and cripple our ability to respond via governance.


EDIT: Turns out, Klein agrees.

Trump is a rolling shock machine, which a recipe for keeping us scattered and reactive to the latest shocking news. There will be moments when we need to react forcefully and meaningfully to protect one another.

[–] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It’s literally the playbook from Bush’s “Shock and Awe” campaign turned on US citizens (minus the indiscriminate bombing).

So far. I do not doubt that we are looking down the barrel of a return to the days when American citizens were bombed by their own government as they did in 1921 and 1985.

Oh yeah, the violence will come. After they've sufficiently shocked everyone into submission. The violence is to perpetuate the submission since shock wears off.

[–] rayyy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

His shock and awe may shock his violence prone brown headed Magas into pulling another 2nd amendment solution on him or his helpers - this time more successfully.

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Brown headed?

Really now.

[–] littlewonder@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

We talkin' about President Elon or his dick sucker, Donald?

[–] grue@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago (2 children)

He is a fascist, the rest of the Republican party are his enablers

The rest of the Republican party are his sycophants and subordinates. It's the "moderate" Democrats who are his enablers, through inaction.

[–] Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The Republicans have the majority in both the House and Senate. To do something, you need power first.

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Imagine winning an election and twiddling your fingers for 4 years straight

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Honest question: What should they have done, given the makeup of the House and Senate?

[–] grue@lemmy.world 27 points 2 days ago (1 children)
  1. Biden should've appointed an AG four years ago who would've actually been motivated to prosecute Trump with a sense of urgency, rather than sitting on his ass for two years before finally appointing a special prosecutor precisely and deliberately after the last moment. (Remember, Merrick Garland was only nominated for SCOTUS in the first place because Obama thought he was so conservative that not even Mitch McConnell could find an excuse to object. That should've made it obvious that he was exactly the wrong choice for AG.)

  2. Also four years ago (or two years ago, or six years ago, or any even-numbered years ago going back to at least before Bill Clinton's "third way" nonsense, if not the end of LBJ's "Great Society" programs or even the New Deal), the Democrats should've been running more economically-progressive candidates (e.g. Elizabeth Warran, AOC, etc.) instead of neoliberal pro-corporate toadies, so that they could have actually moved the needle on helping the working class instead of leaving them vulnerable to empty promises by fascist demagogues.
    To be very clear, I'm not saying that being socially-progressive was a mistake. In fact I will directly refute that: mainstream Democrats trying to scapegoat being too "woke" as the reason they lost are not only wrong, but lying. What I am saying is that the economic aspects of progressivism, not the social ones, are what would've actually made the difference.


As for what they should do now as opposed to in the past, other than "obstruct" I don't have a fucking clue because they've already comprehensively failed and it might very well be too late.