A conservative plan for Donald Trump’s potential transition into the presidency calls for dozens of prisoners to be executed, according to HuffPost. An 887-page plan by Project 2025, led by the ultra-conservative Heritage Foundation, says that if elected, Trump should make a concerted effort to execute the remaining 40 prisoners on death row. The section’s author, attorney Gene Hamilton, advised that Trump “do everything possible to obtain finality” on the current list of people until Congress forces them to stop. Hamilton is the vice president of America Legal First, a group of former Trump lawyers bent on attacking “woke” companies, headed by Stephen Miller. Trump’s approach to the death penalty stands in stark contrast to that of President Joe Biden, who has openly opposed the death penalty, but done little to move forward legislation to reform or abolish the practice since entering office.
For those of you not in the know Project 2025 is Republicans plan to turn the USA into an authoritarian state.
They are even sicker than most people imagine.
Remember this when certain bad actors post their propaganda here about how bad Biden will be for a second term. Remind them of this when they post that bullshit.
Call them out.
And vote for your lives.
They want blood. No matter the route. If I can ask anything of my fellow liberals is that you arm yourselfs. I’m not saying we take to the streets with weapons. I’m saying we should all be prepared for the absolute insanity that may ensue if he actually wins
There will be insanity if he’s allowed to run at all.
There should be no way for people to participate in a democracy they have attempted to overthrow, and these fuckers are absolutely going to try again. It will be a shitshow. I hope the US justice system comes through, but it will be a very dangerous time for America if Trump and his cronies are not prosecuted for their crimes before the next election.
I have some bad news.
Even if Trump gets prosecuted for 1/6 before the election, there is ZERO chance it’s completed before the election. There will be appeals carrying it on for YEARS.
That being said too, there’s nothing in the charges that would disqualify him on conviction. There SHOULD BE, but there isn’t.
Ideally I’d like to see Congress get their shit together and get a Constitutional amendment that says “Convicted felons are inelligible”.
That would solve the problem right there. Convict him in the Stormy Daniels case, problem solved.
No, I don’t think it would be good to strip felons of their ability to be president. People who protest too hard can get felonies. People who steal too many diapers and infant formula for their kids ($2k worth, which is lower threshold every year due to inflation) can get felonies. The felony system is deeply corrupt. We should restore felon’s right to vote.
We need to fix the issues that elect someone deeply unpopular like Trump in the first place - like gerrymandering and uneven delegates. A vote should just be a vote. We should have approval voting (similar to ranked choice). More fascism isn’t the answer.
Word? Do tell, what will happen if you don’t get your way? Make sure it’s actual information, per rule #4, misinformation is a bannable offense.
When the nazis came to power, they forcibly took away the guns of their victims. They’d send a squad of SS to your house, surround it, and force you to give up the gun. If you didn’t, they’d kill you, if you did, they still got you in the end.
Some of their victims hid, refused to give up their arms, and fought back. They didn’t survive.
If guns were the answer to dealing with fascism and authoritarianism, germany never would have had the holocaust.
Yeah, it’s a fucking joke to assume that guns are a hedge against fascism. They’ll take your guns or shoot you. Maybe there’s some protection in being an organised group in the moment, but if they want to get you they’ll get you.
Ruby ridge.
Whilst members of the Weaver family were illegally killed by the government at Ruby Ridge, what’s less known is that Randy Weaver was hanging out with people from the Aryan Nation movement, and a believer in the Posse Comitatus theory of law.
It was White Nationalists that later erased these facts to promote the Weaver’s story as they (rightly) believed it would inspire others into their life style.
Timothy McVeigh cited the story as one of the reasons for his bombing of a federal government building and its daycare centre.
Oh I certainly wasn’t defending him or the white supremacist community he was a part of.
I was also tempted to mention Wako and the Davidians.
My point was, no matter how many guns you have, the machine will always win in a gun fight.
The first thing the nazis did, was purge the bureaucracy. Taking away guns was no concern, at all.
Privately owned guns played no significant role in the nazis’ rise to or hold on power. Anything else is simply marketing by american gun sellers.
Some of their victims hid, refused to give up their arms, and fought back. They didn’t survive.
About 10-15,000 jewish germans survived the holocaust by going underground in Germany. They were colloquially called U-Boote or Illegale. Of course, that has nothing to do with guns. Guns were, after all, handed out to any able-bodied male.
If guns were the answer to dealing with fascism and authoritarianism, germany never would have had the holocaust.
That is only partly true. Germans are only a small fraction of holocaust victims (<5%). The victims overwhelmingly came from eastern Europe, particularly Poland and the Soviet Union. The holocaust happened in the wake of the advancing Wehrmacht. A more far-sighted response to german war preparations would have made a difference. A lesson one must bear in mind in today’s world.
execute death row inmates
= arm yourselves!
Americans are so silly, you’ll never outgun the US military
You ever heard of guerilla tactics? An authoritarian army doesn’t need to be out gunned to have a really bad time
Really… we’re doing this stupid chit again?
This is actually the incarnation of “Defending the Free State” IMO. To be clear, the right to bear arms does not mean you get to attack and overthrow the government, but to defend yourself (along with other states) against any state trying to impose tyranny. The federalist papers posited this (no they’re not law, and they certainly have other issues) and IMO it makes sense, even if it is a view shaped in a time that no longer exists.
Late edit: you don’t get to attack and overthrow the government because you find some policy inconvenient or irritating personally. Tyranny I think is pretty specific, and has nothing to do with government trying to push things like saving life on earth, incentivizing electric vehicles, someone asking for a different name than their birth gender, or trying to protect kids and everyone else from random or other actors with firearms intent on mass death.
Look, can we just collectively agree – all of us who are left of center – to work together and set our differences aside until after this election? Now really isn’t the time for us to be divided. We need to first curb stomp the fascists, so we don’t all get killed
The far left calls anyone right of far left- fascists… so no, they have no intention to work together. They’re so far left that they’ve completely circled around into right wing lunacy.
No they haven’t, and you’re likely just one of them new Russian AI disinformation bots anyway
Ah yes, they’re so intense about fighting capitalist oppression they’ve circled around to… checks notes defending police brutality and advocating for the further privatisation of every public good and dismantling all worker protections.
The difference between “eat the rich” and “feed the rich” is really just one syllable, right? Almost negligible.
(Also, no, they don’t call everyone fascist. They just don’t think being liberal is enough for change, when the “liberals” of the US have a history of complaining about the things they don’t stop the regressives from doing. There’s a difference between calling people “naive and spineless” and “actively pursuing oppression”.)
I will say that there is a marked and growing distain for mixed liberal ideologies. There is a lot of this idea that every socialist needs to be some kind of pure strain to count or take basically the Marxist definition as the only viable one. It kind of ignores a couple of centuries of Socialist thought. A lot of people basically think “means of production” means nothing less than everyone working in a co-op and discounts a lot of past socialist wins as “not socialism”. It’s an important thing to remember about Marx, the world he lived in was very different. Damn near everything at the time was privatized. Water, sanitation, post, fire service, public health and public health regulatory bodies… None of that existed under the perview of Government auspice. Socialist strains more to the legacy of Robert Owens, Daniel De Leon, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and other ethical socialists have had significant wins. Some places took it further than others but the one thing that was allowed to happen in a lot of places was complacency. The 1980’s and 90’s created a liberal fervor that has continued to walk back a lot of significant wins made by the Socialist movements of the early 1900’s and the civil rights movements… But because a lot of the functions of Socialist wins have become the air we breathe people do not associate them with socialism anymore. The issue with peaceful integration is that private gains are always incentivized so complacency cannot be afforded.
It seems weirdly controversial but Non-Marxist socialists exist. Marx was one very popular voice in a sea of people with somewhat related but sometimes contradictory ideas. Some philosophers have been retro-branded as proto-socialists because they existed before Marx who just coined the term. Looking at his contemporaries there’s good reason why he became popular. A lot of what was out there was much drier, committed to peaceful reform. It didn’t tap into people’s anger or emotion in the same way. Right now we deal with a lot of that issue on the left. It is an old struggle. People who are bombastically angry and turning around and biting people for not being “enough” of something. Not fitting a narrow definition. Half my issue with Communist parties I have looked at joining is they aren’t great at being collaborative. Increasingly I have found the argument around “centrism” to stop meaning “people who support the basic status quo” which it seemed to have evolved to being interpretable as for a minute… To a more worrying definition about anyone willing to work across any ideological lines set down by the one guy people bothered to read.
This use of “centrism” as though it’s a plotable point on a map seems to me a worrying fiction. The post moves to create division and self satisfaction where none need exist.
You buy into pretty much the same propaganda, and are equally as dangerous to democracy… so-
Yeah. You’re pretty much the same where it actually matters. The rest of it is irrelevant.
Dangerous to democracy? Where’d you get that idea? I’m not the one trying to install an authoritarian plutocracy.
I’m a staunch believer in educated democracy, but that requires education in the first place. Education regressives have been undermining forever, because it would inform the people of their actual democratic power.
where it actually matters
Which would be? What, in your opinion, actually matters?
My priority is a sustainable and enjoyable future. One where you can grow old without worrying about our pension or affording medical care. One where you no longer pay a cut of your work to a person just becaude they’re rich already. One where you can do the job you love without worrying about how well it pays or whether you’ll get fired.
The Liberals keep bartering for compromise instead of progress, gradually ceding ground to the Conservatives. The spoiler effect means an actually progressive third party has no chance and risks handing power to the regressives by splitting the vote. Because all the Liberals have to do is “be less bad”, you get the choice between right-of-center and far right. This isn’t democracy, it’s slowly dismantling it.
I’ll take the Liberals, because they’re “less bad”, but it’s not a solution. It’s buying time in the hope that we can actually fix the underlying issues.
I disagree. I’ve met plenty of people who are far left and are all in on working together to stop Trump. Don’t be swayed by the terminally online, vocal “leftists”. We don’t know if they’re even genuine people, and they’re assuredly the minority.
I don’t want to be judged based on a false stereotype, and I don’t think we should judge them on a false stereotype either. The far left is antithetical to Trump.
I’d love to believe that is the case, and I’ve no reason to not believe you, but unfortunately- the online representation of the far left is the vocal one. And there are a lot of them. This situation gets helped when you and the ones you represent join the rest of us in standing them down.
I’ve never seen any leftist vs. leftist conversation. And it would go a long way in warming the waters regarding public opinion.
Left of center? You mean left from totally bonkers actual Fascists…
We’re gonna need a bigger tent
I don’t disagree…but the party-line Democrats have been telling progressives exactly that since the Clinton administration.
Again, to be clear: I’m happily voting Biden this November, but the Democratic party has become very good at doing just enough to keep their core loyal while also doing nowhere near enough to keep the country out of constant existential peril, effectively cultivating that crisis as a (pardon the pun) trump card that they then use to tell progressives “what you want is less important than the current crisis! Just go along with us in this election and we pinky swear to do more for your causes!”.
They know if they move left they’ll be displaced by a combination of progressive candidates and centrists, so they have basically adopted the strategy of keeping the right just dangerous enough to be credible while keeping their left flank secured with a drip feed of snail’s pace “progress”.
I can’t really disagree with you. The issue is we have reached the actual point where the current crisis dwarfs all others. Maybe I was just younger then, but it didn’t feel like we had such existential threats in the Bush and Obama years. I remember people said that Romney winning would be the apocalypse, but it’s laughable to say that would’ve been the case in hindsight.
I think what we can take heart in is that we’ve been seeing a gradual increase in progressiveness in the party. And not just a small constant increase, but a significantly growing one. There are a nontrivial number of Congressional members who are incredibly progressive, and they’ve shifted the mood of the party notably leftward. The Inflation Reduction Act was a historic level of climate spending, to the point that Europe felt pressured to pass similar legislation. And the IRA actually closed the corporate tax loophole too – large corporations raking in billions in profits now have to pay a minimum 15%, even if they could previously loophole their way to $0.
I wish things were faster. Gaza in particular has highlighted to me just how frustrating it is for things to only improve at a snail’s pace. And specifically with Gaza, I don’t think the progress is actually amounting to material changes.
We are seeing material changes in other areas though. Healthcare could be a hell of a lot better, but as someone who relied on Obamacare for a few years, things have actually improved for people. The important thing is that we don’t lose heart, and that we keep pushing for better. The US has a rich history of leftists persevering to accomplish women’s suffrage, civil rights, labor rights, and gay rights and equality. As long as we press forward, just like they did, we’ll be successful. The arc of history is long, but it bends towards justice and good.
If we could just bury the fascists for good, we could start to make serious progress.
I’m voting Biden, but not happily.
Israel-Gaza conflict aside…what makes you unhappy about voting for him?
I have to admit that I wasn’t thrilled about voting for him in 2020, but I also have to admit that in the intervening years he has at the very least met my expectations in most areas, and shockingly, he’s exceeded them in a few areas.
As I get older, I’ve learned from experience to temper my expectations in a president, and with those adjusted expectations, I am surprised to find myself feeling better about voting for Biden in 2024 than I did four years ago.
I’m overall happy with Biden except for Afghanistan and Gaza. Given the cards he was dealt with, he seems to be doing an ok job.
Afghanistan was mostly Trump.
In what way? He established an agreement that the Taliban violated, thereby making it void.
Taliban are the best government for Afghanistan, you know why? Because democracy failed, socialism failed, liberalism failed. Realistically, the Taliban are the ones who can run a government in that region. We know the US couldn’t.
This is what I was referring to mostly:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/u-s-review-of-chaotic-afghanistan-withdrawal-blames-trump
Same here. I was not wild about him, and figured he’d be even more right of center than Obama was. Turns out to not be the case on quite a few fronts.
I can sum it up in one word: age.
Look, I’m no spring chicken. My age starts with a 4 now, and it seems the age gap between me and the age of the president hasn’t changed.
I’m just tired of geriatrics running the country.
None of us really are.
So 2020 part two?
Pretty much. This is going to keep cropping up until we deal a decisive loss to fascism. They need to be beaten by huge margins.
Huge accumulations of capital are incompatible with democratic governance.
That’s the issue we are not willing to solve.
Fascists are simply people passionate about infinite capital accumulations. The fascists protect the billionaires by channelling the populist economic discontent toward all manner of scapegoat issues.
If you don’t like fascism you must work to outlaw, and make culturally unacceptable, extreme wealth accumulations.
https://www.philosophersbeard.org/2012/04/what-to-do-about-rich.html
More like 2004 part 6
They actually stole the 2000 election and have come full circle to screaming about the Dems stealing 2020, projection as per usual.
Trump’s approach to the death penalty stands in stark contrast to that of President Joe Biden, who has openly opposed the death penalty, but done little to move forward legislation to reform or abolish the practice since entering office.
So, it’s saying his words stand in contrast. His actions, on the other hand, seem to say very little.
Perfunctory reminder that presidents are not kings. Congress passes legislation.
…you realize that still doesn’t speak well to the Democrats ability to organize and pass legislation? The republicans are the threat that they are because Democrats leave this shit on the table. It’s like abortion; there have been several occasions in 21st century where the Democrats had the legislature and the presidency, yet it still comes down to 9 unelected elders. They even had a month’s forewarning of the Dobbs decision, yet no legislative fix! They didn’t even try!
“Dems are bad at protecting abortion because the law on the books was overturned by a corrupt Repub SCOTUS. That’s why we have to deter Dem votes, so we can have an even more corrupt SCOTUS.”
Do you think about what you are typing at all, or is this like a copy/paste from some sort of propaganda and disinformation Discord group?
You seem to misunderstand the Dobbs decision. There was no law in the books, abortion was set by the decision of a previous supreme court ruling, Roe V Wade. Dobbs over-rulled that ruling – if there had been an actual law, passed at any point in time the legislature, there would have been nothing the supreme court could do.
A month before the Dobbs ruling and until the following November, the Democrats had the house, senate, and presidency. If they had passed a law enshrining abortion as a right, then all court rulings would become moot.
And… the supreme court is already a captured body for the republicans. Too late. There is going to be a republican in office either next year or in another four. That’s just how US presidencies go – no party holds the wing for very long. Pearl clutching about the makeup of the court is a little late at this point.
Wow, you managed to completely ignore mountain of misdeeds by conservatives to then blame dems for what conservatives have done over and over again. Not only that, you’ve conflated the death penalty and abortion along with general shit-talking of democrats, mostly baseless Fox News talking points…
But what really speaks shit about conservatives it how they’re constantly tearing down our democracy and then trying to blame democrats for it— just like you are here. The problem for you is: we’re not as stupid as you think we are.
Are you a bot or just a paid shill?
I’m not saying conservatives are good, I’m saying democrats are not very serious about opposing them.
Are you a child, or have you only recently started paying attention to yankee politics?
You’re spreading GOP disinformation and talking points, and you’re not fooling anyone.
yankee politics
It’s 2024, not 1864, Lmao
christ it’s like i’m talking to 2016.
is it nice? moving through time without noticing or remembering it’s passing? As static as a simpsons character?
If you don’t like that your bs isn’t tolerated here, leave.
Throwing tantrums won’t change that.
As soon as I read the headline I knew Baby Goebbels was involved.
Just getting ready to open the ovens.
(The GOP really really wants ovens )
Jesus: don’t abort those fetuses because life begins at conception.
Also Jesus: fuck these adults, let them fry.
Very cool and consistent, a serious political party here.
You frame it as a contradiction, but this is very nakedly the nature of a patriarchal theocracy.
There’s no real conflict between the view of a dictatorial Israeli King as someone who treats woman as chattel and endorses state execution of prisoners. This is all over the old testament and common enough in the New Testament Letters from Paul not to be remarkable.
Very cool and consistent, a serious political party here.
They’re deadly serious. It’s the 1980s all over again, folks.
they strayed so far from what conservatism actually is. it’s ridiculous.
Conservatism at its core is ‘just’ wanting to keep the status quo. Which itself is imho already pointless, but it’s not too bad.
It however, is not reactionary.
These people are reactionary to the mediaeval extent. But we preach to the choir. Try getting those people who themselves believe in those ideas, that they don’t work…
Conservatism is a reaction to progress. It’s inherently reactionary.
Let’s be real, they START by executing prisoners Pretty soon anything but their political party & their religion is made illegal so anyone daring to say otherwise gets arrested / imprisoned / executed.
The first thing Nazis did was make other political parties illegal. That and they came for trans people
Let’s be real, they START by executing prisoners Pretty soon anything but their political party & their religion is made illegal so anyone daring to say otherwise gets arrested / imprisoned / executed.
I mean they openly spoke about this on CPAC. Project 2025 sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it’s not a theory, it’s right out there in the open.
This is why it’s especially irritating when the bothsiderists go on with the #BidenSoOld stuff, or the tankies go on with the #GenocideJoe thing, or the handwringing over whether journalists should side with democracy and so on.
This stuff is right out in the open. Do bothsiderists, tankies or journalists think they’ll be safe under this kind of thing?
Yeah I definitely get that. I also get why people don’t like Biden. He really oughtn’t be president, neither of them ought be candidates, but when the option is between him and Trump, going with Biden is a no-brainer. Trump is literally working to dismantle democracy. He doesn’t want people to have a choice, and the choice that you Americans face is laughable as it is.
Aww man… I thought this was about corrupt politicians getting justice.
Trump is not capable of justice
