this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024
101 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19104 readers
3383 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Donald Trump’s recent cabinet picks, including controversial figures like Matt Gaetz, Pete Hegseth, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., signal a deliberate effort to upend norms, bypass accountability, and impose a new reality on American governance.

By ignoring FBI background checks, exploiting legal loopholes, and sidelining Congress, Trump aims to consolidate power, destabilize democratic institutions, and govern unilaterally.

This strategy echoes authoritarian tactics, where truth and law are manipulated to serve power.

Critics warn of a growing “kakistocracy,” threatening U.S. governance and fostering public disorientation and disengagement.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] taiyang@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

You know, the single "disrupt the norms" part is actually perfectly legit. We need that desperately in some departments. The people he chooses and why they are chosen are terrible dogshit, though, obviously.

Harris was threatening to put Republicans in some of these positions, which isn't equally bad but still a terrible idea. I personally would love to see a progressive shake-up cabinet, although my priority is always education. Depts of Education are often led by establishment figures (and even Dems have picked donors for it as a reward for service) and it's a big reason we see little movement at both federal and state levels.

There are a lot of very progressive, research-backed education specialists who would absolutely rock my world. But they're always Socialist, if not Marxist. Turns out to be a good worldview when addressing public school effectivemess, but they won't ever be picked unless the dems get more progressive.