Sure would be historic to hand unchecked executive power to Donald Trump desperate to evade prosecution and repay favours.
Not in a good way, but historic for sure.
this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
68 points (88.6% liked)
politics
19091 readers
3480 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
And to punish his perceived enemies, don’t forget that part. And give unchecked power to cronies who openly want to get rid of ‘undesirables’.
The Nazis didn’t go full Jews-in-ovens at the beginning. First they came for the socialists, and the queers, and the political dissidents, and then everyone who wasn’t white, straight, and christian enough.
Fascists eliminate everyone until the only ones left to oppress are themselves. They need an enemy, and if you don’t think they’ll eventually come for you, you’re wrong.
If trump wins, it’ll be historic, all right. Children in 2060 will learn about the 20s and 30s in school as a cautionary tale, and if they’re lucky, some holocaust survivors will still be alive to speak at assemblies. Hopefully those survivors won’t be showing the scars of a nuclear bomb like I saw in school as a child.
It's fucking hilarious considering Harris in polls has the edge in MI, and the Green Party draw last election was almost null.
This is the right response, here. Everybody knows the existing "left" third parties are all either actively steered by 3-letter agencies or only relevant because the main parties get to sponsor them as spoilers for each other.
I wish I had the kind of confidence to make claims like this with a straight face. Politicians are so weird.
According to the modlog someone else (admittedly a slightly trollous user) posted this with the title "Jill Stein ally says the Greens' strategy is about making Harris lose the presidency" and got banned for it based on rule 1. I thought removal was reasonable but apparently the rule says "If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive." Could someone clarify how the alterations to the title didn't make it more descriptive?
I only know this because I was searching for certain keywords and stumbled upon comments in the deleted thread.