Hey you know what would be a great idea? What if we go and give the executive wide ranging unilateral censorship powers just before the election against the outright fascist we’re projected to lose to? We could stop all those pesky kids from crying about our genocide!
Washington Generals ass political party.
I’m not sure how you expected me to glean any of that from “Huh?”.
In any case Mamdani has been in office less than a month and while he’s done some good I think you should wait a bit before you go calling him some kind of herald of democrat reform. They will likely continue to sabotage him while he’s in office because any successful socialist is a threat to their power and donors. It’s not like New York hasn’t had progressive mayors before.
Sorry it’s been a while and I was going from memory. It was more an opposing faction that simultaneously resigned than a separate party and I think they may have just told former donors to give directly to individual campaigns rather than the party.
Either way they’ve wrested control back already. If you would like to read more, here’s a couple articles about it
https://www.nevadaappeal.com/news/2021/mar/11/other-six-basin-states-know-colorado-river-droppin/ https://www.socialistalternative.org/2023/06/29/pulling-out-the-rug-what-happened-after-dsa-and-bernie-supporters-took-over-the-nevada-democratic-party/
There was a big progressive victory in NV for the 2020 elections. The progressive Bernie supporter wing successfully took over the party from the establishment dems.
So the dems formed another party and stole half a million from the old party’s coffers on the way out, leaving the new progressive leaders with no means to pay any of the debts the dems had run up. They took the donor lists with them and started getting all their big donors to move their donations over to the new party they controlled.
Which is all to say that even when progressives win the democrats will try to destroy you.
Chuck Schumer literally governs based off an imaginary republican family he made up in his head who he runs all of his policy decisions by before voting. He has talked about this openly and repeatedly, for years. He calls them the “Baileys” and they voted for Trump.
Ah yes, here we see Lucy is placing the football in front of Charlie Brown but will she let him kick it?
They will strongly advise the president that what he’s doing is illegal and immoral and send you panicked fund raising emails about it. Oh, and text messages. Can’t forget those.
On May 1, 2003, he was nominated by President George W. Bush to a new seat on the Southern District of California created by 116 Stat. 1758. Benitez was confirmed by the United States Senate on June 17, 2004, by a 98–1 vote.
Yeah, Kamala Harris getting voted in definitely would have solved this, and its all Trump’s fault. Dems are completely blameless here, despite all but one of them voting for this judge. It’s perfectly reasonable to be more upset at the people who didn’t vote for this than the people who affirmatively voted for it in your name.
edit: extra lol:
Benitez was confirmed despite overwhelming opposition from the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, which rates the qualifications of judicial nominees.
so dont even try to pretend they didn’t know this guy was a shit.
It’s a good start, I guess, but you have to lock up a lot more than that to meaningfully change the war on Gaza. Trump wasn’t even involved for like 2/3rds of it, and the guy lining up behind Bibi isn’t exactly demanding peace.
so what if it is “blatant jury nullification”? that’s not illegal.
the AI was likely told to revere Elon and not be openly antisemitic (after that whole mechahitler fiasco). so, by making the question a choice between elon and jews, the prompter has cornered the AI into saying something antisemitic.
Why wouldn’t it work that way when the world has warped itself to suit his whims in almost every other circumstance? Who’s going to stop him?
oh no the government might spend more money!? i guess we can’t do that then!! nevermind that the government is already spending this money and all im suggesting is redirecting that funding to a different related department to make public officials actually invested in maintaining a historically neglected program that serves mostly the poor.
you’re right, instead we should discourage people from filing civil suits entirely by making sure only people who can afford to pay the defendants’ lawyers fees will file them. that is a much better solution.
Yes, but if we changed the rules we could, for example, add funding to the office of the Public Defenders and they could hire a special lawyer for civil cases against public servants available to anyone who doesn’t wish to pay for their own laywers.
“We should change the way things work.” “Thats not how things work” great argument buddy, glad we could hash this out.
Yep that is an accurate description of the way the broken system currently works. Thanks!
If public defenders are good enough for everyone else, they’re good enough for politicians. Maybe they’ll actually get some funding and support that way.
Remember when one of the idiots who participated in his defense came out and said that he fucked up a full ride scholarship to go be a right wing talking head for Turning Point, and called him an antagonistic arrogant dumbass who couldn’t score high enough on his ASVAB to live out his dream of murdering minorities legally overseas?
It’s is explicitly government censorship and the power to do this was granted to the president by a bill passed under and signed by Biden (just before they lost the election)