The Dems should not try to stop unpopular MAGA policies

[Axulus]

If there is anything a wide swath of the country would find unpopular that MAGA tries to implement, the Dems should not spend political capital trying to stop it. They need to focus on calling it out and covering it to the max, but should otherwise not stand in the way. We need MAGA extremism to really be felt, painfully. Only then will we get meaningful change.

If the deport 15,000,000 immigrants bill comes up in congress, Dems should not filibuster it.

If Trump implements his across the board tariffs, they need to go into effect.

If Elon wants to cut 2 trillion and Trump allows it, Dems should scream but otherwise not stop it.

The only exception I would make is if Trump makes further efforts to tear down democracy. There's no going back from that.

People need to see what they actually voted for.

 

[ZiprHead]

That's why I like to keep this one handy.

 

[SLD]

Exactly. We need to grow a pair of balls.

 

[Elixir]

If there is anything a wide swath of the country would find unpopular that MAGA tries to implement, the Dems should not spend political capital trying to stop it. They need to focus on calling it out and covering it to the max, but should otherwise not stand in the way. We need MAGA extremism to really be felt, painfully. Only then will we get meaningful change.

If the deport 15,000,000 immigrants bill comes up in congress, Dems should not filibuster it.

If Trump implements his across the board tariffs, they need to go into effect.

If Elon wants to cut 2 trillion and Trump allows it, Dems should scream but otherwise not stop it.

The only exception I would make is if Trump makes further efforts to tear down democracy. There's no going back from that.

People need to see what they actually voted for.

People that so voted are not likely to be able to put together cause and effect, unless FOXNews tells them Dems didit.

 

[Swammerdami]

People that so voted are not likely to be able to put together cause and effect, unless FOXNews tells them Dems didit.

Or worse, people will correctly note that Democrats failed to use what power they have (e.g. filibuster) to block some right-wing misbehavior.

 

[ZiprHead]

People that so voted are not likely to be able to put together cause and effect, unless FOXNews tells them Dems didit.

Or worse, people will correctly note that Democrats failed to use what power they have (e.g. filibuster) to block some right-wing misbehavior.

This.

Because the dems didn't object they approved it and it's their fault.

 

[Politesse]

For shame!

Feeling surly about the reality of slim (1%!) majority support for a political candidate is no excuse for inaction in the face of evil deeds. That's like throwing your baby in front of train because you are annoyed that it cried. Especially since many of the people most affected by the policies you propose abetting didn't have right to vote in the election you're trying to punish them for.

Is this a popular sentiment? If so, no wonder the Democrats are losing popular support, the faithless cowards! We're not even properly to the battle yet, and you lot are casting about for a pair of unsoiled underpants to make your surrender flag from! Fight, you fools, fight like your rights depend on it. Because they DO.

 

[Jarhyn]

People that so voted are not likely to be able to put together cause and effect, unless FOXNews tells them Dems didit.

Or worse, people will correctly note that Democrats failed to use what power they have (e.g. filibuster) to block some right-wing misbehavior.

Let's be honest here... The filibuster will be one of the absolute first casualties in the coming months.

 

[ideologyhunter]

W-w-whattt???????????? Didn't the Repubs instruct us over and over that the filibuster is a necessary device to insure that the minority party has a voice? I am shocked. Shocked.

 

[laughing dog]

The US does not gave the capability of successively carrying out much of Trump’s deportation plans. Nor is he likely to get much of his agenda through Congress unscathed.

Where he can do real damage is with appointments, firings and administrative policy along with some tariff policy.

If he gets some of his way on deportations snd tariffs, goods and services will become more expensive - something people will notice.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Feeling surly about the reality of slim (1%!) majority support for a political candidate is no excuse for inaction in the face of evil deeds. .

I agree with the argument against inaction, but c'mon, they have a lot more than a 1% advantage. How about control of all three branches, including an unstoppable majority in SCOTUS and a preponderance of federal judiciary seats. Add in a majority of governorships and state legislatures. And a level of strategy and zealotry from a half century of think tank operations and ersatz populist demagoguery that the Dems cannot match. I still say, fuck 'em, pick our battles with care and use every strategy that has a chance in the courts.

 

[Politesse]

Feeling surly about the reality of slim (1%!) majority support for a political candidate is no excuse for inaction in the face of evil deeds. .

I agree with the argument against inaction, but c'mon, they have a lot more than a 1% advantage. How about control of all three branches, including an unstoppable majority in SCOTUS and a preponderance of federal judiciary seats.

I'm aware. But the "moral" justification for inaction that is being proposed here is a childish and thoughtless "they voted for him, so see how they like it!", as though the victims of all this will be mostly Trump voters, suitable targets for schadenfreude. But they aren't. Most of the people hardest hit by the pogroms to come will not be Trump voters, nor will Trump voters learn any "lessons" from mass deportation*, a national abortion ban**, privatization/censorship of education***, abandoning Europe to Putin's mercy ****, and criminalization of public dissent *****. His voters will be happy, sure, because that is exactly what they just voted for. But what about the rest of us? 49% percent of the electorate voted for no such things, and plenty more residents of this country had no say at all.

* aimed at undocumented immigrants, who can't vote
** aimed at underage rape victims and their unborn children, who can't vote
*** aimed at children, who can't vote
**** aimed at Ukrainians and others who can't vote here
***** aimed at turning protestors into felons, who can't vote

Honestly, anyone who thinks "voting the right way" is the only civic responsibility they have is a damned fool, and really does almost - almost but not quite- deserve the trouble that's coming, if they're going to let the small portion of the population that's useful handle all the fighting from here on out, when we've been in the trenches on their behalf this whole time. I've been preparing for the battles to come since well before the election, because it was always obvious that Biden was not going to win a second term. Even ge realized that, too late. But here come these fools, saying why bother to fight any more since we lost the election! Jesus Christ, there's more to national politics than a biennial poll.

 

[Elixir]

inaction that is being proposed here is a childish and thoughtless "they voted for him, so see how they like it!", as though the victims of all this will be mostly Trump voters, suitable targets for schadenfreude.

Yeah, an expression of futility. Let’s extract whatever entertainment value remains and try to get over the pending end of democracy before it becomes reality.

I don’t know of any way to lessen whatever pain is coming. It will be global, not just Murkin partisans.
Maybe California should secede if it gets bad. Declare war on Texas?

 

[Politesse]

Maybe California should secede if it gets bad.

I wish! But so far, there's very little talk of that on the street. Less than last time, even.

And really, that would just be kicking the can down the road. Losing California, the state most opposed to their alliance, would cement Trump/Putin's power within the remaining nation of the US, while also making us all legal targets for mass violence. State secession is illegal under Constitutional law, so if we do in fact try to secede, he can then march in troops to take everything back and ask no apology for doing it.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

That's assuming people are smart enough to learn their lesson. They're already dumb enough to vote for the guy. Besides, by the time people learn their lesson, will be too late for any action whatsoever on climate change too. Things are just fucked, time to accept it.

 

[Elixir]

 

[Swammerdami]

People that so voted are not likely to be able to put together cause and effect, unless FOXNews tells them Dems didit.

Or worse, people will correctly note that Democrats failed to use what power they have (e.g. filibuster) to block some right-wing misbehavior.

Let's be honest here... The filibuster will be one of the absolute first casualties in the coming months.

I don't know how things will play out. Trump will need 50 Senators to confirm appointments; 50 Senators to change the rules; and so on. There will be 52(?) GOP Senators but not all will be happy about the fascist take-over. Murkowski of Alaska and Collins of Maine might resist. There are other GOP Senators who, however right-wing they might be, detest Trump. OTOH, J.D. Vance will preside over the Senate and can announce his own rules, overturned only with difficulty.

I worry that the filibuster rule, probably still in effect, will not stop Trump. He will issue Executive Orders with no Congressional approval. Even if the orders are illegal, Trump just needs 5 Supreme Court Justices to agree they are legal. Supposedly he plans to replace many thousands of career Fed workers with Trump loyalists. Will he? If he does it will lead to travesties the Senate couldn't stop anyway.

And if necessary I think the fascists may use violence to help achieve their agenda.

 

[Elixir]

I think the fascists may use violence to help achieve their agenda.

YA THINK?
That’s what they do.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The US does not gave the capability of successively carrying out much of Trump’s deportation plans. Nor is he likely to get much of his agenda through Congress unscathed.

Where he can do real damage is with appointments, firings and administrative policy along with some tariff policy.

If he gets some of his way on deportations snd tariffs, goods and services will become more expensive - something people will notice.

I don't think he actually can directly accomplish much on his agenda. But I think he will put people in power that will do his agenda anyway regardless of what the law says.

 

[Jarhyn]

People that so voted are not likely to be able to put together cause and effect, unless FOXNews tells them Dems didit.

Or worse, people will correctly note that Democrats failed to use what power they have (e.g. filibuster) to block some right-wing misbehavior.

Let's be honest here... The filibuster will be one of the absolute first casualties in the coming months.

I don't know how things will play out. Trump will need 50 Senators to confirm appointments; 50 Senators to change the rules; and so on. There will be 52(?) GOP Senators but not all will be happy about the fascist take-over. Murkowski of Alaska and Collins of Maine might resist. There are other GOP Senators who, however right-wing they might be, detest Trump. OTOH, J.D. Vance will preside over the Senate and can announce his own rules, overturned only with difficulty.

I worry that the filibuster rule, probably still in effect, will not stop Trump. He will issue Executive Orders with no Congressional approval. Even if the orders are illegal, Trump just needs 5 Supreme Court Justices to agree they are legal. Supposedly he plans to replace many thousands of career Fed workers with Trump loyalists. Will he? If he does it will lead to travesties the Senate couldn't stop anyway.

And if necessary I think the fascists may use violence to help achieve their agenda.

"Official acts" are an effective lubricant for republicans, I think.