Americans of Lemmy, what is your approach to next year's election?

2020 was… truly unique. It was so hard to stay away from doom scrolling, and I (and many others) were pretty disillusioned by the sad fact that so much of our country legitimately supported the Orange Man. I didn’t get a wink of sleep the night of the election because I genuinely considered it to be a make or break decision for America.

My point is that looking back on it, in the end the only real difference I made was at the ballet box. This year I’m going for the Head-in-the-Sand approach. I’m done with the political memes. Done with the Twitter screenshots. It just riles me up and this year I’m gonna do my best to fight that.

LemmyIsFantastic,

Vote DNC and hate it.

taiyang,

Oh, who told you the 2024 campaign slogan?

eksb,
@eksb@programming.dev avatar

It does not matter who I vote for for federal office. My state is never close to competitive and my house district is gerrymandered.

If fascists win my districts for state office, it will not affect the balance of power in the state assemblies.

So I told all of the Democrats running for state and local office that if there is not a primary for the presidential election, then I will not vote for any Democrats in the general elections in 2024, for any office. Maybe they can put pressure on the DNC.

This is the only way I can potentially have any input.

The only way this works is if Democrats would shift left if they started losing elections because people refused to vote for old white male conservative Democrats.

But I fear they would actually shift right. The Democratic Party is not a big tent that holds both the neoliberal corporate shills and the progressives. It is a hostage situation where the neoliberal corporate shills demand our support, otherwise the fascists will kill us.

physcx,

I just want to say that your vote for the federal office does matter even if you live in a non-competitive state. Some states allocate a percentage of their electoral votes rather than all or nothing but even if yours does not, voting still adds a data point that says I support this person instead of that person. There have been several times where a candidate has won the presidency without winning the most votes but it was always very close to 50%. If everybody that had a preference voted and the outcome was 55% this guy / 45% the other guy and the other guy won... that could be a real driver for change to the electoral college system.

eksb,
@eksb@programming.dev avatar

My state is winner take all.

If my vote does not affect outcome put only expresses support, I am voting for somebody actually good (often from the Green Party).

Even if it was 55/45, nothing would change. The Senate would be very close, if not in favor of the candidate who got 45%. The House would probably also be close, because the legislatures of the states that voted for the 45% candidate would still gerrymander. The only change could come from the states that voted for the 55%. If they gave all of their votes to whoever won the national popular vote, nothing would change. If they did proportional allocation, then it would get even worse.

My vote does not matter.

AnarchoSnowPlow,

People who aren’t insane on social issues have been fleeing the GOP. This is, and will continue to pull Democrats right until some viable alternative emerges, if it ever does.

WIIHAPPYFEW,
@WIIHAPPYFEW@hexbear.net avatar

Waiting for the impromptu Cornel West vs Jill Stein debate ig

rip_art_bell,
@rip_art_bell@lemmy.world avatar

Honestly there’s not that much one can do, but I will:

  • Hope Trump is thrown in prison
  • Vote straight ticket Democrat
  • Hope another Jan. 6 doesn’t occur
  • Try not to lose my shit when idiots say stuff like “both parties are equally bad”

I live in a solid blue state, so my national-level votes don’t do much (though I’ll cast them anyway).

In past years I’ve thrown a few hundred dollars at close senate and house races. In 2020 I volunteered for a phone/text bank sort of deal to make sure people were registered to vote.

furrious09,

Do people say both parties are equally bad? I’d agree that both parties are bad, but ‘equally’? Maybe a decade ago, but not anymore.

tastysnacks,

You’ll find republicans say that. Equally was more than a decade ago. They actually had a chance too. When the Tea Party started, it was actually grassroots. But then they got hijacked by people like the Coch brothers which twisted it to their desires.

pohart,

Definitely voting for someone who doesn’t support genocide for president. Down ballot I’ll likely vote 3rd party as well, but I haven’t decided for sure.

Captainvaqina,

Congrats on helping to ensure you’ll never again have the right to vote during traitor trump’s fascist dictatorship that you’ll be enabling.

Detectorist,

deleted_by_author

    •
    frauddogg,
    @frauddogg@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    One hand washes the other.

    pohart, (edited )

    If Trump is one vote from winning NY then he swept the board. There’s no way NY goes red in any election that has NY as the tipping point state.

    TheAlbatross,

    Hey I’m voting third party in a deep blue state also, you wanna be wicked condescending to me too? Take that energy to the phone banks, I bet the democrats never tried making a total ass of themselves before.

    TheEgoBot,

    Congrats on saying “genocide is an acceptable price” out loud

    phillaholic,

    You act like Republicans don’t have stronger ties to Israel and haven’t discriminated against Muslims. Either you’re naive or acting in bad faith.

    TheEgoBot,

    OR I simply refuse to endorse any singular candidate who has funded genocide. You can call me whatever you want for having convictions while your lesser evil funds a holocaust

    phillaholic,

    Naive. Got it.

    Unattended consequences of your actions. Learn it before it’s too late.

    Take care.

    TheEgoBot,

    So are you going to take responsibility for the 11,500 people dead (since October 7th) as the unintended consequences of your actions? You told everyone we needed to vote Biden to protect people in 2020, did he protect them? And I don’t want to hear anything about trans people and gay people because there are trans people and gay people in Palestine, or do they not count because they weren’t fortunate enough to be born here or born White? I’m naive but you sleep like a baby with your hands covered in blood.

    PowerCrazy,

    The largest benefactors of AIPAC and Israel in the house and senate are fucking democrats you dunce.

    SandbagTiara2816,

    I like the Green Party’s eco-socialism, but their anti-vaccine lunacy and inability to do anything electorally beyond run a presidential candidate every four years doesn’t give me the warm fuzzies.

    I like Cornel West, and I appreciate his long-standing commitment to left-wing and anti-racist values.

    That said, I live in the real world, where Donald Trump is running as an open fascist promising to make America a dictatorship if elected, and Joe Biden is the only candidate running with a realistic chance of beating him.

    So I’ll be voting for every Democrat I possibly can, while wishing they were better than they are, as always.

    glingorfel,

    Joe Biden is also an open fascist who is proudly facitating a genocide and ethnic cleansing

    Rawdogg,

    You won’t find an American president that doesn’t support Israel, you were close with bernie.

    OprahsedCreature,

    Because if there’s nothing else you can count on an American president for, it’s them being a standard-bearer for ethics.

    ArmoredThirteen,

    Well my choices are backslide slowly by voting dem, maybe buying enough time to get out of the country safely in the next few years, or risk being federally persecuted for being trans. So I’m going to dissociate through the whole thing and hopefully won’t be able to remember voting for fucking Biden. Outside the election I do what I can to support actual leftist movements but until any of them have a chance to win against the fascists on ballots I’m team ‘slightly better of two shitty choices’. I just want to be left alone to garden I hate all of this

    ArmoredThirteen,

    Come on out down voters, I’d love to hear you attempt to explain why I’m making a bad decision

    thecrotch,

    I downvoted you because of this comment. Does that help?

    ArmoredThirteen,

    I appreciate you thank you

    Adkml,

    Didn’t downvote you but the only difference I’ve seen and heard about as far as how things are going for minorities is when there’s a dem president libs tell minorities to stfu because they’re making them look bad.

    When there’s a republican president libs pretend to support blm, when there’s a dem president libs tell them they’re secretly republican russians.

    Try telling a lib the concentration camps on the border are still a problem and you’ll get a lecture about how it’s a way more compassionate concentration camp now.

    ArmoredThirteen,

    I ended up writing a way bigger response than I set out to, politics…

    So my minority view is only from being trans I don’t fall into other categories, I’m only talking from that view and obviously can’t speak for other groups. From my end of things Biden has undone a lot of the particularly wild stuff Trump did and is even throwing us the occasional scrap of protection. It isn’t great but I can’t say nothing has gotten better. I will say most of the stuff that has gone well is on pretty shaky ground and the next repub we get will gut all of it in a second.

    Yeah Biden and dems in general are just so bad. Liberals are frustrating and definitely think the scraps I’ve gotten have solved everything and I should stop complaining. I hate it, I wish we had another choice. But that just isn’t where we are at so between Trump or every dem I’ve seen I’m going for the dems. They only have my back so far as will poll well with libs but that’s better than Trump who is actively attacking me and empowering others to do the same.

    I don’t think this system can be fixed by voting for third party at this time. All that does is light a vote on fire that could have gone toward the less bad of two bad options. I do think it can be fixed or improved, slowly, by building a movement for a third party with enough traction to start getting into local offices. My hope is from there those people can push for local change that makes it easier to vote outside dem/repub which sets the scene for doing it on the big scale. That’s only possible given time and repubs are clear they’re done fucking around and we will not be given a chance for that under their rule.

    Adkml,

    Yea I’m in a small town so I’m aware how rabid and bloodthirsty the chuds are.

    I’m not voting for Biden but I also live in New York so I’m privellaged to have the option to do that meaningless protest.

    I thunk your spot on with thenlocala support, generally just vote for whoever the working families party candidate is even though 90% of the time it’s the same person as the dem candidate but it’s a good way to weed out the chuds that just run as dems because this is new york.

    frauddogg, (edited )
    @frauddogg@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    Because Biden’s shitty fucking policies got half my family locked up for trying to keep their seed fed on bids anywhere from five to thirty, typically on some mandatory-minimum bullshit; the other half can’t get jobs under his “booming economy”; and the fact that he’s cosigning a fucking genocide of one of the few peoples in the world to be as brutally colonized as the Black diaspora in Occupied America. You’re smoking meth if you think I’m going act like what you’re doing is worth uplifting or even cosigning.

    You already are supporting a fascist if you haven’t divested by now-- but I don’t expect you to get that.

    ArmoredThirteen,

    First off, I appreciate the response this is what I was hoping for instead of just downvotes.

    No I distinctly don’t think what I’m doing is worth uplifting I think it is a bad situation and I’m doing what I hope makes it worse more slowly than my other options. Biden is a piece of shit I know that, and I’m being affected by the “booming economy” too it’s a bunch of lies. My company is about to fire a huge chunk of people I might be in there, and even if I’m not I’ll have to watch as my friends lose their jobs.

    “keep their seed fed on bids anywhere from five to thirty, typically on some mandatory-minimum bullshit” I don’t know what this means could you explain?

    What are you doing this election? What can we do to get out of this situation? Why do you believe in your choice at the ballot? I’d rather not vote for Biden but I also believe until things are changed from local up, voting third party is the same as not voting in the sense that it puts the decision in other people’s hands, and I’m super not voting for Trump.

    CarbonScored,

    Things will get inevitably worse. Voting might slow that decline slightly if we’re lucky.

    The only hope for any kind of improvement, to reach a slightly tolerable world, is mass action outside of voting, and that just doesn’t seem to be happening. So it’s hard to care too much.

    robocall,

    Vote against Republicans.

    MomoTimeToDie,

    Voting trump, assuming he takes the nomination

    FireTower,
    @FireTower@lemmy.world avatar

    I think avoiding political memes & etc is probably a good idea.

    mateomaui,

    hard liquor probably

    paddirn,

    The 2020 election got me off of facebook and most other social media. Not quite sure how I’ll approach Lemmy going into 2024, seems ok for now and not the dumpster fire that facebook was during 2016 and 2020. If it gets too bad I might block national news & political communities and see if that helps. I already know that Trump/GOP represents fascism in America, so I don’t really need more news to confirm that point or help me make up my mind going into the election.

    gravitas_deficiency,

    I’m voting for the most progressive candidate possible in the primary, and then whoever’s not the Republican in the general, and I fully intend to do that for the rest of my life.

    The Republican Party has some plans they’re putting together, and between that and the rhetoric that most major Republican politicians and candidates spout these days (very specifically including Trump), it’s abundantly clear they’ve more or less completely given up on democracy, and are planning on dismantling a significant proportion of the core institutions of our country and government, which will effectively usher in the American Empire (as in: a possibly theocratic, but definitely authoritarian and likely outright fascist dictatorship). To be clear: that would be a Very Bad Thing. You think Russia is troublesome now? Wait until Trump or someone similar starts treating them like an ally, emulating as much of Putin’s power structure as possible just because they think it’s cool and would make them look powerful, and potentially teaming up to do shitty things to the rest of the world because we have something like 95% of the nuclear weapons ever produced, and while Russian ones are in a questionable state, ours definitely work.

    If Republicans win this next election - and especially if they are able to secure the presidency and both houses of Congress - I genuinely don’t think things will recover without significant domestic political violence, which may ultimately result in a civil war. I’m doing my best to prepare for some “GTFO” contingencies that could be executed in the next few years, but it’s not an easy thing to do, and there’s still a huge number of unknowns in a ton of dimensions.

    If you think I’m being hyperbolic, you’re not paying attention.

    agamemnonymous,

    Oh hey look, it’s the only rational voting strategy in a FPTP elective structure! Anyone who thinks different is just more evidence we need Civics back in our schools.

    TauZero,

    more evidence we need Civics back in our schools

    Maybe we need more math as well - have you heard of the Ultimatum Game? Sometimes the rational strategy is to reject unfair split offers, even if that makes it a guarantee that you both get nothing.

    SatanicNotMessianic,

    I’ve taught game theory. Voting isn’t the Ultimatum game, because the most a third party is going to do is shave off a few percentage points, resulting in the main party losing, resulting in the main party generally becoming more conservative. Look who ran after Reagan - the entire Democratic Party shifted right with the third way. Look who we ran after Trump.

    In voting the way it’s currently configured, there are two elements from game theory that apply. The first is minimax strategy - minimize the maximum damage your enemy can do. Above all that means keeping republicans out of office if you care about minimizing harm to women, minorities and immigrants, the poor, and the LGBT community.

    The second concept that applies is the BATNA - the best alternative to a negotiated agreement. If the negotiated agreement fails (we get a left democrat on the ballot) our next best alternative is to get a Democrat elected.

    We came within a hair’s breadth of not having another election, and at the very least we will be looking at a roll back of LGBT rights, a nationwide abortion ban, and a massive crackdown that will make sure they don’t lose any more elections.

    PowerCrazy,

    Not having another sham election sounds like a great outcome to me.

    agamemnonymous,

    Sounds great, but then the genie grants it and you don’t get any more elections, sham or otherwise. I’ll take the illusion of democracy over blatant mask-off fascism, personally.

    PowerCrazy,

    If you live in the “illusion of democracy” then the elections don’t matter in the first place, so we may as well forego the mask so taht even blind people like you can see it. And polite fascism is actually worse because then liberals like you will support it and chastise others for pointing out the emperor has no clothes.

    For example, do you know who started using drones to bomb civilians? Do you know who first started putting kids in cages? Because liberals like you think he was the greatest president to ever president, and you gleefully supported him since he was polite with his fascism.

    agamemnonymous,

    Lotta unsubstantiated assumptions about me there. Maybe reassess your own biases before offering analysis.

    PowerCrazy,

    I’m just making assumptions based on your own words.

    I’ll take the illusion of democracy over blatant mask-off fascism, personally.

    This is what liberals believe.

    agamemnonymous,

    It is what pragmatists believe. Some pragmatists are liberals, other pragmatists have other ideals. The coincidence of pragmatic results is not indicative of a coincidence of pre-pragmatic ideals. Your framework is too simplistic to be interesting or useful.

    PowerCrazy,

    Lol I’m sure pragmatcists(?) have a cohesive framework they all draw from, and I’m sure it is definitely different from the current Neo-liberal zeitgeist.

    agamemnonymous,

    Some people believe that stringent adherence to idealism is paramount, despite the material suffering of others implementation of that ideal causes. Other people have empathy, and are willing to analyze the actual consequences of political action independent of idealism, prioritizing actions which do tangible good over performative platitudes. Pragmatists fall in to the second camp, you certainly appear to fall into the first. The first are boring and impotent everywhere but their own minds.

    PowerCrazy,

    If you would rather support the illusion of democracy despite the material suffering it is currently causing, you just value the status-quo over all other concerns. People who value the status-quo over all other considerations have innately conservative and reactionary outlooks. Those people could also be described as polite fascists, i.e. liberals.

    agamemnonymous,

    And if you would rather support the dissolution of the democratic process despite the material suffering it will certainly cause, you just value your ideals over all other concerns. People who value ideals over all other considerations have innately Ineffective outlooks. They are useful tools that allow fascists to accumulate power.

    PowerCrazy,

    You said it yourself, you want the illusion of democracy, you don’t actually care that we do not live in a democracy. The Liberal must maintain the illusions or the cognitive dissonance makes them go mask off. Keep Calm and Carry on, and all that.

    And that is why events like this happen. truthout.org/…/schumer-slammed-for-speaking-at-pr…

    You aren’t upset that Schumer and Jeffries are supporting genocide, you are upset that they aren’t hiding it better, they aren’t maintaining the illusion. Well your comfort is leading to fascism while you criticize anyone who dares point it out.

    agamemnonymous,

    Sure, but your alternative is blatant support of genocide. It’s well and fine to say who ought to be in charge, but mathematically it’s one of two people. I agree that the options suck, but I will use the powers that I have in their proper places. Vote for the lesser evil, and advocate against evil entirely elsewhere. You act like liberal is worse than fascist.

    PowerCrazy,

    In a way it is. If someone is an out and out fascist, it’s easy to point at them and get people to stop supporting them, i.e. Trump. If someone is a polite fascist, i.e. liberal, then you will have thousands of people hand-wringing about lesser evils, and strategic voting, being a pragmatist, etc etc, meanwhile kids are still in cages. Guantanamo is still open, and torturing people. Unlimited funding for additional death and destruction around the world occurs, and all the polite liberal does is shrugs their shoulders. Because that stuff isn’t happening to them.

    The liberal is comfortable enough to attempt to stop that shit from happening to anyone, but they’d rather defend the status quo and criticize those who speak out.

    Stop voting for genocide, it’s literally the least you can do and it cost you nothing.

    agamemnonymous,

    Agree to disagree. I’m not content to let the bodies pile up to revolution levels, those lives are more than just metrics to spur on dissidence. People are still voting for Trump, obviously that strategy doesn’t even work even if it weren’t ghoulish. The logistics of keeping the evil hush-hush results in fewer bodies than out and out ethnic cleaning. I’m on the side of fewer bodies.

    TauZero,

    the most a third party is going to do is shave off a few percentage points, resulting in the main party losing

    If the third party can force the main party to lose, then it holds ultimatum power and game theory rules apply. The main party irrationally keeps rejecting the ultimatum and as a result keeps losing. To execute the threat of the ultimatum even after the unfair split has already been offered is the paradox of game theory. You have to appear credible enough to carry out such a threat, but the only reliable way to appear credible is to actually follow through on such threats every time.

    The Democratic party keeps losing and shifting right because it acts irrationally and fails to execute optimal game theory strategy. It could have offered the left a fair split and we could have all had guaranteed single-payer medical care, food, and housing, but instead none of us will have women’s rights, and the immigrants and gays among us will be herded into cages.

    SatanicNotMessianic,

    That is literally not how it works. That’s how people think it should work, but when you see that it doesn’t, you have to turn back and review your premises and your model. I know the way you think it should work and how you want it to work, but when it doesn’t work you need to revise.

    The problem is this - the feedback loop is insufficient and the correlation is unclear. If you are directly negotiating with someone, then you can play Ultimatum. If you are one of a hundred million people casting a vote for one person or another, you cannot. Perot cost Bush I the election, and Nader cost Kerry the election. Neither party decided that they needed to move in the direction of the spoiler candidate. They’re especially not going to do so for 3p candidates who pull in the low single digits, even if they lose by low single digits, because they’ll think they can get more by moving towards the center.

    You can vote however you want, but don’t base it on a theoretical foundation that has less than zero application to the scenario you’re modeling. It really, honestly is a minimax choice, and if you are truly an ally for those of us in marginalized communities, you have to recognize it.

    I’m not being a right winger here - I’m a member of the DSA and this is in line with what they (and people like Chomsky) advise. But I’m not talking about even that angle. I’m just talking minimax and BATNA. If negotiations fail (ie we didn’t get Bernie), the best alternative is Hillary. At least Roe wouldn’t have been overturned and we wouldn’t have states suing to make ten year olds give birth to their rapist’s babies.

    TauZero,

    So I am proposing that the Democratic party is acting irrationally and suboptimally, but you claim that the Democrats are acting most optimally, and it is the fringe left that is acting irrationally instead by refusing to accept a unfair split against all game theory guidance, causing all of us to eat shit (despite them making up only low single digits). Yet if the Democrats are so rational, how come they keep losing? Shouldn’t they have found an optimal strategy to get around the irrational ultimatum of the left? Yet here we are.

    SatanicNotMessianic,

    I do not mean this to come off as blunt as it sounds, but I’m trying to be both clear and concise.

    What you’re talking about is not how game theory works. What you’re doing is taking the most basic, highly abstracted representation of a generic idea and expecting it to correlate with reality. It’s the same thing people do when they ascribe some kind of wish fulfillment to the free market or to evolutionary dynamics. It’s not even a platonic ideal - it’s drawing a supply/demand curve and thinking you understand how prices work in a market economy. Here’s the main issues you’re running into when you try to play Ultimatum with something the size of the Democratic Party:

    1. Noise. There is a permanent base of 3-5% of the electorate that’s going to vote Green, or whatever. The protest voters almost never rise above that noise floor. Focus on a single (potentially complex) issue would help. Green rallies (and others) often have everything from antivax to prison reform to the environment to voting rights to BDS and BLM. All of those things (except the antivax) might be important, but there needs to be a central focus. IMO it’s voting rights - I’d love DSA to drop everything to just start suing states and protesting for voting rights, because everything else is lost without that. We can even both/and, as long as there’s a vision and a focus on a main first objective. Right now we’re coming off like a bunch of verses from We Didn’t Start the Fire. Ultimatum with multiplayer and a noise function is a completely different game.
    2. Feedback loop. The consequences for actions needs to be tightened up, and they need a wide base. There needs to be visible and constant representation out in front of both cameras and politicians. This can be people like the Squad or figures like Robert Reich, but there needs to be a uniform voice that doesn’t wait for the election cycle. Groups like Moms for Liberty have this kind of thing on lock. They have a brand and spokespersons and will host and endorse, or else attack on Fox News within hours of a political decision. They’re shit in every way, but they can work the machine. Ultimatum with a delayed feedback loop is a completely different game because the failure of the deal is less attributable.
    3. Solidarity and messaging. The majority of Americans want universal health care. The majority of Americans want green energy. The majority of Americans want a cease fire in Gaza. By spreading opinions across multiple realizations of this top level policy objectives, we dilute the message. Ultimatum requires identifiable players with identifiable agendas.

    We as voters aren’t playing Ultimatum. Instead, we are playing minimax as an emergent strategy to defend the rights of marginalized populations.

    TauZero,

    Thank you for your detailed input!

    It’s not even a platonic ideal - it’s drawing a supply/demand curve and thinking you understand how prices work in a market economy.

    You got me 😁. I love drawing supply-and-demand curves. Seems pretty hopeless then if to even begin to understand how to vote “correctly” you need 5 years of game theory PhD. Hearing someone say “just trust me bro, the optimal strategy is that one” is not good enough. Voting was supposed to be for the masses…

    drop everything to just start suing states and protesting for voting rights

    I could get onboard with ranked-choice voting. My city used IRV for our latest mayoral primary election, and even though none of my ranked candidates won, I felt extremely satisfied that at least my voice was finally being heard. When a literal police-mayor got elected (winning primary by only 7000 votes), I had the comfort of full knowledge that this was not due to any spoiler effect on my part, but solely simply due to more people voting for him. If we’d campaign for ranked-choice voting in federal elections - presidential primaries and general - we can eliminate all the above hand-wringing. The Democratic party should be totally on board with this since they could finally get the Green protest vote.

    frauddogg,
    @frauddogg@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    Sometimes the rational strategy is to reject unfair split offers, even if that makes it a guarantee that you both get nothing.

    Yup. Mutually assured destruction: either the malfeasant and murderous can get right and start fixing what they’ve ruined, or I don’t have a single issue becoming a lead weight around the country’s neck. Ain’t like this country hasn’t tried to kill me by cop more than once anyway, I have no reason to want to see this awful joke of an empire perpetuate.

    6daemonbag,

    Is there a neutral review of project 2025 that you can point to? That site is ass and either points to a book you can buy or a thousand links to PDFs.

    gravitas_deficiency,

    Please define “neutral review” in this context.

    The whole thing is unrepentantly and deeply biased, and it’s intentional.

    I don’t know if this matches your definition of “neutral”, but it must be said that “neutral” is not synonymous with “unbiased”.

    6daemonbag,

    Yes I meant unbiased, but I was unsure if even using that word would be taken the wrong way. I don’t want to be taken as a centrist or anything like that, because I’m not even close.

    I just want a flat clinical review of what it says versus what it actually means without clickbait sensationalism. It is plainly bad, that much is obvious. But what are the real-life, bureaucratic implications of its potential execution?

    Thanks for the link, I’ll definitely check it out.

    PowerCrazy,

    The Constitution needs to be rewritten anyway and we are overdue, preserving the status quo is enabling American fascism.

    mawkishdave,
    @mawkishdave@lemmy.world avatar

    I am still hoping (sure it won’t happen) but the GOP pick someone else so Trump runs as a independent.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • [email protected]
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • oklahoma
  • Socialism
  • KbinCafe
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • Ask_kbincafe
  • SuperSentai
  • feritale
  • KamenRider
  • All magazines
    •