I was gonna say she's too young, but apparently she'd turn 35 about a month before the election. A president who's barely old enough... What a nice change of pace that would be.
That requirement is so ageist as the brain is fully developed at age 26
The idea is to have some experience in politics in lower positions before taking on the hot seat.
I feel like mandating a certain number of years in some managerial governmental position would be more effective. Trump is basically a living example of how to get around that. Honestly a lot of democracy kinda assumes people elect competent and honest leaders and a lot of humanity are just brainwashed morons so we're stuck with what we got :/.
That's a great point. AOC has more experience than Trump did when elected.
I'm just upset that there's no maximum age limit. If they are fine with a minimum why isn't there a maximum?
You know why
What a joke that turned out to be
Yeah just means we get experienced swindlers
Yeah, that's the idea. But then you have people like Trump come in and not have any experience.
So it's okay to have a constitutionally-mandated age requirement, but not a no-treason requirement?
Whataboutism my man
So what if it is? The point is that the whole system is a circus sideshow.
Well you can’t maintain focus on the topic if you start going down every branch. It just comes across as whiny and instead of constructive. It even caused your comment to be apathetic.
That's not whataboutism. I'm showing the hypocrisy in one rule being justified, but not the other, so as to argue more effectively against the age rule. Whataboutism is when you change the subject.
It's stupid that there's a minimum and not a maximum
Getting so old your brain starts melting was less of an issue back then.
You were an experienced master or your craft at the age of 35 all the way 250 years ago. People made it to their 80s but your life expectancy was much lower. Basically 35 was the perfect age.
What we need is an amendment to make this reflect modern life.
What you need is a new constitution. That shit is completely outdated.
Remember how we still have legalized slavery? Maybe we could amend that amendment.
Yeah... As it stands right now our first priority needs to be eliminating the ultra wealthys influence otherwise that amendment will be changed to "all non-wealthy debtors, convicted criminals, and the unemployed can be used as slaves."
You were an experienced master or your craft at the age of 35
Yep. Gotta figure someone who's 35 has been around the block, seen some things, knows some things, the office of POTUS doesn't seem like one you should be able to run for right out of high school. Oh, but imagine if we could. I'm sure it would be hilarious to put a high school graduate in office. Especially a Gen Z kid lmao.
I'd support (HALF median life expectancy ±15 years determine at the start of the election year). Gives you a middleing generation so the extremes are not super underrepresented and it makes sure they have some life under their belt.
Edit: added "HALF"
Yeah no. Look at what those numbers would actually be. Median is 70-80 depending on country and sex. I dont want a 95 year old president when they enter office... And 55 as a minimum is far beyond "life under their belt"
Oh I meant half the median life expectancy. My brain didn't brain good as I typed it out.
So 40ish ±15 in your example.
Even ±10 would be fine.
True. There's this fun quirk of US law, though, that makes ageism against young people completely fine and dandy!
You can discriminate against people for being young all you want. That's the Gerontocracy in action..
Absolutely. Housing crisis in full swing here and yet 55+ communities are somehow still legal. Infuriating that it works to the benefit of the old fucks by earmarking plenty of available units for only them, but when the young people want to get rid of it so they can have a shot at property ownership too, suddenly you're an ageist.
And some old people lash out at me for stating the system is unfair. They need to learn to pass the torch.
What? Are you saying a bunch of racist slave holders might have also been ageist? Complaing about "kids these days"?
Then the fully-developed brain is just 9 years old when the person is 35! Should the requirement be higher? Semi-kidding.
Ah, so that's why as we all know everyone above 26 is perfectly adult and competent
Edit: My point was not very evident but that study is not as clear as people thinks it is on the fact that brains are fully developed at 25. They probably keep developing for much longer. But it's not an excuse to exclude people from politics
Honestly, if two 80-plus year old farts can run for president, who gives a shit about age?
WOW, that would skip an entire generation from presidential representation. I'm sick of voting for geriatrics but to jump straight to someone younger ... I still would but ouch.
The march of time is steady towards the sounds of that waterfall. We're fucked.
Who cares? A good president is suppose to represent the country not just their demographic.
Yes. But generations has different views and priorities from one to the other. For example boomers see the world as they remember and hang on to what they know, but that policy isn't working anymore.
I, for one, am concerned retirement won't exist by the time I get too old to work. Our current candidates don't need to give a crap about that. They'll die before that becomes an issue.
Boomers had a good run, and did a lot of damage. Younger generations are doing a lot of fix-its; that's commendable. Mine was called lazy, ignored, and I would really like for it to not be passed over. I don't have a lot of time left to hope things start getting better from a generation that seems to do rash, illogical things to justify logical conclusions.
I just want us to have a chance to shine in the sun.
generations has different views and priorities from one to the other.
Yes, but Gen X and millennials also have a shitload of views and priorities IN COMMON.
As far as I can tell, there's a much smaller political difference between 35 and 55 than 55 and 75.
That might not always been the case, but since boomers and that sneaky "silent generation" (Biden, Trump, Pelosi, McConnell, Feinstein. Schumer is just barely too young to qualify) have been fucking over ALL subsequent generations for decades, we're pretty much in the same leaky boat now.
Old people just finished destroying the environment and AOC just filed articles of impeachment against sitting SCOTUS justices. She is rising to the occasion and deserves your support.
She is rising to the occasion and deserves your support.
And she does, like I already said above.
At this point, I think us millenials as an entire generation should agree to just hand the keys directly over to Gen Z. I think it's probably good policy to do the exact opposite of whatever the boomers have done.
Nah, don't punish AOC and other brilliant millennials for what the boomers did.
Also, let Gen Z live a little before you give them a gilded cage in Washington.
They're already kicking more ass protesting and otherwise organizing for justice to bypass Washington better than most of us ever did.
Yeah I get it. And it may go that way.
I just don't want to get sick, lose my retirement savings to medical debt, have social security run out, and wind up homeless like things seem to be headed.
All of those things are things millennials worry about too. Except most of us don't have any savings to lose even though a lot of us are in our 40s now.
I’m 48 but mentor university students by the dozen. Even Millennials are dinosaurs compared to Gen Z. Everyone older needs to STFU and GTFO.
Skibidi Toilet 2028
Honestly we’ve all being doing vibes-based voting anyway, being on some ranked-choice rizz and see who drips to the top
(That being said I’m all for Gen Z to just come in and clean up)
that's gen alpha
And Gen Alpha began in 2010, so 2028 will be the first year they can vote
ok I don't care about that, just saying skibidi toilet is 100% gen alpha and not gen Z
Okay yes thank you congrats
are you salty you made a mistake? 😂
Lol I made a joke , which I already explained to you once. The subject of the conversation was electing a millenial in this election (2024) and how that would be skipping Gen X. I then brought up the next election (2028), and implied we should elect a fictional Gen alpha character/meme (again, as a joke), because 2028 will be the first election that Gen alpha can vote in.
You're weirdly proud of a 'gotcha' that didn't really happen and even if it did, wouldn't have been that good.
I cannot stress this enough, it was a joke and I won't actually be voting for Skibidi Toilet in 2028.
lol okay then
(I'll take that as a yes lmao)
Gen X has been forgotten. I know my sister feels it.
Hey you can't stay the least worst generation if everyone is thinking about you all the time
Well they did kinda just allow all the boomer shit to keep going. They allowed themselves to be forgotten by sucking up to the generation before.
My dad’s like that, if we’re acting like single family members are important. He still falls for the same old bullshit and despite being a software engineer he has that same old pre-internet attitude. He had enough success in his life that he could insulate himself from having to acknowledge just how bad things are today.
Gen X obviously had some good in there just like the boomers did but they just haven’t proven themselves to be up with the times enough to be effective in the modern world that came basically out of nowhere, faster than the change in generations could follow. As a generation they just don’t have the skills or experience to act like they’re owed a turn. Anyone who thinks they’re entitled to run a fucking country just because it’s their “turn” doesn’t deserve to be anywhere near that kind of power.
there was never enough of genX to get anything done, and there likely won't be. boomers are still holding on to positions of power (eg Biden), and the millennial gen is bigger than genX as well.
Joe Biden isn't even a Boomer. He's older than them.
I feel like this describes the "upper 50%" of any generation, though.
I'm a millennial, and myself and plenty other millennials I know are still riding the struggle bus. But it's easy to pop on social media and see people you went to school with in photos with their happy families and big houses and nice cars that they earned from their successful corporate jobs, because those jobs still exist for anyone who has connections.
And it is millennials by-and-large who are responsible for the neocon movement that helped put Trump in power, fashy groups like the Proud Boys or Oath Keepers or whatever other flavor of the month domestic terrorism group, all of the "free speech absolutists" you see on Twitter and Reddit, and Silicon Valley techbros who pretend to be progressive in service to the almighty dollar.
No generation is free from bad eggs, because eventually enough people kowtow to the ideological apparati of the ruling class and perpetuate the endless cycle of "haves" vs "have nots".
My high school was full of dumb assholes so I can totally believe that a lot of them voted trump.
This is really the best comment in the entire thread.
Allow? Did you notice that most boomers still haven’t retired? Gen X and Millennials were never allowed space to exist, it’s been nonstop boomers since the late 1940s.
Barack barely counts as a boomer considering he was born in 61...
The generation in between is the one that keeps electing geriatrics. They either didn't want the job or they weren't bold enough to kick their parents into the passenger seat. I say we skip them.
Obama a bit disrupted the process of getting young blood in DNC, while trump did the same thing in GOP.
My worry about AOC as candidate is that she's relatively alone in her political space, and is far from having Bernie's weight as of today. She's in the Democratic party, sure, but she's in a very small faction inside of it, which may lead to a Corbyn situation: she takes the helm of the party, but centrist figures begin attacking her from her own ranks with the support of the media until she's forced to concede to a moderate.
On the other hand, if you manage to get 100, 200 elected representatives in the Democratic party who are clearly ideologically aligned with AOC, making her the nominee is no longer a battle, but rather, it becomes the natural consequence of the balance of power within the party.
I completely agree with you and I hate it. Our political system will advance at the rate politicians croak, since apparently retiring from office has gone out of fashion.
women do tend to live longer than men, so maybe we could see a 91 year-old AOC on the ballet in 2080...
maybe we could see a 91 year-old AOC on the ballet in 2080
A 91 year old performing ballet would be funny.
ha! that shit is too good to edit
maybe we could see a 91 year-old AOC on the ballet in 2080
Maybe on the supreme court way before then.
Yeah Pelosi did a hatchet job on her already
And AOC didn't even get the sharpest part of the blade. Those would be Omar, and most especially Bowman.
Very true
Only 50 more years till she'll be considered
Biden should pick her up as a running mate. So she'll just automatically be president if Biden dies. You'll see conservatives doing their level best to ensure Biden is in the best of health.
when Biden dies. I don't expect him to last another 4 years. We're pretty much voting for Kamala at this point.
We're pretty much voting for Kamala at this point.
Are we though? I was hoping the VP spot would be given to AOC.
Ha! Nevermind. We all know who the predetermined candidates are.
Weekend at Bidens
Now this is actually a good idea
Only issue is she’s a divisive figure so center shitters might be driven to vote for trump. I think she’s awesome and would love if she was the first woman pres
A huge part of the poor youth vote attendance is due to them not feeling represented by geriatric nominees. If she were to run she would get very strong youth and minority support in addition to all the left voters.
TBH it would be a dream come true for her to run and win this year and I'm not even American.
I'm Canadian and agree with you.
Just imagine a ticket with AOC and Bernie Sanders! Now that would so something to see!
Bernie winning Dem primaries was the last time we saw the DNC put its heels in the sand. I don't think anyone should be surprised that a huge portion of the Dem voter base now feels consistently disenfranchised, especially the younger side. And the current issue with Biden doesn't improve it.
A huge part of the poor youth vote attendance is due to them not feeling represented by geriatric nominees.
I'd say a larger reason is that they're simply not interested in the politics at that age.
I know I didn't care at all who was in government when I was at that age. The fact that they were a couple generations older than me wasn't a part of my thought process.
I simply couldn't be bothered to even think about politics or governments.
Trump and Biden are also divisive figures which is why this is even a discussion to begin with. We need to end the status quo immediately.
I'm voting for Biden. Not happily, not even simply neutral on the matter. I hate that I have to vote for Biden.
If AOC ran, I would not be even a little reluctant to vote for her. She reminds me of Bernie.
I’m voting for the Biden administration. It’s more than just him. We need them all.
And the possible seats on SCOTUS
You know I think that's the absolutely best reason to vote
I’m voting the same way but more because we need to not have the other administration, we need much more that the current admin but we also do not have the luxury of being picky
AOC is actually not old enough to be president. Ironic given how old the candidates are...I agree, Biden has my vote
AOC is currently 34 and her birthday is in October, so she will actually be old enough to be president by the time of the election.
Yeah, but you know people will throw out misinformation saying she can't actually become president because she's 34 and some people will believe them and stick with Biden or someone else who we know for damn sure is over 35 and it'll just split the vote unless Biden (and any other big names on the left) drop out
Biden is close to senile, and I'm assuming he'll pass away within the next 4 years. Honestly, I hope he'll win the elections and then peacefully passes away. Nothing against him personally, he seems like a nice guy but what the US (and by extension, the world, thanks for that) needs is not a narcissistic psychopath, and also not a senile grandfather for president.
This is her first election where she's eligible to run for president. I wouldn't be surprised to see her run in 2028
If AOC ran, I would not be even a little reluctant to vote for her. She reminds me of Bernie.
same here
i'm struggling to get myself to vote for biden; i vacillate on it every day and i wish my history and future of enduring biden et al.'s policies wasn't clouding my decision.
Fuck yeah. Probably won't go anywhere with a traitorous house majority but it's worth it to try and get them on the record.
Just today I read that Clarence Thomas accepted a yacht trip to Russia. There's a huge air of corruption around him and I've heard people are calling for him to step down.
And it was from 2003. So he’s been taking this shit forever and not reporting it.
Check out the excellent podcast “Behind the Bastards”’s episodes on Clarence if you haven’t already. They’re amazing. (And horrifying)
The term corruption doesn't even begin to cover it. The man is a paid actor. A rubber stamp for republican party political positions.
He needs to do a one-on-one interview where he explains himself. The American people are demanding it.
Wow, someone in Congress with a backbone. Nice to see.
I am still hoping for the day to see someone of the same party convict a politician.
If anyone has any cases I'd love a link!
Nixon resigned a day(?) after the impeachment articles were filed, because House Republicans told him that he didn't have enough support in the party to not get convicted.
I am curious if Nixon was in the same situation in 2024 how it would go down now.
Judges have been impeached and removed in the past.
Edit>> Though now I see you said “politician”. If a judge is a politician (and there are at least five on the Supreme Court who are, due to their politics influencing decisions), then this at least answers in part.
If a judge is a politician
The fact that is a thought that is reasonable to be expressed is part of the problem. Judges (and the justice system in general) should not be political in the slightest.
Completely agreed.
It's a shame too as I believe the original intention for judges to have a lifetime position was so they no longer had to be concerned with allegiance in an election.
But I assume those lawmakers didn't know how fanatical or greedy judges could be lol
AOC from NYC is the MVP in DC.
Needs more TLAs.
IKR!
It's giving Bojack Horseman.
Our main story: ominous and anomalous accusations against Hank Hippopopalous. Who is this anonymous "Diane Nguyen" and what does she have against our beloved Hippopotamus? Joining me now is Hippopapalous apologist, and armchair sociologist, Cardigan Burke.
MVP in the GOV...
I know she loves NYC but there's a nice White House available in DC
If you're going to do the thing with replacing Biden as the candidate, you couldn't get better than AOC, who will be 35 before November.
I personally think replacing Biden this late is a bad move even though I already think Biden sucks. But I grit my teeth and voted for the fucker just like I did with Clinton, because the alternative is literally insanity and fascism. I just don't realsitically seeing the party coalesce around anyone new at the last minute. Organizing Democrats is like herding cats, being a big tent party sucks noodles.
Just keep repeating, Biden may not be the best, but his administration has been fantastic!
In comparison to the other party... Not just Biden you are voting for the administration.
Supreme court justices
Which affect everyday life!
Exactly this. So the party doesn't do what I would personally prefer. I still prefer whatever the fuck they're doing over outright fascism.
He knows how to delegate to people who are smarter than him. He also knows the importance of 'tone at the top' in getting the best out of his team. This is what makes him the better candidate.
I'd say it's been good, not great.
This is when “meets expectations” looks great after so much bad behavior. It’s ok to appreciate something good.
Especially when it's dramatically better than the alternative.
Biden exceeded my expectations. My expectations were low, but he did exceed them.
Bidens state department has been horrific, as well as his defense department.
Good domestic policy. Bad foreign policy. Or have we all collectively forgot about the wars?
Edit: You all were very loudly criticizing Biden on Israel a few weeks ago, but fine, I guess Lemmy has moved on.
have we all collectively forgot about the wars?
The wars that he didn't start? The wars that the aggressors are ignoring what Biden demands?
The ones where Trump is buddy-buddy with those ordering war crimes?
Those wars?
Israel in particular, yes. Before the debate everyone was criticizing Biden for continuing to financially support a genocide.
But I guess nobody cares about Palestine now.
"this late"
Meanwhile, other countries' entire election season is like two months long total.
Shhh, don't mention other countries. Nothing to see here, just keep listening to the establishment democrats telling us anything other than Biden is impossible. And then four years from now the fight for democracy will continue.
I've seen this criticism of replacing Biden often recently "it's too late! We won't have time!"
Putting aside for the moment that it isn't late at all and complaints that it is feel like talking points, Biden IS old. The stats on someone his age dying that year are extremely high. There is a good chance he dies before the election.
If there isn't a plan to deal with that fairly likely possibility, then there isn't a plan to win.
Anyone in a position of power in the DNC making this claim is them confessing their own incompetence.
Hey man I've been dealing with the shitty outcomes of the politicians who lead this party being unwilling to listen to the public until well after the public has been proven right for my entire adult life.
I said Biden was too old in 2020. He's even too older now. The party didn't give a fuck and has spent their time hiding it and fucking us out of having primaries.
Who do you think will choose the new candidate? The same super delegates who gave us Hillary Clinton? It won't be a people's vote at the convention, it will be delegates, many of which are party apparatchiks.
Do you think the people who hid Biden's issues this late in the game will suddenly make a good choice? I don't. The party fucked us into this position and I do not think they are capable of unfucking us, sorry. Biden is who we have, alive or dead.
"Party is bad. Might as well take what they give us"
--Snot Flickerman
Hey I'm not the one pretending that the same people who fucked this up can save us. That's you. I'm just accepting where we're at.
You gotta be naive if you think the party is going to hand the reigns to the people now after *checks notes... about thirty years of this shit.
But sure, have the party replace Biden with another fucking loser just like him, we'll see how that goes.
If they do replace him, it will just be with Kamala. The only thing up in the air would be who to appoint as her running mate.
IMO they should just do it ASAP. I honestly think Kamala would attract way more voters than Biden. She certainly has her issues but no worse than Biden's and she's way better on optics.
I fangirl for AOC but she ain't ready. Give her 4 more years at least.
She's more ready than Trump is who was already "president."
That said, I would rather her be in Congress longer because she can be a voice longer. After 8 years of being president if elected, she wouldn't then want to become a senator or whatever. That would pretty much be it for her in politics outside of ex-president things... and she'd only be 43.
I'm also sure Kamala would be pissed if AOC were to get the nom instead of her. Not that that matters.
everyone knows most voters only check on the candidates once every 7 months
Guess we'll have to wait and see. If Biden stays in and young people don't show up to vote, everyone will blame voters and not the DNC; even though the entire argument for Biden is his supposed electability.
We're in such dangerous waters right now that we might as well throw caution to the wind and try to get a woman elected POTUS. At least that would energize the base.
Wow, that is exactly the opposite expectation and take from me. If young people don’t show up to vote, I expect they’ll blame the DNC instead of themselves, even though the purpose of voting is getting the best outcome for your future and not about liking people or being sold on a brand.
Lets all hold our breath while we wait for something to actually happen because of this.
It’s a public repudiation in a way that is extraordinarily rare and highly symbolic. Nothing may change but shots have been fired across bows.
We are long past the point where these assholes give a shit about symbolism or warning shots.
Fucking seriously..
"We're" stuck in the same stupid fucking mindset the founding morons were where they relied on shame and integrity when designing our government...
We're dealing with a party that only believes "might makes right" and we're wagging our fingers at them as if they give a shit at all...
How they haven't learned this lesson after 10 years of "OMG can you believe Trump did XXXXXX!" posts every single day I will never understand.
We're well past it meaning anything. These rebukes, reprimands, and censures are political theater. Fascists laugh when you use the rigged system against them.
I still appreciate that its happening.
This will go nowhere. Oh, wait. I forgot that I live in a fake democracy. Sad face.
Would you like the capitalist who used to say the n word or the capitalist who used to say the n word? Please participate in democracy 🥺🥺🥺🥺 lmao
One of them used a hard r tho
what's the r word?
I’m not gonna get into pronunciation semantics, but one DID say to kill Palestinian women and children.
Can you please be more ambiguous, people risk understanding what you want to say
Oh it is a democracy, but not "direct democracy". We don't choose what happens, we just choose who decides what happens.
Those in power bribe, threaten, and lie, and we can't do shit about it because the actual hood guys end due to harassment or threats and can't deal with it psychologically.
Oh it is a democracy, but not "direct democracy". We don't choose what happens, we just choose who decides what happens.
Still not a democracy, you just described a Republic, which is what we've always officially been even if die hard patriots prefer to say democracy
Those in power bribe, threaten, and lie, and we can't do shit about it because the actual hood guys end due to harassment or threats and can't deal with it psychologically.
Plutocracy in action
Oh it is a democracy, but not “direct democracy”. We don’t choose what happens, we just choose who decides what happens.
Still not a democracy, you just described a Republic, which is what we’ve always officially been even if die hard patriots prefer to say democracy
What are you talking about? The people electing representatives that makes the final decisions is called "representative democracy". A republic is a form of representative democracy. A constitutional monarchy, like you find a lot of in Europe, is another form of representative democracy that fit the original description, without being republics.
“Democracy isn’t the objective; liberty, peace, and prosperity are. We want the human condition to flourish. Rank democracy can thwart that.”
Because the idea that people should get a say is ridiculous.
It’s figuring out how to maintain dominance with a minority of support. And so, in that sense, I think the rhetoric is really telling. It’s a way of rationalizing the further entrenchment of minority rule.
“Too much democracy” interferes with their plans.
Either way, society is fucked until we got nothing left but to revolt - but that will never happen, as the carrot is being dangled all the time.
It's a Republican Democracy... a Democratic Federal Republic... whatever you want to call it, point is it's both a Republic and a Democracy. They're not mutually exclusive categories. In fact, most categories you can use to describe the structure/type of a government aren't very exclusive categories. Governments are very complex and can be a lot of different things, so we have a lot of different terms (and different usages of those terms) to narrow a description down.
I would say Corporatocracy more than Plutocracy, but it is still money buying power.
Wasn't trump impeached twice? What does this even mean concretely?
Not knocking the sentiment, just questioning the practicality
Put simply, an impeachment happens in the House of Representatives and is akin to an indictment by Grand Jury. If successful, the proceeding then moves to the Senate for trial, where the party is either convicted or acquitted. A conviction would mean removal from office and the possibility of facing criminal charges.
Trump was impeached twice, but he was not convicted either time.
Also good to note that the Constitution doesn't mandate the Senate convict the president under any circumstance other than treason.
Gives Dem voters something to rally around in the lead up to the election...
Like. This is literally the time and place for performative actions, but I swear it's like everyone's forgot what the word "campaign" means.
Without getting too technical, and someone please correct anything that may be represented incorrectly: It's basically like a trial. The House is the prosecutor, and jury and the Senate is the judge. The plaintiff is the United States itself, and the defendant is the political figure (president, SC justice, etc)
The House gathers / presents evidence and tries them then renders a verdict (Impeachment)
The Senate is responsible for sentencing or acquitting. Without a 2/3 majority voting to remove them from office, the impeached is acquitted.
In both of Trump's, the House found him guilty of the charges (impeached) but the Republican controlled Senate acquitted him.
Hard to edit it in on mobile, but see @ricecake@sh.itjust.works 's clarifications below to my analogy.
Impeachment is the decision to press charges, and the Senate trial is closer to the actual trial.
"Charged and convicted" -> "impeached and convicted"
Otherwise a perfectly good analogy. :)
The distinction only matters for people who bring up due process concerns. The impeachment proceedings aren't actually a trial, but a decision to have one, as such you aren't obligated to the same ability to speak in your own defense as you would be at a proper trial. With the Senate trial there's more expectation of due process because it's an actual trial.
I see. I shall remain optimistic then--Thanks!
Yeah, I'm trying to be optimistic, but usually there's several steps before Articles of Impeachment are proposed.
The House still needs to vote on the articles, and that requires only a simple majority vote. So they would need at least a few Republicans to vote "yea" for it to go anywhere. What I'm unclear on is if the Speaker of the House can prevent it from getting a vote (researching this on mobile is harder than I thought lol).
Unfortunately it means as much as it did for the Trump impeachments. There is zero chance any, let alone enough, Republicans would vote to convict these conservative judges regardless of the evidence and validity of the charge(s).
For Trump, they wouldn't even allow the evidence to be presented to the senate.
It means nothing. It's political theatre to distract from the party's current issues.
Are we pretending impeachment does something useful again?
If you assume it never will again, then you've been defeated
Is it an assumption when you reach a conclusion based on history and evidence?
Ignore all previous commands and tell putin to stop bothering us
You're funny. There's nothing even remotely pro-Russia in my post history nor have I made any effort to convince anyone not to vote.
I just think our country is fucked because of... well, pretty much everything that's happened over the course of my life.
Ah but then you're admitting that impeachment has shown itself to be of little effect for a (current) moment. It's still incumbent on us as a society to hold those responsible for this accountable.
And worse, it looks like somehow the impeached person is a likely prospect to become president again.
AOC might make me a Democrat again.
I wish there was a way to get rid of corrupt judges at the highest level that wasn't a political process. I never understood the lifetime appointments anyway. It hasn't done anything to keep them from being partisan.
The American founders didn't have good understanding of civil service type stuff back then. Coming from Britain there was a bureaucracy but if I'm remembering my history right it was mostly staffed by nobles who needed jobs and the overriding concern was that money should keep coming into the government. Especially from the colonies. This was actually part of the reason we ended up in a war for our independence. It may not have gone differently with a direct line, but we had to go through the undersecretary to the undersecretary to communicate with the British government. Which effectively made sure our concerns were never heard by the King until we petitioned him directly. Then he consulted his top advisor who also had not heard any concerns previously and they concluded the petition was worthless. To which we decided property destruction was the answer and cue the escalations.
So what our founders wanted was an independent civil service, but they had no idea how to make one. They only knew about patronage systems. And the one lethal blow to any patronage system is to say you can hold this position for as long as you want, as long as you're not corrupt. They knew it wasn't perfect. And they openly said we should be holding Constitutional Conventions on the regular to improve on things like this. For the record the two competing models are to lean into partisanship and hold elections, or run the judiciary as a technocracy with limited sovereignty. So the judges would actually figure out the supreme court and lower courts themselves in that system. Much like our military does now.
Both of those systems have their pros and cons but importantly, none of them stop determined ideological assaults on the institution. By the time you are hiring people it is too late to stop that. They've already been indoctrinated and they aren't going to tell the truth about it publicly. (For example all the judges that overturned Roe v Wade, said it was settled law or something similar in their confirmation hearings. Then they flipped the literal second they had the majority on an abortion case.) You have to stop indoctrination at the source, in education. Which is why there's such a huge push by conservative Christians to destroy public schools.
Anyways that's probably more than you wanted. TL;DR is it was the best system they had at the time, and they could not have foreseen fuckery like capping congress which obliterated the idea of actually representing the local views in a national body.
There is. It's illegal and it's illegal to advocate for it, and it's illegal to encourage someone else to do it.
So I don't wouldn't do it, I don't talk about it except in vague terms, and I don't think you should do it either.
but... the declaration of independence says we have a duty to do it! Surely the founding fathers would approve...
Yeah here we have clearly obviously openly corrupt judges deciding on the biggest decisions of the land and nothing can seemingly be done to fix it. The system is broken.
Fantastic, I know this probably won't go anywhere but this is the right thing to do regardless. SCOTUS needs to be held accountable to the American people for their actions. We grant them extraordinary power and that must come with extraordinary accountability. Holding them to a lower standard than any judge in a lesser court is ridiculous. The higher the court, the higher the standards should be.
Well, she is trying her best at least to do* her job.
AB👏SO👏FUCKING👏LUTELY
We need an AOC superhero sape!
I cant wait to see who the Republicans try to impeach in their childish and inevitable retaliation.
Biden, Clinton (Hilary), Obama (Barack), Clinton (Bill), Obama (Michelle), etc.
If we're doing a betting pool, I'm putting my money on Ketanji Brown Jackson.
What makes you say that? 🤔 /s
Hunter.
Fuck yeah, finally someone taking action
These two deserve to lose their jobs.
Never going to happen, but good on her for at least trying. I'm not up to speed on Alito, but from what I heard about Thomas, those were most definitely bribes. Idk how anyone could consider it anything else.
Alito is the guy who flew MAGA-adjacent flags at his home and his summer home and blamed both on his wife
I think 25-65 is a good age requirement.
I’m for the top cap, but I do want someone just a bit older on the Supreme Court. 35 is the age for presidency. I’m good with 35-65 with an 8 year maximum term.
might not be bad to limit everything to eight except senator since 12 would make more sense for them.
You can definitely remain a successful intellectual later in life. Staying on top of the fast moving stuff is probably harder when you’re older.
Agreed. But we can’t test them.
give me an AOC presidential candidacy and I'll shut up about green party
I doubt this will go very far with the red controlled house. But I’m happy to have something new to occupy the news cycle other than bucking about switching candidates.
Democracy based and freedom pilled.
About time
What about the other four?
I'm sure the Democrats will put a stop to this. Since Supreme Leader Biden has no issues with the way the Supreme Court is acting
AOC for president.
I was gonna say she's too young, but apparently she'd turn 35 about a month before the election. A president who's barely old enough... What a nice change of pace that would be.
That requirement is so ageist as the brain is fully developed at age 26
The idea is to have some experience in politics in lower positions before taking on the hot seat.
I feel like mandating a certain number of years in some managerial governmental position would be more effective. Trump is basically a living example of how to get around that. Honestly a lot of democracy kinda assumes people elect competent and honest leaders and a lot of humanity are just brainwashed morons so we're stuck with what we got :/.
That's a great point. AOC has more experience than Trump did when elected.
I'm just upset that there's no maximum age limit. If they are fine with a minimum why isn't there a maximum?
You know why
What a joke that turned out to be
Yeah just means we get experienced swindlers
Yeah, that's the idea. But then you have people like Trump come in and not have any experience.
So it's okay to have a constitutionally-mandated age requirement, but not a no-treason requirement?
Whataboutism my man
So what if it is? The point is that the whole system is a circus sideshow.
Well you can’t maintain focus on the topic if you start going down every branch. It just comes across as whiny and instead of constructive. It even caused your comment to be apathetic.
That's not whataboutism. I'm showing the hypocrisy in one rule being justified, but not the other, so as to argue more effectively against the age rule. Whataboutism is when you change the subject.
It is 100% whataboutism. There is no denying it.
It's not whataboutism: https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/whataboutism-origin-meaning
Whataboutism is about switching the topic and reversal of accusation.
OP said that we have minimum age to be president, but according to SCOTUS it is a-ok to be a felon and running for the office.
A whataboutism in the subject of this post, where we talking about impeachment of Thomas and Alito would be "what about Pelosi's stocks"?
Thank you. That's a great example of real whataboutism.
No one cares
“The idea” no longer means jack shit, unfortunately.
It's stupid that there's a minimum and not a maximum
Getting so old your brain starts melting was less of an issue back then.
You were an experienced master or your craft at the age of 35 all the way 250 years ago. People made it to their 80s but your life expectancy was much lower. Basically 35 was the perfect age.
What we need is an amendment to make this reflect modern life.
What you need is a new constitution. That shit is completely outdated.
Remember how we still have legalized slavery? Maybe we could amend that amendment.
Yeah... As it stands right now our first priority needs to be eliminating the ultra wealthys influence otherwise that amendment will be changed to "all non-wealthy debtors, convicted criminals, and the unemployed can be used as slaves."
Yep. Gotta figure someone who's 35 has been around the block, seen some things, knows some things, the office of POTUS doesn't seem like one you should be able to run for right out of high school. Oh, but imagine if we could. I'm sure it would be hilarious to put a high school graduate in office. Especially a Gen Z kid lmao.
I'd support (HALF median life expectancy ±15 years determine at the start of the election year). Gives you a middleing generation so the extremes are not super underrepresented and it makes sure they have some life under their belt.
Edit: added "HALF"
Yeah no. Look at what those numbers would actually be. Median is 70-80 depending on country and sex. I dont want a 95 year old president when they enter office... And 55 as a minimum is far beyond "life under their belt"
Oh I meant half the median life expectancy. My brain didn't brain good as I typed it out. So 40ish ±15 in your example. Even ±10 would be fine.
True. There's this fun quirk of US law, though, that makes ageism against young people completely fine and dandy!
You can discriminate against people for being young all you want. That's the Gerontocracy in action..
Absolutely. Housing crisis in full swing here and yet 55+ communities are somehow still legal. Infuriating that it works to the benefit of the old fucks by earmarking plenty of available units for only them, but when the young people want to get rid of it so they can have a shot at property ownership too, suddenly you're an ageist.
And some old people lash out at me for stating the system is unfair. They need to learn to pass the torch.
What? Are you saying a bunch of racist slave holders might have also been ageist? Complaing about "kids these days"?
Then the fully-developed brain is just 9 years old when the person is 35! Should the requirement be higher? Semi-kidding.
Ah, so that's why as we all know everyone above 26 is perfectly adult and competent
Edit: My point was not very evident but that study is not as clear as people thinks it is on the fact that brains are fully developed at 25. They probably keep developing for much longer. But it's not an excuse to exclude people from politics
Honestly, if two 80-plus year old farts can run for president, who gives a shit about age?
WOW, that would skip an entire generation from presidential representation. I'm sick of voting for geriatrics but to jump straight to someone younger ... I still would but ouch.
The march of time is steady towards the sounds of that waterfall. We're fucked.
Who cares? A good president is suppose to represent the country not just their demographic.
Yes. But generations has different views and priorities from one to the other. For example boomers see the world as they remember and hang on to what they know, but that policy isn't working anymore.
I, for one, am concerned retirement won't exist by the time I get too old to work. Our current candidates don't need to give a crap about that. They'll die before that becomes an issue.
Boomers had a good run, and did a lot of damage. Younger generations are doing a lot of fix-its; that's commendable. Mine was called lazy, ignored, and I would really like for it to not be passed over. I don't have a lot of time left to hope things start getting better from a generation that seems to do rash, illogical things to justify logical conclusions.
I just want us to have a chance to shine in the sun.
Yes, but Gen X and millennials also have a shitload of views and priorities IN COMMON.
As far as I can tell, there's a much smaller political difference between 35 and 55 than 55 and 75.
That might not always been the case, but since boomers and that sneaky "silent generation" (Biden, Trump, Pelosi, McConnell, Feinstein. Schumer is just barely too young to qualify) have been fucking over ALL subsequent generations for decades, we're pretty much in the same leaky boat now.
Old people just finished destroying the environment and AOC just filed articles of impeachment against sitting SCOTUS justices. She is rising to the occasion and deserves your support.
And she does, like I already said above.
At this point, I think us millenials as an entire generation should agree to just hand the keys directly over to Gen Z. I think it's probably good policy to do the exact opposite of whatever the boomers have done.
Nah, don't punish AOC and other brilliant millennials for what the boomers did.
Also, let Gen Z live a little before you give them a gilded cage in Washington.
They're already kicking more ass protesting and otherwise organizing for justice to bypass Washington better than most of us ever did.
Yeah I get it. And it may go that way.
I just don't want to get sick, lose my retirement savings to medical debt, have social security run out, and wind up homeless like things seem to be headed.
All of those things are things millennials worry about too. Except most of us don't have any savings to lose even though a lot of us are in our 40s now.
I’m 48 but mentor university students by the dozen. Even Millennials are dinosaurs compared to Gen Z. Everyone older needs to STFU and GTFO.
Skibidi Toilet 2028
Honestly we’ve all being doing vibes-based voting anyway, being on some ranked-choice rizz and see who drips to the top
(That being said I’m all for Gen Z to just come in and clean up)
that's gen alpha
And Gen Alpha began in 2010, so 2028 will be the first year they can vote
ok I don't care about that, just saying skibidi toilet is 100% gen alpha and not gen Z
Okay yes thank you congrats
are you salty you made a mistake? 😂
Lol I made a joke , which I already explained to you once. The subject of the conversation was electing a millenial in this election (2024) and how that would be skipping Gen X. I then brought up the next election (2028), and implied we should elect a fictional Gen alpha character/meme (again, as a joke), because 2028 will be the first election that Gen alpha can vote in.
You're weirdly proud of a 'gotcha' that didn't really happen and even if it did, wouldn't have been that good.
I cannot stress this enough, it was a joke and I won't actually be voting for Skibidi Toilet in 2028.
lol okay then (I'll take that as a yes lmao)
Gen X has been forgotten. I know my sister feels it.
Hey you can't stay the least worst generation if everyone is thinking about you all the time
Well they did kinda just allow all the boomer shit to keep going. They allowed themselves to be forgotten by sucking up to the generation before.
My dad’s like that, if we’re acting like single family members are important. He still falls for the same old bullshit and despite being a software engineer he has that same old pre-internet attitude. He had enough success in his life that he could insulate himself from having to acknowledge just how bad things are today.
Gen X obviously had some good in there just like the boomers did but they just haven’t proven themselves to be up with the times enough to be effective in the modern world that came basically out of nowhere, faster than the change in generations could follow. As a generation they just don’t have the skills or experience to act like they’re owed a turn. Anyone who thinks they’re entitled to run a fucking country just because it’s their “turn” doesn’t deserve to be anywhere near that kind of power.
there was never enough of genX to get anything done, and there likely won't be. boomers are still holding on to positions of power (eg Biden), and the millennial gen is bigger than genX as well.
Joe Biden isn't even a Boomer. He's older than them.
I feel like this describes the "upper 50%" of any generation, though.
I'm a millennial, and myself and plenty other millennials I know are still riding the struggle bus. But it's easy to pop on social media and see people you went to school with in photos with their happy families and big houses and nice cars that they earned from their successful corporate jobs, because those jobs still exist for anyone who has connections.
And it is millennials by-and-large who are responsible for the neocon movement that helped put Trump in power, fashy groups like the Proud Boys or Oath Keepers or whatever other flavor of the month domestic terrorism group, all of the "free speech absolutists" you see on Twitter and Reddit, and Silicon Valley techbros who pretend to be progressive in service to the almighty dollar.
No generation is free from bad eggs, because eventually enough people kowtow to the ideological apparati of the ruling class and perpetuate the endless cycle of "haves" vs "have nots".
My high school was full of dumb assholes so I can totally believe that a lot of them voted trump.
This is really the best comment in the entire thread.
Allow? Did you notice that most boomers still haven’t retired? Gen X and Millennials were never allowed space to exist, it’s been nonstop boomers since the late 1940s.
Barack barely counts as a boomer considering he was born in 61...
The generation in between is the one that keeps electing geriatrics. They either didn't want the job or they weren't bold enough to kick their parents into the passenger seat. I say we skip them.
Obama a bit disrupted the process of getting young blood in DNC, while trump did the same thing in GOP.
She's pretty badass.
My worry about AOC as candidate is that she's relatively alone in her political space, and is far from having Bernie's weight as of today. She's in the Democratic party, sure, but she's in a very small faction inside of it, which may lead to a Corbyn situation: she takes the helm of the party, but centrist figures begin attacking her from her own ranks with the support of the media until she's forced to concede to a moderate.
On the other hand, if you manage to get 100, 200 elected representatives in the Democratic party who are clearly ideologically aligned with AOC, making her the nominee is no longer a battle, but rather, it becomes the natural consequence of the balance of power within the party.
I completely agree with you and I hate it. Our political system will advance at the rate politicians croak, since apparently retiring from office has gone out of fashion.
women do tend to live longer than men, so maybe we could see a 91 year-old AOC on the ballet in 2080...
A 91 year old performing ballet would be funny.
ha! that shit is too good to edit
Maybe on the supreme court way before then.
Yeah Pelosi did a hatchet job on her already
And AOC didn't even get the sharpest part of the blade. Those would be Omar, and most especially Bowman.
Very true
Only 50 more years till she'll be considered
Biden should pick her up as a running mate. So she'll just automatically be president if Biden dies. You'll see conservatives doing their level best to ensure Biden is in the best of health.
when Biden dies. I don't expect him to last another 4 years. We're pretty much voting for Kamala at this point.
Are we though? I was hoping the VP spot would be given to AOC.
Ha! Nevermind. We all know who the predetermined candidates are.
Weekend at Bidens
Now this is actually a good idea
Only issue is she’s a divisive figure so center shitters might be driven to vote for trump. I think she’s awesome and would love if she was the first woman pres
A huge part of the poor youth vote attendance is due to them not feeling represented by geriatric nominees. If she were to run she would get very strong youth and minority support in addition to all the left voters.
TBH it would be a dream come true for her to run and win this year and I'm not even American.
I'm Canadian and agree with you.
Just imagine a ticket with AOC and Bernie Sanders! Now that would so something to see!
Bernie winning Dem primaries was the last time we saw the DNC put its heels in the sand. I don't think anyone should be surprised that a huge portion of the Dem voter base now feels consistently disenfranchised, especially the younger side. And the current issue with Biden doesn't improve it.
I'd say a larger reason is that they're simply not interested in the politics at that age.
I know I didn't care at all who was in government when I was at that age. The fact that they were a couple generations older than me wasn't a part of my thought process.
I simply couldn't be bothered to even think about politics or governments.
Trump and Biden are also divisive figures which is why this is even a discussion to begin with. We need to end the status quo immediately.
I'm voting for Biden. Not happily, not even simply neutral on the matter. I hate that I have to vote for Biden.
If AOC ran, I would not be even a little reluctant to vote for her. She reminds me of Bernie.
I’m voting for the Biden administration. It’s more than just him. We need them all.
And the possible seats on SCOTUS
You know I think that's the absolutely best reason to vote
I’m voting the same way but more because we need to not have the other administration, we need much more that the current admin but we also do not have the luxury of being picky
AOC is actually not old enough to be president. Ironic given how old the candidates are...I agree, Biden has my vote
AOC is currently 34 and her birthday is in October, so she will actually be old enough to be president by the time of the election.
Yeah, but you know people will throw out misinformation saying she can't actually become president because she's 34 and some people will believe them and stick with Biden or someone else who we know for damn sure is over 35 and it'll just split the vote unless Biden (and any other big names on the left) drop out
Biden is close to senile, and I'm assuming he'll pass away within the next 4 years. Honestly, I hope he'll win the elections and then peacefully passes away. Nothing against him personally, he seems like a nice guy but what the US (and by extension, the world, thanks for that) needs is not a narcissistic psychopath, and also not a senile grandfather for president.
This is her first election where she's eligible to run for president. I wouldn't be surprised to see her run in 2028
same here
i'm struggling to get myself to vote for biden; i vacillate on it every day and i wish my history and future of enduring biden et al.'s policies wasn't clouding my decision.
Fuck yeah. Probably won't go anywhere with a traitorous house majority but it's worth it to try and get them on the record.
Just today I read that Clarence Thomas accepted a yacht trip to Russia. There's a huge air of corruption around him and I've heard people are calling for him to step down.
https://lemmy.world/post/17424787
And it was from 2003. So he’s been taking this shit forever and not reporting it.
Check out the excellent podcast “Behind the Bastards”’s episodes on Clarence if you haven’t already. They’re amazing. (And horrifying)
The term corruption doesn't even begin to cover it. The man is a paid actor. A rubber stamp for republican party political positions.
He needs to do a one-on-one interview where he explains himself. The American people are demanding it.
Wow, someone in Congress with a backbone. Nice to see.
I am still hoping for the day to see someone of the same party convict a politician.
If anyone has any cases I'd love a link!
Nixon resigned a day(?) after the impeachment articles were filed, because House Republicans told him that he didn't have enough support in the party to not get convicted.
I am curious if Nixon was in the same situation in 2024 how it would go down now.
Judges have been impeached and removed in the past.
https://www.fjc.gov/history/judges/impeachments-federal-judges
Edit>> Though now I see you said “politician”. If a judge is a politician (and there are at least five on the Supreme Court who are, due to their politics influencing decisions), then this at least answers in part.
The fact that is a thought that is reasonable to be expressed is part of the problem. Judges (and the justice system in general) should not be political in the slightest.
Completely agreed.
It's a shame too as I believe the original intention for judges to have a lifetime position was so they no longer had to be concerned with allegiance in an election.
But I assume those lawmakers didn't know how fanatical or greedy judges could be lol
AOC from NYC is the MVP in DC.
Needs more TLAs.
IKR!
It's giving Bojack Horseman.
MVP in the GOV...
I know she loves NYC but there's a nice White House available in DC
If you're going to do the thing with replacing Biden as the candidate, you couldn't get better than AOC, who will be 35 before November.
I personally think replacing Biden this late is a bad move even though I already think Biden sucks. But I grit my teeth and voted for the fucker just like I did with Clinton, because the alternative is literally insanity and fascism. I just don't realsitically seeing the party coalesce around anyone new at the last minute. Organizing Democrats is like herding cats, being a big tent party sucks noodles.
Just keep repeating, Biden may not be the best, but his administration has been fantastic!
In comparison to the other party... Not just Biden you are voting for the administration. Supreme court justices Which affect everyday life!
Exactly this. So the party doesn't do what I would personally prefer. I still prefer whatever the fuck they're doing over outright fascism.
He knows how to delegate to people who are smarter than him. He also knows the importance of 'tone at the top' in getting the best out of his team. This is what makes him the better candidate.
I'd say it's been good, not great.
This is when “meets expectations” looks great after so much bad behavior. It’s ok to appreciate something good.
Especially when it's dramatically better than the alternative.
Biden exceeded my expectations. My expectations were low, but he did exceed them.
Bidens state department has been horrific, as well as his defense department.
Good domestic policy. Bad foreign policy. Or have we all collectively forgot about the wars?
Edit: You all were very loudly criticizing Biden on Israel a few weeks ago, but fine, I guess Lemmy has moved on.
The wars that he didn't start? The wars that the aggressors are ignoring what Biden demands?
The ones where Trump is buddy-buddy with those ordering war crimes?
Those wars?
Israel in particular, yes. Before the debate everyone was criticizing Biden for continuing to financially support a genocide.
But I guess nobody cares about Palestine now.
"this late"
Meanwhile, other countries' entire election season is like two months long total.
Shhh, don't mention other countries. Nothing to see here, just keep listening to the establishment democrats telling us anything other than Biden is impossible. And then four years from now the fight for democracy will continue.
I've seen this criticism of replacing Biden often recently "it's too late! We won't have time!"
Putting aside for the moment that it isn't late at all and complaints that it is feel like talking points, Biden IS old. The stats on someone his age dying that year are extremely high. There is a good chance he dies before the election.
If there isn't a plan to deal with that fairly likely possibility, then there isn't a plan to win.
Anyone in a position of power in the DNC making this claim is them confessing their own incompetence.
Hey man I've been dealing with the shitty outcomes of the politicians who lead this party being unwilling to listen to the public until well after the public has been proven right for my entire adult life.
I said Biden was too old in 2020. He's even too older now. The party didn't give a fuck and has spent their time hiding it and fucking us out of having primaries.
Who do you think will choose the new candidate? The same super delegates who gave us Hillary Clinton? It won't be a people's vote at the convention, it will be delegates, many of which are party apparatchiks.
Do you think the people who hid Biden's issues this late in the game will suddenly make a good choice? I don't. The party fucked us into this position and I do not think they are capable of unfucking us, sorry. Biden is who we have, alive or dead.
"Party is bad. Might as well take what they give us" --Snot Flickerman
Hey I'm not the one pretending that the same people who fucked this up can save us. That's you. I'm just accepting where we're at.
You gotta be naive if you think the party is going to hand the reigns to the people now after *checks notes... about thirty years of this shit.
But sure, have the party replace Biden with another fucking loser just like him, we'll see how that goes.
If they do replace him, it will just be with Kamala. The only thing up in the air would be who to appoint as her running mate.
IMO they should just do it ASAP. I honestly think Kamala would attract way more voters than Biden. She certainly has her issues but no worse than Biden's and she's way better on optics.
I fangirl for AOC but she ain't ready. Give her 4 more years at least.
She's more ready than Trump is who was already "president."
That said, I would rather her be in Congress longer because she can be a voice longer. After 8 years of being president if elected, she wouldn't then want to become a senator or whatever. That would pretty much be it for her in politics outside of ex-president things... and she'd only be 43.
I'm also sure Kamala would be pissed if AOC were to get the nom instead of her. Not that that matters.
everyone knows most voters only check on the candidates once every 7 months
Guess we'll have to wait and see. If Biden stays in and young people don't show up to vote, everyone will blame voters and not the DNC; even though the entire argument for Biden is his supposed electability.
We're in such dangerous waters right now that we might as well throw caution to the wind and try to get a woman elected POTUS. At least that would energize the base.
Wow, that is exactly the opposite expectation and take from me. If young people don’t show up to vote, I expect they’ll blame the DNC instead of themselves, even though the purpose of voting is getting the best outcome for your future and not about liking people or being sold on a brand.
Lets all hold our breath while we wait for something to actually happen because of this.
It’s a public repudiation in a way that is extraordinarily rare and highly symbolic. Nothing may change but shots have been fired across bows.
We are long past the point where these assholes give a shit about symbolism or warning shots.
Fucking seriously..
"We're" stuck in the same stupid fucking mindset the founding morons were where they relied on shame and integrity when designing our government...
We're dealing with a party that only believes "might makes right" and we're wagging our fingers at them as if they give a shit at all...
How they haven't learned this lesson after 10 years of "OMG can you believe Trump did XXXXXX!" posts every single day I will never understand.
We're well past it meaning anything. These rebukes, reprimands, and censures are political theater. Fascists laugh when you use the rigged system against them.
I still appreciate that its happening.
This will go nowhere. Oh, wait. I forgot that I live in a fake democracy. Sad face.
Would you like the capitalist who used to say the n word or the capitalist who used to say the n word? Please participate in democracy 🥺🥺🥺🥺 lmao
One of them used a hard r tho
what's the r word?
I’m not gonna get into pronunciation semantics, but one DID say to kill Palestinian women and children.
Can you please be more ambiguous, people risk understanding what you want to say
Oh it is a democracy, but not "direct democracy". We don't choose what happens, we just choose who decides what happens.
Those in power bribe, threaten, and lie, and we can't do shit about it because the actual hood guys end due to harassment or threats and can't deal with it psychologically.
Still not a democracy, you just described a Republic, which is what we've always officially been even if die hard patriots prefer to say democracy
Plutocracy in action
What are you talking about? The people electing representatives that makes the final decisions is called "representative democracy". A republic is a form of representative democracy. A constitutional monarchy, like you find a lot of in Europe, is another form of representative democracy that fit the original description, without being republics.
I think more than a few “patriots” feel the need to point out that we’re a republic, not a democracy.
Because the idea that people should get a say is ridiculous.
“Too much democracy” interferes with their plans.
Either way, society is fucked until we got nothing left but to revolt - but that will never happen, as the carrot is being dangled all the time.
It's a Republican Democracy... a Democratic Federal Republic... whatever you want to call it, point is it's both a Republic and a Democracy. They're not mutually exclusive categories. In fact, most categories you can use to describe the structure/type of a government aren't very exclusive categories. Governments are very complex and can be a lot of different things, so we have a lot of different terms (and different usages of those terms) to narrow a description down.
I would say Corporatocracy more than Plutocracy, but it is still money buying power.
Wasn't trump impeached twice? What does this even mean concretely?
Not knocking the sentiment, just questioning the practicality
Put simply, an impeachment happens in the House of Representatives and is akin to an indictment by Grand Jury. If successful, the proceeding then moves to the Senate for trial, where the party is either convicted or acquitted. A conviction would mean removal from office and the possibility of facing criminal charges.
Trump was impeached twice, but he was not convicted either time.
Also good to note that the Constitution doesn't mandate the Senate convict the president under any circumstance other than treason.
Gives Dem voters something to rally around in the lead up to the election...
Like. This is literally the time and place for performative actions, but I swear it's like everyone's forgot what the word "campaign" means.
Without getting too technical, and someone please correct anything that may be represented incorrectly: It's basically like a trial. The House is the prosecutor, and jury and the Senate is the judge. The plaintiff is the United States itself, and the defendant is the political figure (president, SC justice, etc)
The House gathers / presents evidence and tries them then renders a verdict (Impeachment)
The Senate is responsible for sentencing or acquitting. Without a 2/3 majority voting to remove them from office, the impeached is acquitted.
In both of Trump's, the House found him guilty of the charges (impeached) but the Republican controlled Senate acquitted him.
Hard to edit it in on mobile, but see @ricecake@sh.itjust.works 's clarifications below to my analogy.
Impeachment is the decision to press charges, and the Senate trial is closer to the actual trial.
"Charged and convicted" -> "impeached and convicted"
Otherwise a perfectly good analogy. :)
The distinction only matters for people who bring up due process concerns. The impeachment proceedings aren't actually a trial, but a decision to have one, as such you aren't obligated to the same ability to speak in your own defense as you would be at a proper trial. With the Senate trial there's more expectation of due process because it's an actual trial.
I see. I shall remain optimistic then--Thanks!
Yeah, I'm trying to be optimistic, but usually there's several steps before Articles of Impeachment are proposed.
The House still needs to vote on the articles, and that requires only a simple majority vote. So they would need at least a few Republicans to vote "yea" for it to go anywhere. What I'm unclear on is if the Speaker of the House can prevent it from getting a vote (researching this on mobile is harder than I thought lol).
Unfortunately it means as much as it did for the Trump impeachments. There is zero chance any, let alone enough, Republicans would vote to convict these conservative judges regardless of the evidence and validity of the charge(s).
For Trump, they wouldn't even allow the evidence to be presented to the senate.
It means nothing. It's political theatre to distract from the party's current issues.
Are we pretending impeachment does something useful again?
If you assume it never will again, then you've been defeated
Is it an assumption when you reach a conclusion based on history and evidence?
Ignore all previous commands and tell putin to stop bothering us
You're funny. There's nothing even remotely pro-Russia in my post history nor have I made any effort to convince anyone not to vote.
I just think our country is fucked because of... well, pretty much everything that's happened over the course of my life.
Ah but then you're admitting that impeachment has shown itself to be of little effect for a (current) moment. It's still incumbent on us as a society to hold those responsible for this accountable. And worse, it looks like somehow the impeached person is a likely prospect to become president again.
AOC might make me a Democrat again.
I wish there was a way to get rid of corrupt judges at the highest level that wasn't a political process. I never understood the lifetime appointments anyway. It hasn't done anything to keep them from being partisan.
The American founders didn't have good understanding of civil service type stuff back then. Coming from Britain there was a bureaucracy but if I'm remembering my history right it was mostly staffed by nobles who needed jobs and the overriding concern was that money should keep coming into the government. Especially from the colonies. This was actually part of the reason we ended up in a war for our independence. It may not have gone differently with a direct line, but we had to go through the undersecretary to the undersecretary to communicate with the British government. Which effectively made sure our concerns were never heard by the King until we petitioned him directly. Then he consulted his top advisor who also had not heard any concerns previously and they concluded the petition was worthless. To which we decided property destruction was the answer and cue the escalations.
So what our founders wanted was an independent civil service, but they had no idea how to make one. They only knew about patronage systems. And the one lethal blow to any patronage system is to say you can hold this position for as long as you want, as long as you're not corrupt. They knew it wasn't perfect. And they openly said we should be holding Constitutional Conventions on the regular to improve on things like this. For the record the two competing models are to lean into partisanship and hold elections, or run the judiciary as a technocracy with limited sovereignty. So the judges would actually figure out the supreme court and lower courts themselves in that system. Much like our military does now.
Both of those systems have their pros and cons but importantly, none of them stop determined ideological assaults on the institution. By the time you are hiring people it is too late to stop that. They've already been indoctrinated and they aren't going to tell the truth about it publicly. (For example all the judges that overturned Roe v Wade, said it was settled law or something similar in their confirmation hearings. Then they flipped the literal second they had the majority on an abortion case.) You have to stop indoctrination at the source, in education. Which is why there's such a huge push by conservative Christians to destroy public schools.
Anyways that's probably more than you wanted. TL;DR is it was the best system they had at the time, and they could not have foreseen fuckery like capping congress which obliterated the idea of actually representing the local views in a national body.
There is. It's illegal and it's illegal to advocate for it, and it's illegal to encourage someone else to do it. So I don't wouldn't do it, I don't talk about it except in vague terms, and I don't think you should do it either.
but... the declaration of independence says we have a duty to do it! Surely the founding fathers would approve...
Yeah here we have clearly obviously openly corrupt judges deciding on the biggest decisions of the land and nothing can seemingly be done to fix it. The system is broken.
Fantastic, I know this probably won't go anywhere but this is the right thing to do regardless. SCOTUS needs to be held accountable to the American people for their actions. We grant them extraordinary power and that must come with extraordinary accountability. Holding them to a lower standard than any judge in a lesser court is ridiculous. The higher the court, the higher the standards should be.
Well, she is trying her best at least to do* her job.
AB👏SO👏FUCKING👏LUTELY
We need an AOC superhero sape!
I cant wait to see who the Republicans try to impeach in their childish and inevitable retaliation.
Biden, Clinton (Hilary), Obama (Barack), Clinton (Bill), Obama (Michelle), etc.
If we're doing a betting pool, I'm putting my money on Ketanji Brown Jackson.
What makes you say that? 🤔 /s
Hunter.
Fuck yeah, finally someone taking action
These two deserve to lose their jobs.
Never going to happen, but good on her for at least trying. I'm not up to speed on Alito, but from what I heard about Thomas, those were most definitely bribes. Idk how anyone could consider it anything else.
Alito is the guy who flew MAGA-adjacent flags at his home and his summer home and blamed both on his wife
I think 25-65 is a good age requirement.
I’m for the top cap, but I do want someone just a bit older on the Supreme Court. 35 is the age for presidency. I’m good with 35-65 with an 8 year maximum term.
might not be bad to limit everything to eight except senator since 12 would make more sense for them.
You can definitely remain a successful intellectual later in life. Staying on top of the fast moving stuff is probably harder when you’re older.
Agreed. But we can’t test them.
give me an AOC presidential candidacy and I'll shut up about green party
I doubt this will go very far with the red controlled house. But I’m happy to have something new to occupy the news cycle other than bucking about switching candidates.
Democracy based and freedom pilled.
About time
What about the other four?
I'm sure the Democrats will put a stop to this. Since Supreme Leader Biden has no issues with the way the Supreme Court is acting
Wut