Good.
Fuck Hakeem Jefferies. Pussy wanted to protect Hegseth because he's more concerned about alienating the entirely fictional demographic of GOP voters who might flip Dem if the Dems become more semi-fascist
More and more it looks like controlled opposition. It sounded like a conspiracy theory, but I'm now truly starting to be convinced that Schummer and Jeffries were bought.
Its just beyond the pale at this point.
And Schumer has out right said it. His service isn't to the American people but to Israel.
And only 40 years too late.
Both parties are bought. Citizens United legalized all bribery.
If you'll allow me to put on my tin foil hat for a second,
I genuinely wonder if Israel is privately instructing them to not actually oppose Trump whatsoever.
They're both EXTREMELY bought and paid for by AIPAC. And we know Israel LOVES Trump and Pete Kegs-breath because they both are the biggest supporters of Israel's war crimes that've ever been in their respective positions.
They're not moving rightward to appease the voters, they're doing it to appease the corporate donors.
Every politician has a unique means of staying in power, favours, friends, appeal, funding, handlers, Jeffrey's may simply not be able to stay in power if he doesn't do this. These people don't adhere to idealistic ideology or fancy ideas, they trade in power and persuasion.
well he doesn’t seem to have either power or persuasion.
Yeah but neither do you (at least the power bit), which means he succeeded at his job.
Well we should destroy the system that enables this and remove these people from any position of power indefinitely. I personally also think they should be put in fucking prison.
What is the replacement system you envision?
There are literally thousands of books written about different systems than this one, many of which I would consider better.
I have no clue which ones you’re imagining. What are some examples, and how would we put it in place?
The first step is ranked choice voting for everything from local to federal elections.
First past the post is literally the worst way to operate a voting system of your goal is to get an accurate representation of the populace.
I’m very much in favor of the reforms of ranked choice and proportional representation (fairvote.org).
But these aren’t really a replacement after we destroy the current system. More like incremental fixes for the current system.
I’d still like to understand more about the vision of destroying (what’s the plan?) the system and what would come next (what’s part two of the plan?).
Read some books about successful revolutions and the states that replaced them and get back to me. You’re asking me to explain an incredibly multifaceted and complicated thing with tons of historical context and political theory behind it over Lemmy and I am not willing to do that, these are things you will have to put time and effort into learning on your own lad.
Wow, your tone is really strange for a place like the fediverse. It’s a place of discussion, and usually replies of interest and curiosity to a post or comment are met with enthusiastic responses of ideas and sources.
If you’re willing to say “destroy” it, then it should be easy to a give a simple example of a replacement you prefer. Most systems people write about have a ~~pretty~~ short names or at least authors/titles. You could just pick one and name it. I’d love to know one you imagine would be better.
I’m not asking what exists. I’m not asking you to explain any system. I can go learn all about it later.
I’m asking you to give an example. Even as broad as: communism / anarchy / technocracy / Star Trek post scarcity utopia. And I am also curious how (protest/strike/voting/sabotage/armed revolution) I can work with you it get there since we may have the same goal.
I just know an incoming bad faith argument when I see one man and I’m just not that interested in engaging on it with you.
Okay.
Edit:
This really stuck in my craw. I’m not sure how it would make you feel if my response to you answering what comes after “destroy” is a bad faith argument. You have every right to avoid it though. But I also really wonder what makes you think this is where I was headed with my question.
Ironically, your comments may not technically be bad faith arguments themselves, but they definitely have the feel of them. You make a bold statement but attack instead of supporting, elaborating, or explaining. As if you entered the discussion with no intention of participating in actual discussion.
Why even share your opinion in a discussion forum then? It’s strange and I could now interpret it as disingenuous. If that’s not the case, if “destroy” isn’t your entire plan, then I still am earnestly curious what the rest of your picture for the future is.
I’ve encountered your comments more than once on various topics on Lemmy for more than a year. I’d like to get to know the thoughts and feelings of others sharing these federated communities—especially if they seem to be active here. Sure, the opinions of writers are great, but I’d be reading a book instead of being here if that’s what I was after. I’m here to find out what internet randos have to say.
You’re more of an “agitate guy” than a “fix guy”
Socialism, communism, anarchy, pick one. Imperial hegemony under christofascism/ techno oligarchy is bad for the entire world.
shit, at this point i'd even take direct democracy
The bar is set super low right now my dude.
Yeah, that was... something. Felt a smidgen of my soul leave my body at that point. Hegseth ordered people killed in cold blood and all you got was "won't matter anyways?" What is wrong with you, Jefferies?
If he's fine with innocent children being murdered in cold blood by Israel why would he draw the line at innocent fishermen?
Good to see resistance. Even if it doesn’t gather support now it’s always good to take the first steps. Move Kegsbreath’s impeachment into view in a corner of whatever the Overton window has become in the age of disinformation.
How DARE he!
-OTHER Democrats for some Reason!
Well good, get it on the books for future historians if nothing else.
It would be better if it's "Democrat announces articles of impeachment against Trump" instead to cut all this shit off at the root.
Right because that totally worked the last time, and the time before that
Just spam impeachments fuck it. Why not at this point?
Impeach remove convict and then president piggy pardons him.
Impeachment is not a criminal trial.
Impeachment is explicitly not allowed to be pardoned in the constitution.
After a 2/3 conviction and removal, it takes only a simple majority vote to disqualify for future office. Can't pardon this, I mean they could try, then we'd be in a constitutional crisis.
Problem would be finding that 67 senators willing to vote to convict. Aint happening, everyone is corrupt.
Doesn't that technically mean we're in a constitutional crisis already?
Rumors have been going around that Hegseth was gonna get fired early next year anyway.
Apparently Trump promised not to fire any cabinet members for a year bc he had such turmoil amongst the turnover during his first term.
Sorry for the CNN article. I actually read a story about this back in Sept but I can’t remember where and CNN was the first I could find referencing the same idea.
At the time I read about, it was over Signalgate and the embarrassing Trump at the Fat Generals Speech.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/21/politics/trump-cabinet-kristi-noem-chris-wright
Didnt he also already put in articles of impeachment on Trump? Theyve been sitting there since March or something
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News