Was a pretty good ~10 min speech too, on the House floor.
Is there any chance this will ever pass?
I don’t really know what it would take to get this done
0%
Would require the GOP to no longer exist to get this done.
She could also try to convince Biden to have them assassinated, which would be totally legal.
With the current SCOTUS, it’s only an official act if a Republican does it.
I’m not advocating for it, but like, if they are dead they can’t really speak up about their opinions. Again, not condoning murder, but just thinking through the logic on this.
I say just keep killing justices till they change it. I am condoning this.
Not a non-zero possibility, considering how often Biden is confusing names now. Just present his name in a brochure that seems to talk about the middle east and needing to assassinate a target, that gets it an automatic human right’s pass.
Wait, that’s an option?
Ever played Suzerain? There’s a timeline where this is possible, but you gotta play it right.
That said, this speech would make a big impact in that game. But it’s obviously fictional and based in the beginning of a the Cold War within the Eastern Bloc, so it’s more realistic in expected outcomes than the reality of 2024 United States. Maybe they can make a hardcore mode DLC based on those societal and political conditions.
In truth, regardless of camps, all Americans should be livid if they are those that refer to themselves as real Americans—honestly, patriotic conservatives the most, in protection of the constitution. Unfortunately that unity is gone, so the words will get washed away by a torrent of bias before they can be pondered on.
Suzerain
Hadn’t heard of this game, but looks interesting. Is it a grand strategy game like EU4 or HOI, but with a narrative? Or am I way off?
It is functionally a well written and presented ‘choose your adventure’ political drama.
There are elements of randomness and gameplay systems, but it is not really a grand strategy game with a whole extremely complex simulation engine undergirding it, the way Paradox games are.
I would say that it does count as a strategy game in the sense that navigating toward outcomes you want does take a good bit of understanding how power politics works within basically the Cold War era, particularly from the standpoint of a non aligned nation.
Maybe you could say its like the Paradox games, if they stripped most of the numbers mechanics, made them less complex and not the focus, and were left with mainly narrative events and focus trees, but those were done in great detail.
Note
I played this game basically right when it came out, several years ago, and it may have changed since.
Interesting, thanks for the info.
it is not really a grand strategy game with a whole extremely complex simulation engine undergirding it, the way Paradox games are.
This might actually be a plus for me, for as much as I want to love those games, I always ultimately get bogged down in that shit.
I haven’t played in a while, but I have over 100 hours in EU4, with at least a half a dozen of the dlc, and I can say that I still don’t truly know how to play those games “properly.” The level of detail is simultaneously insane and dumb (sometimes their approximations of real life things are understandably absurd). I love the idea of them though.
I just got a new PC with a little more juice, and picked up Victoria 3 and have been debating if I should start watching tutorial videos or not…
Completely and wildly different genre, but I’ve been very intrigued so far with Workers & Resources: Soviet Republic as a city builder with a pretty impressive amount of detail. It’s unique among the genre as the main goal isn’t financial, but more focused on the well-being of your citizens. Lots of public housing, public transport, walking paths… There are two currencies, and if you choose to deal with the West you have to use a separate currency.
I feel like if I’m going to put the time into a complex “simulation” game at this point, it might be that one.
Kind of. The genre is hard to explain. You would like it if you’re into grand strat. I’ve done four playthrough and two DLC,.each time taking on different tactics and stances.
By the president ordering the assassination of every Republican legislator, lobbyist and RNC operative.
We’d need every Democrat and a few Republicans. Since these traitorous justices are what’s giving Republicans power, it’s pretty unlikely. Still worth trying.
Yeah, you push the issue and get people on record voting to defend blatant corruption. Then you can use it against them in the next election. House Reps run for office every two years. It’s really frustrating to watch the Democrats abandon a cause because “it will never pass the House.”
That’s just to get the articles passed in the house. To get a conviction in the senate you need a 2/3 supermajority. Never happen. But it doesn’t hurt to get people on the record as opposed.
And when that fails:
We take to the streets We take to our representatives We disrupt everything until we solve this matter.
You best believe there will be an out roar.
There’s always a chance, it’s just very small. These corrupt justices are the end game for the republican party, the odds of any of them breaking ranks to convict is very low.
That said, it’s almost certainly not about conviction, so much as upholding the rule of law and creating political pressure and support for something like packing the court.
The motion will get assigned to a committee, run by Republicans, where it will die. Even if there is a sympathetic Republican on that committee, all House members are up for re-election in November, and voting for this is a sure way to get the MAGAs all up in their grill and would likely lead to that person losing a ton of MAGA support, and likely losing their job.
AOC knows this and is doing this to help Democrats in vulnerable districts, to help turn the House in the next Congress. “Elect us into the majority, and we will actually look into this.”
You are arguing that Republicans are, ”To busy keeping their job to do their job”. While that may be true in some cases, I fear that for some of them, breaking the Supreme Court like this was the goal all along.
deleted by creator
Would need at least some republican support, since they still hold the majority. So, not holding my breath, they tend to stick together.
No, this is pro forma only. Which doesn’t mean it’s unimportant because it’s about the message. But it will not go anywhere judicially.
None, but what matters is getting voting records so that later this year or in 2026 during House races, they can show who made an attempt to punish the traitors to our democracy, and who is in full support.
Don’t follow much US politics because yous cunts shoehorn it into every fuckin thread about squirrels, dog food or whatever, but why is that lassie not your president? Instead of the two pish-reeking geriatric cunts you’ve got at the moment
She will not be the minimum age of 35 until next year and this is ineligible to run for the position till 2028
Also, we have a racism and sexism issue in this country so it would be an uphill battle.
She’s 35 in October, she is eligible
She wasn’t eligible last time around, which is why she couldn’t be president now.
We have an election this year in November. A month after her 35th birthday. She could be the nominee instead of Biden.
Soooo, there is a minimum age but not a maximum ?
Yet cognitive decline starts way earlier than people are willing to admit !
deleted by creator
Yeah, at least as early as 1776
LMAO, cognitive decline does not begin in your 30s, but yeah I guess so. There is something to be said about intelligence plus life experience.
Lol but reading comprehension starts at 4 mate 😅
According to the SCOTUS, being ineligible for the Presidency isn’t a barrier, to running or winning. So I say bring on AOC as the nominee instead of Biden!
why is that lassie not your president?
She needs to be about a century older, white, male, sell out to corporations, and shed her sense of ethics.
Then maybe, if the GOP is running enough of a Nazi.
Corp and ethics are the big ones, otherwise you get Bernie lol
I find somehow telling that US got a black president before it get (if it even go there) a woman president
It’s pretty consistent. Black men got the right to vote long before women too. The US has more deep rooted misogyny than racism, and it’s got plenty of racism.
Blew my mind when I found out women couldn’t have their own bank accounts in the United states until 1974.
Technically, she wasn’t old enough to run until this year.
More practically, we have a center-right party and a fascist party in this country. The center-right party has a few actual leftists in it, but they tend not to gain much power.
lassie not your president
lassie for president and larry the cat for prime minister 2024
Lassie is useless. Lassie warns others about danger AFTER it happens. Perfect politician
At least Lassie isn’t the one causing the danger.
I hope…
A large chunk of the US is deeply sexist on top of other intellectual and moral failings.
This is aggravated by the right wing fighting against education, especially when it benefits the general public.
Because as president you serve 4-8 years and then become generally irrelevant. In congress you can serve for decades.
I’ve always wondered why this is? In our country a previous prime minister remains highly relevant and politically active until they retire, even if that is long after they were in the position. The leader of the current largest opposition party was prime minister for eight years before losing the previous election, and is set to be the opposition’s front runner for PM in the next election in not too long.
Like, why didn’t e.g. Obama run for a position on the senate after finishing his second term as president? He’s definitely still young enough, even in countries where you don’t need to be a fossil to have political power.
Soooo, a LOT of people on the right hate her… even more than Bernie.
She’s too young. Like by law. Next election she’ll be old enough to run
The age requirement applies at inauguration. AOC is old enough to run this cycle by a few months.
I’m willing to bet that even if the two judges were removed tomorrow, the Democrats wouldn’t add any judges because they’d want to “play fair” and not assign someone right before an election.
It was Mitch McConnell and the Republics that blocked Merrick Garland, not the Democrats.
That is true, but you also have to remember the Democrats BARELY put up a fight against their nonsense because they were SO certain they were going to win in 2016.
This “Put all our eggs in one basket, the people are too smart to fall for this” crap ALWAYS undoes the Democrats. Every single time.
Shit wasn’t even that long ago and people are already distorting and misremembering it… smh
And Democrats are likely to apply the same bullshit excuse that McConnell pulled on themselves.
They did in 2020 when they let Trump nominate a justice a month before the election. Obama was denied his appointment because the election was nearly a year away
They’ve been playing that game since Reagan, so yeah.
You also want that juicy carrot at the end of that stick during an election year. Ensure your voters are going to vote for you or else risking losing your whole democracy.
Counter point - you get them installed so they can make meaningful decisions that help the people and then constantly remind the public:
We did that! We did that! We did that! Vote for us and there will be more of that.
That’s literally the stick and not the carrot
They would. But Democrats don’t have a majority in the Senate, so confirmation won’t happen. Manchin and Sinema are the necessary independents likely to refuse to confirm.
And here’s the big fucking shocker. Guess who seated these two into their positions?
George Fucking Bush.
Republicans will still blame dems tho. Thanks to their lack of an educational system or ability to think critically or objectively for anyone that has anything to do with their party lines. Keep defunding that education and pushing the norm away from progress, tolerance, and respect for thy neighbor.
Sycophants.
Not the same Bush mind you…
H.W.
Trying to help. In the headline Thomas and Alito are mentioned. Thomas is from HW era and Alito was selected by W after Sandy gave W the election so she could retire under a republican. Two different Bushes. Cheers
This bush that bush, they’re all the same plant when alls said and done let’s be real
Why would they “blame” Dems? They’d just say it’s not a big deal.
¿Por que no los dos?
A politician, for the people? Strange.
There’s a handful.
Love to see it. AOC doing great work. To drive turnout, the November election should be about this issue: electoral and judicial reform. We can’t fix this country without it.
listen to her speech compared to, say, marjorie green, and how she approaches things passionately and logically with facts to back it up is night and day.
it’s also a reminder of how marjorie greene is everything to the republicans that they tried to claim aoc would be to the democrats. instead, aoc has become one of the most passionate, analytical, and policy wonk driven politicians in congress.
I always thought it was hilarious how they’d complain that Democrats (especially coastal Democrats) are all “ivory tower elites”, and then mock her for working as a bartender and imply that made her unfit for office.
Like, make up your mind, assholes.
They don’t use words to try to find or describe truth. They use words for effect. If saying (or believing) A gets what they want today, and Not-A gets it tomorrow, they will happily switch without any hesitation. Sometimes without any awareness.
We all are at risk of doing this. But the Republicans have it turned up to 11.
And because of that, on some fundamental level, they are bad people.
Cognitive dissonance. The goal never was to be understood. Just to create chaos.
Nothing like a good bit of public shaming for these corrupt judges.
I am certain that neither one of them feels shame. Ever.
She needs to force everyone involved to read the Pro Publica piece and call it an executive summary lol
Hell she should just get the people who worked on that piece to advise
it will not go anywhere but good for her for doing it.
Of course. It’s pretty much just to get headlines and for people to campaign on. But that’s really all you can hope for when Republicans control the House and won’t actually take up any meaningful oversight.
Would much rather have the senate actually investigate them
I wonder how you can spend 500 000$ on an Indonesian trip… are those Indonesian dollars, or are they having coke and hooker every minutes?
Idk, if I had to guess I’d say probably something like renting out an entire resort for the duration plus whatever they did there.
Can supreme court justices be impeached? Has it been attempted before?
So… Yes
It would be a pretty glaring oversight if someone at a position of power couldn’t get their misconducts condemned.
Like the President?
Thanks!
dewit.gif
