7 ms·

> There is ample ability to change events, but people must believe they can act and act together, as they have for centuries of democracy and for all human hist

> There is ample ability to change events, but people must believe they can act and act together, as they have for centuries of democracy and for all human history. This is the political will of a plurality of American voters. They certainly can't claim they didn't know what they would get, and they seem unconcerned by any of these actions that many of us find terrifying. It is difficult to see how we can democracy our way out of this situation.

ta9000 9mo ago
Frankly I don’t think Trump 1 vs Trump 2 admin wise are the same. Many people were duped. They’re idiots, but not malicious idiots.
- Loudergood 9mo ago
  Plenty of them are malicious idiots. See quotes of them saying "They're hurting the wrong people"
  - ta9000 9mo ago
    You mean Boehbert, a congresswoman? Yeah she’s pretty awful.
Aurornis 9mo ago
> This is the political will of a plurality of American voters. This fallacy gets repeated over and over, but it's obviously false. Have you really never voted for a candidate who went on to do things you didn't agree with? It's a quintessential fact of politics that voting for a candidate is not equivalent to an endorsement of everything that candidate does in the future. It's a premise that is obviously false when we consider our own votes, but it feels cathartic to force the claim on to the other side. This administration's net approval rating flipped net negative very quickly after his election and has been trending downward. It's just navel-gazing to pretend like what he's doing has high approval.
- palmotea 9mo ago
  >> This is the political will of a plurality of American voters. > This fallacy gets repeated over and over, but it's obviously false. And it's used to condemn and justify. Most politicians, including Democrats, like to pretend that winning means the unpopular policies they happen to like are the will of the people. They will constantly gaslight you on it. In reality, American politics gives people coarse choices that few are entirely happy with and many are very unhappy with. It's really hard to justify radical partisan action without denying that fact.
  - bloppe 9mo ago
    It's true that partisan politics provides only coarse choices. That's true of America's bipartisan system as well as multiparty parliamentary systems. But the parties are still dynamic coalitions that can change dramatically over time. Just look at the difference between the 1950s Democrats vs the 2000s Democrats, or the 2015 Republicans vs the 2020 Republicans. The coarse options that are available at election time can be massively influenced in the years leading up to the election.
    - palmotea 9mo ago
      > It's true that partisan politics provides only coarse choices. That's true of America's bipartisan system as well as multiparty parliamentary systems. But the parties are still dynamic coalitions that can change dramatically over time. Just look at the difference between the 1950s Democrats vs the 2000s Democrats, or the 2015 Republicans vs the 2020 Republicans. You're missing my only point, which is how (say) a coarse 51% victory for a coalition gets frequently and deliberately misrepresented as "the American people" wanting that coalition's unpopular policies. American politics isn't really about representing the American people, it's about minority ideological factions jockeying for power to subject the American people to their vision. Hence the rise of campaigning that's mostly attacking the opponent. A recent example is the Democrats vis-a-vis Trump: despite all their rhetoric, their behavior over the last decade belies an attitude that they think they use the repulsion he generates to avoid moderating themselves and still win.
rhubarbtree 9mo ago
This is disingenuous and a way to rationalise your feelings by blaming trump voters. Firstly, it’s a two party state and choice is limited. People vote for the least worst option, or for a candidate that shares at least some of their values. Second, many people did not vote. Third, approval ratings show that many trump voters do not approve of his actions. Fourth, where did “annex Greenland, abduct Maduro, remove independence of the reserve” appear on his manifesto?
- watwut 9mo ago
  It is totally ok to blame Trump voters. They literally wanted this to happen and it happened. OK, they did not wanted the "bad thing A" to happen, they only wanted the "evil things B and C" to happen. Usually based on what affects them personally. > People vote for the least worst option, or for a candidate that shares at least some of their values. Voting for Trump because you share his values is not exactly defense, something positive or even respect worthy. Yes, equally people voted for Hitler because they shared values. This commonality of values is why they are culpable and we can blame them.
- croon 9mo ago
  These are all before the 2024 election: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-could-try-buy-greenland-once-more-1878583 https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-could-try-buy-greenlan... https://www.wired.com/story/trump-cia-venezuela-maduro-regime-change-plot/ https://www.wired.com/story/trump-cia-venezuela-maduro-regim... https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-trumps-wish-for-more-federal-reserve-control-could-impact-economy-if-hes-reelected https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-trumps-wish-for-more-f... https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/publications/end-federal-reserve-we-know-it https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/publications/end-f... Trump voters are either willfully ignorant or gleefully supportive. Maybe not the first time, but definitely the second and third time. There no longer exists other excuses.
  - rhubarbtree 9mo ago
    Are those links to a manifesto? You haven't answered my other points. It's just post-hoc rationalisation because you're angry.
throw0101c 9mo ago
> This is the political will of a plurality of American voters. Trump has (amongst?) the lowest approval of any president at this point in his tenure, even lower than his first term. * https://news.gallup.com/poll/699221/trump-approval-rating-drops-new-second-term-low.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/699221/trump-approval-rating-dr... * https://www.natesilver.net/p/trump-approval-ratings-nate-silver-bulletin https://www.natesilver.net/p/trump-approval-ratings-nate-sil... > It is difficult to see how we can democracy our way out of this situation. Assuming there is no martial law later in 2026, vote to give the other party more power in Congress so the Legislative branch can actually grow a spine and push back against Executive actions.
- SAI_Peregrinus 9mo ago
  I'd love it if the other party would show evidence of being willing to elect vertebrates. Of course I'll still vote for whoever is most likely to win against the authoritarians, but at the moment that seems to be a bunch of worms.
rdiddly 9mo ago
There are two reasons to doubt that. One is that people's opinions change after they have voted. The other is that there is enough evidence of 2024 election "anomalies" to consider the vote itself suspect.
sanderjd 9mo ago
The political will of a plurality of American voters elected this administration a little over a year ago. We don't have direct evidence of what the current political will of a plurality of American voters is. We have some indirect evidence via polls and off-cycle elections that this is not the political will of most Americans. We'll have stronger evidence after the vote for the full House and third of the Senate later this year. Personally, I don't think we have evidence yet that the democratic process in the US is broken. I have concerns as many people do, but the recent off-cycle elections went off just fine.
keybored 9mo ago
This is what has been repeated again, again, again, again, and again since the election. Those other commoners did it. They wanted it. So much effort spent talking about how democracy was so powerful—all the wrong commoners got what they wanted—right up until Trump and now it’s too late, no one cares about this one comment box. I’m not an American. I just have a vested interest in the commoners of America getting their stuff together.

ta9000 9mo ago

Frankly I don’t think Trump 1 vs Trump 2 admin wise are the same. Many people were duped. They’re idiots, but not malicious idiots.

Loudergood 9mo ago
Plenty of them are malicious idiots. See quotes of them saying "They're hurting the wrong people"
- ta9000 9mo ago
  You mean Boehbert, a congresswoman? Yeah she’s pretty awful.

Aurornis 9mo ago

> This is the political will of a plurality of American voters. This fallacy gets repeated over and over, but it's obviously false. Have you really never voted for a candidate who went on to do things you didn't agree with? It's a quintessential fact of politics that voting for a candidate is not equivalent to an endorsement of everything that candidate does in the future. It's a premise that is obviously false when we consider our own votes, but it feels cathartic to force the claim on to the other side. This administration's net approval rating flipped net negative very quickly after his election and has been trending downward. It's just navel-gazing to pretend like what he's doing has high approval.

palmotea 9mo ago
>> This is the political will of a plurality of American voters. > This fallacy gets repeated over and over, but it's obviously false. And it's used to condemn and justify. Most politicians, including Democrats, like to pretend that winning means the unpopular policies they happen to like are the will of the people. They will constantly gaslight you on it. In reality, American politics gives people coarse choices that few are entirely happy with and many are very unhappy with. It's really hard to justify radical partisan action without denying that fact.
- bloppe 9mo ago
  It's true that partisan politics provides only coarse choices. That's true of America's bipartisan system as well as multiparty parliamentary systems. But the parties are still dynamic coalitions that can change dramatically over time. Just look at the difference between the 1950s Democrats vs the 2000s Democrats, or the 2015 Republicans vs the 2020 Republicans. The coarse options that are available at election time can be massively influenced in the years leading up to the election.
  - palmotea 9mo ago
    > It's true that partisan politics provides only coarse choices. That's true of America's bipartisan system as well as multiparty parliamentary systems. But the parties are still dynamic coalitions that can change dramatically over time. Just look at the difference between the 1950s Democrats vs the 2000s Democrats, or the 2015 Republicans vs the 2020 Republicans. You're missing my only point, which is how (say) a coarse 51% victory for a coalition gets frequently and deliberately misrepresented as "the American people" wanting that coalition's unpopular policies. American politics isn't really about representing the American people, it's about minority ideological factions jockeying for power to subject the American people to their vision. Hence the rise of campaigning that's mostly attacking the opponent. A recent example is the Democrats vis-a-vis Trump: despite all their rhetoric, their behavior over the last decade belies an attitude that they think they use the repulsion he generates to avoid moderating themselves and still win.

rhubarbtree 9mo ago

This is disingenuous and a way to rationalise your feelings by blaming trump voters. Firstly, it’s a two party state and choice is limited. People vote for the least worst option, or for a candidate that shares at least some of their values. Second, many people did not vote. Third, approval ratings show that many trump voters do not approve of his actions. Fourth, where did “annex Greenland, abduct Maduro, remove independence of the reserve” appear on his manifesto?

watwut 9mo ago
It is totally ok to blame Trump voters. They literally wanted this to happen and it happened. OK, they did not wanted the "bad thing A" to happen, they only wanted the "evil things B and C" to happen. Usually based on what affects them personally. > People vote for the least worst option, or for a candidate that shares at least some of their values. Voting for Trump because you share his values is not exactly defense, something positive or even respect worthy. Yes, equally people voted for Hitler because they shared values. This commonality of values is why they are culpable and we can blame them.
croon 9mo ago
These are all before the 2024 election: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-could-try-buy-greenland-once-more-1878583 https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-could-try-buy-greenlan... https://www.wired.com/story/trump-cia-venezuela-maduro-regime-change-plot/ https://www.wired.com/story/trump-cia-venezuela-maduro-regim... https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-trumps-wish-for-more-federal-reserve-control-could-impact-economy-if-hes-reelected https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-trumps-wish-for-more-f... https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/publications/end-federal-reserve-we-know-it https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/publications/end-f... Trump voters are either willfully ignorant or gleefully supportive. Maybe not the first time, but definitely the second and third time. There no longer exists other excuses.
- rhubarbtree 9mo ago
  Are those links to a manifesto? You haven't answered my other points. It's just post-hoc rationalisation because you're angry.

throw0101c 9mo ago

> This is the political will of a plurality of American voters. Trump has (amongst?) the lowest approval of any president at this point in his tenure, even lower than his first term. * https://news.gallup.com/poll/699221/trump-approval-rating-drops-new-second-term-low.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/699221/trump-approval-rating-dr... * https://www.natesilver.net/p/trump-approval-ratings-nate-silver-bulletin https://www.natesilver.net/p/trump-approval-ratings-nate-sil... > It is difficult to see how we can democracy our way out of this situation. Assuming there is no martial law later in 2026, vote to give the other party more power in Congress so the Legislative branch can actually grow a spine and push back against Executive actions.

SAI_Peregrinus 9mo ago
I'd love it if the other party would show evidence of being willing to elect vertebrates. Of course I'll still vote for whoever is most likely to win against the authoritarians, but at the moment that seems to be a bunch of worms.

rdiddly 9mo ago

There are two reasons to doubt that. One is that people's opinions change after they have voted. The other is that there is enough evidence of 2024 election "anomalies" to consider the vote itself suspect.

sanderjd 9mo ago

The political will of a plurality of American voters elected this administration a little over a year ago. We don't have direct evidence of what the current political will of a plurality of American voters is. We have some indirect evidence via polls and off-cycle elections that this is not the political will of most Americans. We'll have stronger evidence after the vote for the full House and third of the Senate later this year. Personally, I don't think we have evidence yet that the democratic process in the US is broken. I have concerns as many people do, but the recent off-cycle elections went off just fine.

keybored 9mo ago

This is what has been repeated again, again, again, again, and again since the election. Those other commoners did it. They wanted it. So much effort spent talking about how democracy was so powerful—all the wrong commoners got what they wanted—right up until Trump and now it’s too late, no one cares about this one comment box. I’m not an American. I just have a vested interest in the commoners of America getting their stuff together.