POG Politics Thread Version 3
Come on in! Since Dustin is taking his ball and going home, it's time to start a new politics thread.
Democrats used to be the party of the South (agrarian chattel slavery) and Republicans the North (industrial wage slavery).
I'm interested in words that only show up in a particular phrase.
Chattel slavery is such a phrase. You never see chattel in any other context.
Clowntable used to get sooooo mad when I would mention wage slavery. The very concept makes anarcho-capitalists shudder.
You don't usually see "chattel" used because it does have such a close association with slavery, but it used to be used commonly for what we now call "personalty" (movable property), as distinguished from "realty" (unmovable property, ie land).
Older legal codes and cases use the term "chattel" for everyday things like timber, horses, etc. It is still used in more sophisticated frameworks (eg., "chattel paper" refers to a document outlining a financial obligation - debt being a thing that can be sold).
Clowntable used to get sooooo mad when I would mention wage slavery.
Had he no concept of the Hobson's Choice? Did he mistake specific equivalence for general?
makes anarcho-capitalists shudder
I thought Atlas shrugged.
The new AOC and new Filthy political sweetheart? She's coming after the old guard Democrats.
I only made it about half way through. I like her idea about campaigning while actually doing things to help people too. and she has a nice voice and face, but she's a Democrat. might as well be a Nazi
Hehe, Gotta love human nature.
Before Trump took office, they were good.*
*by US standards
Preach Jon preach! I think he has a point.
Science, as it turns out, has already inquired into the question of whether or not social media content moderation unfairly penalizes conservative speech. We asked leading scholars on this issue the following questions:
Do social media companies disproportionately moderate posts from one side of the political spectrum? If so, is this the result of bias or something else?
Second, does social science show that one side of the political spectrum is unfairly penalized or rewarded by platform recommendation algorithms? If so, which side and why?
In total, we received fourteen replies.
To summarize, science holds that to the extent conservatives experience content moderation more often, it is because they are more likely to share information from untrustworthy news sources, even when other conservative users rate the trustworthiness of those sources. Regarding the second question about algorithmic bias, the evidence largely suggests that conservative sources and accounts tend to receive more engagement, not less—not because of platform bias but more likely because of the nature of the right-wing news ecosystem and the valence of the content shared in it.
Shakespeare: If we are going to overthrow the government, the first thing we need to do is remove all of the lawyers.
Trump's GOP: I will see your move, and raise with removing the courts, too.
.
“ There’s a direct correlation to politics. In 2020, according to CNN’s exit polls, voters with a college degree accounted for 41% of the electorate and they supported President Joe Biden 55% to Trump’s 43%. Trump got the support of about two-thirds of White voters without a college degree, but he lost White college-educated voters.”
No wonder they wanted to dismantle the Department of Education. Easier to keep them obedient, when they are stupid.
wtf? this is amazing. sorry me and my judgment are high AF
Even by the standards of this administration, this is ****ing vile. Literal Nazi ****.
she is the puppy murderer
In 2022, then-Sen. J.D. Vance and former Rep. Steve Chabot — both Republicans from Ohio — and the Republican Party’s national committees that coordinate spending on behalf of senatorial and congressional races went to federal court, arguing that the federal limits on coordinated party expenditures violate the First Amendment.
because that's the problem with democracy in America today - the people simply cannot donate enough money to their preferred candidates!
In a routine move, Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris has asked for more time to file the government’s brief in response to the Republican Party’s petition. Before the 6th Circuit, the Biden administration defended the federal limits on coordinated party expenditures. It remains to be seen whether Harris will do the same before the Supreme Court, or instead will join the Republican Party to defend the vice president’s former case by asking the justices to reevalute these restrictions under the First Amendment.
Staged or real?
wtf? The dude is a 100% conman scammer.
Is Elizabeth Holmes next? Or maybe have a bidding war with Sam Bankman-Fried!
BREAKING: Former CEO of Nikola Motors, Trevor Milton, has just been granted a full pardon by President Trump.
On January 20, 2025, Trump issued an Executive Order entitled "
"
Included in this order is the following:
(b) Within 90 days of the date of this proclamation, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit a joint report to the President about the conditions at the southern border of the United States and any recommendations regarding additional actions that may be necessary to obtain complete operational control of the southern border, including whether to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807.
That time limit expires on April 20, 2025. The report will be prepared at the behest of Tom Homan, who has waved off "collateral arrests" and publicly flaunted the issuance of court orders and injunctions, and Pete Hegseth, who has repeatedly expressed his desire to increase the "lethality" of the US military.
Incidentally, the Brennan Center published
on April 21, 2022. Included in the article is this recognition of the president's implicit authority under the Act:
The second part of Section 253 permits the president to deploy troops to suppress “any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy” in a state that “opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.” This provision is so bafflingly broad that it cannot possibly mean what it says, or else it authorizes the president to use the military against any two people conspiring to break federal law.
Can the President unilaterally trigger the Act?
Yes:
the Supreme Court decided early on that this question is for the president alone to decide. In the 1827 case
, the Court ruled that “the authority to decide whether [an exigency requiring the militia to be called out] has arisen belongs exclusively to the President, and . . . his decision is conclusive upon all other persons.”
What does the Act enable the Federal Government to do?
Under normal circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act forbids the U.S. military — including federal armed forces and National Guard troops who have been called into federal service — from taking part in civilian law enforcement. This prohibition reflects an American tradition that views military interference in civilian government as being inherently dangerous to liberty.
Invoking the Insurrection Act temporarily suspends the Posse Comitatus rule and allows the president to deploy the military to assist civilian authorities with law enforcement.
allows the president to deploy the military to assist civilian authorities with law enforcement
Note that the Inspectors General and JAG (military lawyer) core have been gutted to the extent that there is currently no internal check on the military, and the VA recently issued an internal directive prohibiting its employees from consulting with attorneys regarding veteran benefits administration until approved by a political appointee (thus imperiling civil resistance by dependent veterans).
We have seen the administration's willingness to ship people off to Salvadorian prison camps with zero due process.
Trump has made it government policy that federal executive actions will proceed without regard for the sensitivity of location:
Among the new administration’s earliest actions were rescinding guidelines for ICE operations, including those directing when prosecutorial discretion can be used, as well as barring ICE agents from launching operations in sensitive locations such as schools, hospitals, and places of worship without judicial warrants, and at courthouses. source
But it doesn't stop at rounding up coloreds - check out Title 50, Chapter 13 of the US Code:
§205. Suspension of commercial intercourse with State in insurrection
whenever the inhabitants of any State or part thereof are at any time found by the President to be in insurrection against the United States ... all commercial intercourse by and between the same and the citizens thereof and the citizens of the rest of the United States shall cease and be unlawful so long as such condition of hostility shall continue
§206. Suspension of commercial intercourse with part of State in insurrection
Whenever any part of a State not declared to be in insurrection is under the control of insurgents, or is in dangerous proximity to places under their control, all commercial intercourse therein and therewith shall be subject to the prohibitions and conditions of section 205 of this title
§210. Penalties for unauthorized trading
... fined not more than $5,000, and imprisoned in the penitentiary not more than three years. Violations of this section shall be cognizable before any court, civil or military, competent to try the same.
§212. Confiscation of property employed to aid insurrection
§221. Closing ports of entry
§223. Forfeiture of vessels owned by citizens of insurrectionary States
