this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024
390 points (96.7% liked)

politics

19090 readers
4594 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

During his term in the White House, Donald Trump governed as a wartime president—with blue America, rather than any foreign country, as the adversary. He sought to use national authority to achieve factional ends—to impose the priorities of red America onto Democratic-leaning states and cities. The agenda Trump has laid out for a second term makes clear that those bruising and divisive efforts were only preliminary skirmishes.

Presidents always pursue policies that reflect the priorities of the voters and regions that supported them. But Trump moved in especially aggressive ways to exert control over, or punish, the jurisdictions that resisted him. His 2017 tax bill, otherwise a windfall for taxpayers in the upper brackets, capped the federal deductibility of state and local taxes, a costly shift for wealthy residents of liberal states such as New York and California. He moved, with mixed success, to deny federal law-enforcement grants to so-called sanctuary cities that didn’t fully cooperate with federal immigration agents. He attempted to strip California of the authority it has wielded since the early 1970s to set its own, more stringent pollution standards.

In Trump’s final year in office, he opened a new, more ominous front in his campaign to assert control over blue jurisdictions. As the nation faced the twin shocks of the coronavirus pandemic and the protests that followed the murder of George Floyd, Trump repeatedly dispatched federal law-enforcement agents to blue cities, usually over the opposition of Democratic mayors, governors, or both. Trump sent an array of federal personnel to Portland, Oregon, ostensibly to protect a federal courthouse amid the city’s chaotic protests; reports soon emerged of camouflage-clad federal agents without any identifying insignia forcing protesters into unmarked vans. Trump responded to the huge racial-justice protests in Washington, D.C., by dispatching National Guard troops drawn from 11 states, almost all of them led by Republican governors. Later he sent other federal law-enforcement officers to combat rising crime in Kansas City and Chicago, a city Trump described as “worse than Afghanistan.”

Trump has signaled that in a second presidential term, he would further escalate his war on blue America. He’s again promising federal legislation that would impose policies popular in red states onto the blue states that have rejected them. He has pledged to withhold federal funding from schools teaching critical race theory and “gender ideology.” He says he will initiate federal civil-rights investigations into liberal big-city prosecutors (whom he calls “Marxist local District Attorneys”) and require cities to adopt policing policies favored by conservatives, such as stop-and-frisk, as a condition for receiving federal grants.

Non-paywall link

all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] blattrules@lemmy.world 50 points 9 months ago (1 children)

He punished blue cities and states in his first term too.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 41 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

they literally delayed, and sabotaged, covid responses because at the time it was "only hurting blue states" \

There was over 100 million covid cases in America, leading to over a million deaths.

And thats all on trump, his crew, not caring to act until red states started getting hit, and even then it was half hearted and laden with disinformation (anyone remember injecting bleach?)

If he had just responded immediately and urgently he would have been a shoe-in for a second term, and would have gotten all the praise he would have ever wanted.

but he had to take the evil option instead, because Trump and his cohorts in the republican party will always take the low road and crawl through the shit.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago

The bleach/UV thing wasn't purposeful misinformation. It was so much dumber.

You probably can't find the full video, but as Trump is walking to the podium, he stops to examine a poster-sized infographic from the CDC. An infographic about sterilizing surfaces. He then takes the stage and starts spewing bullshit.

[–] ech@lemm.ee 15 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Any other president would've leapt at the chance to unify the country behind their response to a crisis like COVID, more or less guaranteeing a second term and a legacy as the president that "beat" COVID. But trump only knows how to sow discord, so of course all he did was politicize it and further divide the country*. They turned masks of all things into a political issue.

I'll always remember his response at a press conference to a question that was essentially "What comfort can you give to scared and suffering Americans?" and instead of, you know, assuring them that "we'll get through this together" like any rational politician would do with a softball question like that, trump of course lashed out and accused the reporter of being against him or something for daring to suggest everything wasn't absolutely perfect I guess. It was fucking bizarre.

*I will give him the barest hint of credit with how he didn't outright sabotage the vaccine development or distribution, but that was frankly because he saw personal glory in it for himself. Once that was politicized too, he fed the anti-vaccine crazies everything they wanted to hear (while quietly getting the vaccine himself, of course).

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Yep.

Trump's ego is his own worst enemy.

Course we knew that when he purposefully bankrupted a casino cause he couldnt handle his wife doing a better job running it.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

At first they thought it was going to kill more Blah people. These ghouls were positively ecstatic over the idea.

Turns out, it was more a self-own, as more teabaggers ended up dying as a percentage...also, if the Orange Dotard actually did the right thing on covid, he might have actually won the election. So he's a dumbass 2x over, at least.

[–] n0m4n@lemmy.world 25 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I still remember that happening when the pandemic first was ramping up. Blue states purchased masks for essential personnel, while Trump sent people to confiscate the supplies to give to Red states donors for resale. Shipments had to be masked for supplies to get to hospitals in the wrong states. Republicans are doubling down on the war on blue.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago (1 children)

This is why I stress that NO Republican should be permitted into office. This is the kind of lunacy they get up to when they have power. And so, they should never be given any power at all.

[–] crystalmerchant@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Haha shitttt I forgot about this! The mask shipment confiscations

[–] Tremble@sh.itjust.works 25 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Aren’t most blue states net contributors to the federal government?

[–] BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

Yes, generally blue states contribute more in taxes than they receive in federal spending and generally red states receive more in federal spending than they pay in taxes. Although there are exceptions, such as Texas (net contibutor) and New Mexico (net recipient).

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 21 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Oh come on, it's not like he tried to engage in mass murder by neglect during COVID or sent DOJ strike teams into blue cities to illegally fight protestors.

Oh wait, he did both of those things.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Let's be honest here. Trump would hurt the red states too. But largely in lip service of hurting the blue states. Which his mouth breathers would be okay with.

[–] ech@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago

The saying "they would eat shit if a Democrat had to smell it" was around for a bit before COVID, but then they literally started drinking urine instead of just getting a damn vaccine. They're so crazy it's beyond parody.

[–] rabiddolphin@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

The media can't wait for a second Trump term

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Entertaining an egg dictator for all these years is exhausting. If they want a civil war so bad they can have it. My entire lifetime corporations and politicians have only grown in extreme wealth and power and the people have only lost. Take your cities back from the invisible masters of corporate America. Free the world.

[–] Rooter@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

No? It will be civil war, guaranteed.

[–] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 5 points 9 months ago
[–] xc2215x@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

Trump would for sure.

[–] ashok36@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

"Second Term"

As if, if trump gets reelected, there will ever be another real election.

[–] K1nsey6@lemmy.world -4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Then the DNC better get a better candidate in there

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

It is way too late in the American election cycle for that.

[–] Human@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why is this being downvoted?

Our only option is a guy who was, and continues to, be deeply unpopular? Who only won last time because (4?) establishment candidates rallied around him in the primary. Oh and who could very well die of old age before finishing his term...

Trump is a threat to anyone who is not a fascist. So why is the establishment(the DNC) continuing to prop up a candidate who is as unpopular Hilary Clinton: a candidate who already lost to Trump?

It does not matter if the economy is doing 'better', inflation is down, crime-rates are down, unemployment is down, etc etc etc. You're average idiot does not pay attention to any of this - its all team-sports to them. They will sooner not vote at all - voter turn out was only 66% in the last election - the highest rate for any national election since 1900.

And all this before we even get to his foreign policy... what the fuck

I do not accept this is the only option. Find another candidate DNC.

[–] K1nsey6@lemmy.world -3 points 9 months ago

The hive mind wont allow them to accept any other outcome. Many others fear being ostracized by their peers if they don't help reverberate the echo chamber. Instead of demanding we support the guy that's polling worse than any prior incumbent, they need to be pushing their party for another option. But democrats always punch left because we remind them they are not good people by supporting other people that are not good.