cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/55106076
Many experts are forecasting the end of a key provision of election law — enabling Republicans to shore up their advantage in the House, according to a new report.
Ahead of the court’s Oct. 15 rehearing of Louisiana v. Callais — a case that has major implications for the VRA — two voting rights groups are sounding the alarm, warning that eliminating Section 2, a provision that prohibits racial gerrymandering when it dilutes minority voting power, would let Republicans redraw up to 19 House seats to favor the party and crush minority representation in Congress.
Bye bye free and fair elections by the midterms! And people called me crazy for predicting this.
Remember:
- Hitler cheated his way to power by declaring illegal all the other parties.
- Trump has the Mein Kampf as his bedside book.
Cannot stress enough how much Democratic states need to stop fucking around and get moving. It’s literal survival at stake here. If you do not follow suit and start a redistricting campaign of your own then everyone is screwed forever.
My guy, please stay up to date. Republicans will be in power for decades to come (legitimately or not). Americans are more than screwed. We are talking about concentration camps for minorities, non-Christians, homeless, disabled, trans and autistic people.
More bargaining from someone who thinks Democrats can save us. Even if they regain power, they’re moving to the right in lockstep with the GOP. We have the GOP of a couple of decades ago vs literal Nazis, and the pendulum will no “swing back” through elections
I mean progressive change is possible at the state level. With the hope of passing progressive change Federally getting pushed back, the focus can be solely on getting those progressive programs passed at the state level. Blue states can even go into debt to fund these programs. If other states see how successful those programs are then people may want to replicate them in their own states.
Imo part of the reason Democrats have struggled so much is because there has been no delivery of the product they are pushing for. People have been checking out since it’s just more of the same crap. Which was great for the corporate Dems/Republicans who were making bank this whole time, but not the rest of us.
The pendulum is not swinging back if young people don’t have hope. Right now, hope among young people is the lowest that it has been. If they have real progressive programs that help them have a roof over their heads, food on the table, and the ability to plan for their future then I’m sure we will see the pendulum swing back.
That’s like the Democratic establishment’s worst nightmare. I’m not saying it isn’t the best idea we could have, but I don’t see them allowing competition to their crap.
Oh it definitely is, mostly because they will finally have to be responsible adults and help their communities. The establishment Dems have close to no choice now but to enact the changes in their states.
They’re all getting close to losing their seats one way or another. Young people are getting fed up with the empty promises, especially when they don’t have the same opportunities as their parents. Either they help pass progressive programs or they are going to be primaried. If we’re struggling to vote out incumbents, then we can try to get an alternative voting system passed in our respective blue states to safely vote them out.
Now the SCOTUS is siding against the Civil Rights Act? JFC how the hell do so many people allow this to happen.
Decades long campaign to get those people in power
Sooo many steps along the road to disaster. Just wrt the supreme court: Democrats allowed it when they didn’t shut down the government over the Republicans refusing to let Obama seat a Supreme Court judge for almost a year, which was legally his right and responsibility. RBG gave the conservatives another supreme court pick by selfishly refusing to retire (into her late 80s and very ill health) because she specifically wanted to see a female president nominate her replacement. The voters set it in stone by lapping up the dumbest presidential candidate of all time, voting for Trump’s first presidency. Biden later pussed out on intervening by not even attempting to expand the court, which has precedence.
Etc. Etc. Etc.
The supreme court is set to be highly friendly to corporations, highly conservative and religious for the next 30 years or so, at minimum.
Rhetorical question, Farley.
JFC, how much worse can life in the states get…
Significantly
Yeah, you’re right, I just cannot believe how bad things have gotten in such a short amount of time.
Long term I’m still optimistic. Most people don’t want this, they’re just not paying attention/being lied to.
We’re on the other side of, “Good times make weak people”, we’re somewhere between “Weak people make hard times”, and “Hard times make strong people”, and we all want to hurry up and get to “Strong people make good times” ASAP. But these things…they take time.
Weak people don’t make hard times.
Evil people do. (Aka Nazis/the wealthy)
And why do you think those people are evil? Because they’re weak. They have to commit all these atrocities to feel strong, because they lack any real strength. Just look at how pathetic ICE officers and their ilk are, happy to beat up and harass unarmed civilians, but the moment they’re even slightly threatened they run away with their tails between their legs.
You’re attributing to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity. The greedy always exist. (I’m not religious so i don’t like the term “evil”, but) the “evil” always exist. But the reason those people have any power right now (and did going into the great depression, and going into the civil war, etc., etc.) is because a weak society allowed them to.
On the other end of this, the goal is to come out with a new culture that prioritizes humanity over greed. We spent so long high on good times that we forgot that was a priority (temporarily embarrassed millionaires). But in hard times, people don’t just decide to make this cultural shift, they literally have to in order to survive.
The greedy make the stupid do the things the stupid do.
They could just as easily make the stupid happy.
So, sure, we should make sure the greedy are executed immediately next time.
(Would that make us evil?)
There does need to be some immediate consequence to the willing act of wanting to make others suffer, whether directly , or by manipulating the minds of others.
Evil doesn’t necessarily have to be religious, BTW:
The concept of evil has been a theme of debate since the ancient Greek, where Plato argued that evil was a result of ignorance and Aristoteles saw morality as a guide for education and politics. Nietzsche claimed that evil was a dangerous concept that was created by the church, while Hannah Arendt underlined the banality of evil by highlighting “thoughtlessness” that frequently justify evil acts. From a neurobiological perspective, studies assessing individuals with neuro-psychiatric conditions associated with evil-related behavioral abnormalities have been suggesting a potential role of frontal and limbic structures, as well as of the serotonergic system. However, several of these studies assessed presumed correlates of evil, such as antisocial personality disorder or impulsive-aggressive behavior.
They could just as easily make the stupid happy
I don’t think it’s as easy to make people happy as it is to make them do stupid shit.
Probably costs more money too.
They could just as easily make the stupid happy.
How are you defining greedy?
There does need to be some immediate consequence to the willing act of wanting to make others suffer
That’s not greed to me. People would be guilty of this every time they are forced to work a double shift lol. The greedy don’t necessarily want to cause suffering, they just don’t care if they do. Their only strategy is to maximize their own utility. Which is also why I don’t think your point about them “making the stupid happy” works.
That’s not to say the two are mutually exclusive. When an economy has healthy competition everyone is acting as greedy as they are able, on the supply side, companies can only raise their prices as high as the quality of their product allows compared to other companies, and on the demand side, consumers will generally take the best deal they can find. Win/win, good times.
In the 50s, people had just come out of massive wealth inequality. They understood the value of prioritizing high corporate tax rates, strong unions, and effective anti-trust legislation. At all times, everyone, corporations to consumers, are acting as greedily as they know how. But it is exclusively the consequence of consumers losing sight of the value of this regulatory balance that corporations are allowed the opportunity to “innovate” on their ability to lobby the govt, delete regulation, and buy up competition. And as a result, we get hard times.
Evil doesn’t necessarily have to be religious, BTW
This is a semantic argument, which is why I didn’t let it stop the point you were making. I felt you were defining “evil” as actively malicious, but as you have pointed out, it’s ambiguous and could be interpreted to include stupidity.
I prefer the term “unethical”.
“It is morally as bad not to care whether a thing is true or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to care how you got your money as long as you have got it.” - Edwin Way Teale
We could just… learn from history instead.
The founding fathers did, and that’s why they didn’t directly rule.
No Kings.
And if all the ants in the world suddenly decided to work together to take over the world, they just could. Unfortunately, humanity isn’t a person who can “just learn” something. It’s a complicated interaction of biology and ecology. For better and worse, “we” can’t all “just learn” something, only a person can. A person is smart, people are stupid.
The founding fathers were strong people borne of hard times, and given an opportunity to create good times.
There is always a deeper pit
At this point, there is no position so indefensible and abhorrent that I would bet against the Supreme Court ruling in favor of it.
But I couldn’t vote for Harris because she hated the voters.
Don’t forget mumblemumble genocide
I got banned from ‘Lefty’ (tankieshits) Memes before I could ask how many Venezuelan fishermen Harris would’ve blown up.
She would have blown up millions of them.
Two thirds of registered voters didn’t vote for Harris. This obsession with a tiny fraction who were justifiably angry about a genocide says a lot more about you than about them.
Yea so the bigger question is why the fuck can a republican standup on national television say that immigrants “are eating the cats and dogs” yet still win the election…
A lot of that relies on an electoral college based system where 20-30k votes in the right states determines the winner regardless of national sentiment.
So enough BS, because a “WhAt AbOuT the GeNoCiDe” crowd can absolutely make a dent in a party that doesn’t have a 24/7 fox-news-newsmax-sinclair human centipede of a media juggernaut telling people how to vote.
The point is that a whole lot of groups make a dent, and many make much bigger dents. Know who else made a dent? The people who were fucking complicit in a genocide. If your problem isn’t with them, then I don’t give a fuck what you think about anything.
Two thirds of registered voters never vote at all, period. They don’t care or don’t have time/aren’t allowed to vote. Don’t deflect to groups that aren’t relevant.
Um, no. The 2024 election was about 1/3 Harris, 1/3 Trump, and 1/3 Other/absent.
The economy stupid! The economy was bad and Democrats lost to the right and left as a result. Rule friggin one of electoral politics cannot be ignored.
<yawn> Oh, another loser trying to stir shit up and divide the left. So original.
Ugh, might as well get ahead of this being how it goes. Because that’s how it gonna go.
