Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Or alternatively:
The "Every trump voter knew about 'DOGE' and the billionaire that would be leading it if trump won, and still voted for this bullshit, and they are 100% at fault" Act of 2025?
"Didn't vote for it" feel like just a way for trump voters to dodge responsibility. They did vote for it. They knowingly voted for the puppet (trump), and the nazi puppeting it. This is 100% on trump voters (that and the conservative media).
No one elected Hitler either - he was appointed chancellor by German president Hindenburg.
We've been following the pre-Nazi playbook to the letter, and an octogenarian just handing out a fuck-ton of power to a vocal shitstain is one of the many parallels.
When I toured the concentration camp at Dachau some years ago, the tour guide was very clear on this point: people did elect the Nazis.
In 1932, the Nazi party became the largest party in the German parliament, with 37.3% of the vote. It is true that it was not mandatory to make Hitler chancellor, but as the head of the largest party, it would have been expected.
The Nazi party received massive support in democratic elections, where the expectation of the voters would have been that if the Nazi party gained enough seats, Hitler would become chancellor.
This is an important point to me, as it shows that it is possible for democratic elections to result in a fascist government that dismantles democracy. Ignoring this historical example prevents us from applying the lesson to new situations.
There are some differences.
Hitler was relatively young and had about as much of his mental faculties as he ever did. Trump is old and senile. I'm not sure his handlers are even giving him the password to his Xhitter account anymore. Most of the posts are how Trump would have talked 20 years ago; barely literate, often childish, but meet a basic level of coherency and sentence structure. With Trump himself off to the side, the people working in the background don't have to have their plans fucked with by the whims of the fascist in chief. He can play golf and watch Fox News all day, and they're all good with it as long as he signs the papers they bring him.
He'll also die of natural causes in the not too distant future, and they don't have anyone else who can galvanize support the way Trump does.
If history rhymes then Trump is Hindenburg and Musk is the young unelected Hitler.
Months ago, everyone would have unequivocally said Trump was Hitler. Maybe these metaphors are bullshit, and we should interpret conditions without them.
Mate, metaphors like this help understand the gravity of the situation to help us see WHY certain actions are bad. From an uneducated standpoint, DOGE might not seem so bad unless you understand that Hitler rose to power on such things:
These metaphors aren't bullshit....they are just getting more accurate.
If we keep changing who The Hitler is in the metaphor, how useful is that to understand the situation?
Trump isn't as young as Hitler was, but they need him as the charismatic front. Musk is relatively young and wields power like Hitler, but he wouldn't have enough support on his own.
Okay,
They're still fascist as fuck.
Never said otherwise.
So what's your point then. That the may be fascist but the Hitler comparisons are a line to far for you?
That the metaphor isn't helpful to understanding if you keep changing who the Hitler is.
There are many examples of fascism out there, and they don't all follow the same script as what happened in Germany.
That's not what a metaphor is?
It's an analogy, not a script. Of course it's not a perfect fit. Metaphors never do. And of course it changes and life itself changes.
Your getting mad about a metaphor when you should be getting mad about facsim itself. Getting mad at nothing is just distraction.
I'm not mad, I'm pointing out that the strategy is flawed. I want that strategy to be as strong as possible. Quibbling about the definition of metaphor and analogy doesn't help anything.
And quibilling about how accurate a metaphor is at any given time is just as useful?
Let me try this.
It doesn't matter if the metaphor doesn't stay consistent or whatever.
Because anyone who would be swayed by a metaphor like that is already swayed. It's time to get in the streets.
Yes? It affects our understanding of the situation.
We're past the time of understanding the situation is my point. It's time to riot.
That sounds like a great plan to Wild E Coyote directly into a wall.
Anyone who can look at the news and not understand never will.
I also think they mixed in the fallout series lore.
Ironically, Fallout had nothing like the propaganda tools we have today. Hitler would have drooled over Twitter, TikTok, Meta, Google's, and a few influencer's grip on the collective psyche.
I all fairness, Hitler didn't get the opportunity to add atomic bombs to his playbook. He tried.
Throw the fucker in jail
Kinda sad ya gotta legislate something that friggin obvious
Not even gonna get to a vote. No one in the GOP cares. Good effort guys.
Gee, I guess you should tell your representatives to just roll over and give up, is that what you suggest? As for me, and my representatives, phone calls every day. (https://www.5calls.org) Protestors at the state capitol EVERY DAY. But sure, you do you. I'll be there, jumping back and forth fast enough that it looks like there are two of us, to make up for you slacking. And when you've had your down time, when you've recharged yourself, maybe think about joining us.
Doesn't matter. The most important thing for dems to do right now is signal they don't like this. Their goal is getting the house in 2026 so they can run hearings for the second half of the Trump presidency.
An even better goal is to grab a few senate seats too so they can go for a possible impeachment.
they would literally have to win every single seat up in 2026 to have that shot.
considering the states with senate races in 2026, there's a 'nearest-to-zero as you can possibly get' chance of that happening.
Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
just reclaiming a simple majority will be extremely difficult.
Defeatist
How about get rid of Qualified Immunity?
Democrats finally noticed the clown show? Musk’s been playing meme-stock messiah while regulators snoozed. Now they’re scrambling to write laws that should’ve existed before letting a hype-man cosplay as economy-in-chief. Newsflash: billionaires aren’t your friends.
This bill’s a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. Musk’s empire thrives on legal gray zones and fanboys who think SEC stands for “Suggestions Eventually Cancelled.” Meanwhile, Dogecoin’s just his latest grift—digital confetti for pump-and-dump sycophants.
Democracy’s a joke? Obviously. But watching Dems pretend to rein in their own Frankenstein? Peak comedy. Next up: laws ensuring water’s wet.
Can some person explain why they can't just go to the police and have him arrested? Why do these empty actions?
Not sure if you are being serious or not. Police do not exist in society to protect the people, they exist to protect the rich.
Any police officer who attempted to arrest one of the richest people would immediately be hit with a lawsuit, likely lose their job within a couple days, and be shunned by the rest of their gang. Not to mention the situation could easily escalate given that most rich people have private guards who are equally armed to defend themselves in case of any Luigi’s.
Additionally police don’t tend to just go arrest high profile people without a lot of justification for doing so ahead of time, such as an arrest warrant, and lots of paper work.
If someone went to a police precinct and told them to arrest him, they’d probably first get a good laugh out of the people behind the desk, and then told to leave immediately.
True, all rich people have escaped the law, not a single one behind bars, ever, I never realized that!
No one is saying they can’t be put behind bars. Try to name a billionaire that was arrested in the US that got arrested without a mountain of paperwork, slow judicial due diligence, and they eventually went to prison.
They are not above the law, but they can control it when they need to. Cops do not fear you or me, but they certainly fear the powerful, and money is often synonymous with power in the US.
This NEEDS to happen.
Oh look, another act. What we really need is
Yeah, why try to create legislation when they could be posting on social media.
Ok, sure, but wouldn't he just get a pardon? Isn't this why the duo of the world's richest man and the most corrupt(able) president so perfectly sinister? Feels bad man
You can’t pardon away a law. They’re seeking liability not criminal punishment and conviction.
It’s not really intended to cause Musk harm, but to force Republicans to explicitly vote for musks continued assholery
