A conservative plan for Donald Trump’s potential transition into the presidency calls for dozens of prisoners to be executed, according to HuffPost. An 887-page plan by Project 2025, led by the ultra-conservative Heritage Foundation, says that if elected, Trump should make a concerted effort to execute the remaining 40 prisoners on death row. The section’s author, attorney Gene Hamilton, advised that Trump “do everything possible to obtain finality” on the current list of people until Congress forces them to stop. Hamilton is the vice president of America Legal First, a group of former Trump lawyers bent on attacking “woke” companies, headed by Stephen Miller. Trump’s approach to the death penalty stands in stark contrast to that of President Joe Biden, who has openly opposed the death penalty, but done little to move forward legislation to reform or abolish the practice since entering office.
For those of you not in the know Project 2025 is Republicans plan to turn the USA into an authoritarian state.
Look, can we just collectively agree – all of us who are left of center – to work together and set our differences aside until after this election? Now really isn’t the time for us to be divided. We need to first curb stomp the fascists, so we don’t all get killed
I don’t disagree…but the party-line Democrats have been telling progressives exactly that since the Clinton administration.
Again, to be clear: I’m happily voting Biden this November, but the Democratic party has become very good at doing just enough to keep their core loyal while also doing nowhere near enough to keep the country out of constant existential peril, effectively cultivating that crisis as a (pardon the pun) trump card that they then use to tell progressives “what you want is less important than the current crisis! Just go along with us in this election and we pinky swear to do more for your causes!”.
They know if they move left they’ll be displaced by a combination of progressive candidates and centrists, so they have basically adopted the strategy of keeping the right just dangerous enough to be credible while keeping their left flank secured with a drip feed of snail’s pace “progress”.
I’m voting Biden, but not happily.
deleted by creator
Israel-Gaza conflict aside…what makes you unhappy about voting for him?
I have to admit that I wasn’t thrilled about voting for him in 2020, but I also have to admit that in the intervening years he has at the very least met my expectations in most areas, and shockingly, he’s exceeded them in a few areas.
As I get older, I’ve learned from experience to temper my expectations in a president, and with those adjusted expectations, I am surprised to find myself feeling better about voting for Biden in 2024 than I did four years ago.
I can sum it up in one word: age.
Look, I’m no spring chicken. My age starts with a 4 now, and it seems the age gap between me and the age of the president hasn’t changed.
I’m just tired of geriatrics running the country.
Same here. I was not wild about him, and figured he’d be even more right of center than Obama was. Turns out to not be the case on quite a few fronts.
I’m overall happy with Biden except for Afghanistan and Gaza. Given the cards he was dealt with, he seems to be doing an ok job.
deleted by creator
In what way? He established an agreement that the Taliban violated, thereby making it void.
deleted by creator
Taliban are the best government for Afghanistan, you know why? Because democracy failed, socialism failed, liberalism failed. Realistically, the Taliban are the ones who can run a government in that region. We know the US couldn’t.
I can’t really disagree with you. The issue is we have reached the actual point where the current crisis dwarfs all others. Maybe I was just younger then, but it didn’t feel like we had such existential threats in the Bush and Obama years. I remember people said that Romney winning would be the apocalypse, but it’s laughable to say that would’ve been the case in hindsight.
I think what we can take heart in is that we’ve been seeing a gradual increase in progressiveness in the party. And not just a small constant increase, but a significantly growing one. There are a nontrivial number of Congressional members who are incredibly progressive, and they’ve shifted the mood of the party notably leftward. The Inflation Reduction Act was a historic level of climate spending, to the point that Europe felt pressured to pass similar legislation. And the IRA actually closed the corporate tax loophole too – large corporations raking in billions in profits now have to pay a minimum 15%, even if they could previously loophole their way to $0.
I wish things were faster. Gaza in particular has highlighted to me just how frustrating it is for things to only improve at a snail’s pace. And specifically with Gaza, I don’t think the progress is actually amounting to material changes.
We are seeing material changes in other areas though. Healthcare could be a hell of a lot better, but as someone who relied on Obamacare for a few years, things have actually improved for people. The important thing is that we don’t lose heart, and that we keep pushing for better. The US has a rich history of leftists persevering to accomplish women’s suffrage, civil rights, labor rights, and gay rights and equality. As long as we press forward, just like they did, we’ll be successful. The arc of history is long, but it bends towards justice and good.
If we could just bury the fascists for good, we could start to make serious progress.
Left of center? You mean left from totally bonkers actual Fascists…
We’re gonna need a bigger tent
deleted by creator
Pretty much. This is going to keep cropping up until we deal a decisive loss to fascism. They need to be beaten by huge margins.
Huge accumulations of capital are incompatible with democratic governance.
That’s the issue we are not willing to solve.
Fascists are simply people passionate about infinite capital accumulations. The fascists protect the billionaires by channelling the populist economic discontent toward all manner of scapegoat issues.
If you don’t like fascism you must work to outlaw, and make culturally unacceptable, extreme wealth accumulations.
https://www.philosophersbeard.org/2012/04/what-to-do-about-rich.html
More like 2004 part 6
They actually stole the 2000 election and have come full circle to screaming about the Dems stealing 2020, projection as per usual.
The post headline is very dramatic but it just implies executing death row inmates not every American in existence.
If you are participating in the two party system, you’re either supporting or enabling fascism.
deleted by creator
Ah yes, they’re so intense about fighting capitalist oppression they’ve circled around to… checks notes defending police brutality and advocating for the further privatisation of every public good and dismantling all worker protections.
The difference between “eat the rich” and “feed the rich” is really just one syllable, right? Almost negligible.
(Also, no, they don’t call everyone fascist. They just don’t think being liberal is enough for change, when the “liberals” of the US have a history of complaining about the things they don’t stop the regressives from doing. There’s a difference between calling people “naive and spineless” and “actively pursuing oppression”.)
I will say that there is a marked and growing distain for mixed liberal ideologies. There is a lot of this idea that every socialist needs to be some kind of pure strain to count or take basically the Marxist definition as the only viable one. It kind of ignores a couple of centuries of Socialist thought. A lot of people basically think “means of production” means nothing less than everyone working in a co-op and discounts a lot of past socialist wins as “not socialism”. It’s an important thing to remember about Marx, the world he lived in was very different. Damn near everything at the time was privatized. Water, sanitation, post, fire service, public health and public health regulatory bodies… None of that existed under the perview of Government auspice. Socialist strains more to the legacy of Robert Owens, Daniel De Leon, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and other ethical socialists have had significant wins. Some places took it further than others but the one thing that was allowed to happen in a lot of places was complacency. The 1980’s and 90’s created a liberal fervor that has continued to walk back a lot of significant wins made by the Socialist movements of the early 1900’s and the civil rights movements… But because a lot of the functions of Socialist wins have become the air we breathe people do not associate them with socialism anymore. The issue with peaceful integration is that private gains are always incentivized so complacency cannot be afforded.
It seems weirdly controversial but Non-Marxist socialists exist. Marx was one very popular voice in a sea of people with somewhat related but sometimes contradictory ideas. Some philosophers have been retro-branded as proto-socialists because they existed before Marx who just coined the term. Looking at his contemporaries there’s good reason why he became popular. A lot of what was out there was much drier, committed to peaceful reform. It didn’t tap into people’s anger or emotion in the same way. Right now we deal with a lot of that issue on the left. It is an old struggle. People who are bombastically angry and turning around and biting people for not being “enough” of something. Not fitting a narrow definition. Half my issue with Communist parties I have looked at joining is they aren’t great at being collaborative. Increasingly I have found the argument around “centrism” to stop meaning “people who support the basic status quo” which it seemed to have evolved to being interpretable as for a minute… To a more worrying definition about anyone willing to work across any ideological lines set down by the one guy people bothered to read.
This use of “centrism” as though it’s a plotable point on a map seems to me a worrying fiction. The post moves to create division and self satisfaction where none need exist.
deleted by creator
Dangerous to democracy? Where’d you get that idea? I’m not the one trying to install an authoritarian plutocracy.
I’m a staunch believer in educated democracy, but that requires education in the first place. Education regressives have been undermining forever, because it would inform the people of their actual democratic power.
Which would be? What, in your opinion, actually matters?
My priority is a sustainable and enjoyable future. One where you can grow old without worrying about our pension or affording medical care. One where you no longer pay a cut of your work to a person just becaude they’re rich already. One where you can do the job you love without worrying about how well it pays or whether you’ll get fired.
The Liberals keep bartering for compromise instead of progress, gradually ceding ground to the Conservatives. The spoiler effect means an actually progressive third party has no chance and risks handing power to the regressives by splitting the vote. Because all the Liberals have to do is “be less bad”, you get the choice between right-of-center and far right. This isn’t democracy, it’s slowly dismantling it.
I’ll take the Liberals, because they’re “less bad”, but it’s not a solution. It’s buying time in the hope that we can actually fix the underlying issues.
I disagree. I’ve met plenty of people who are far left and are all in on working together to stop Trump. Don’t be swayed by the terminally online, vocal “leftists”. We don’t know if they’re even genuine people, and they’re assuredly the minority.
I don’t want to be judged based on a false stereotype, and I don’t think we should judge them on a false stereotype either. The far left is antithetical to Trump.
deleted by creator
No they haven’t, and you’re likely just one of them new Russian AI disinformation bots anyway
deleted by creator