• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

Hawkeye66 said:
Except for that part where him and his gang violently tried to overturn an election huh?
Click to expand...

The January 6th insurgency was 100% his fault. No one is questioning that. But let's talk about what if that group had been successful at taking the capitol building. Then what? Do you really think the VP, Joint Chiefs, and the Cabinet would not have stepped in and invoked the 25th Amendment, called in the armed forces, and it would have ended a whole lot worse than it did. But Democracy would still stand.

Besides, if we are going to talk about these violent actions, look at all the riots that have occurred from those who prescribe to an extremist left agenda. Neither side have clean hands with this one. To be frank, I am impressed with how most people are behaving at least thus far. I was positive that there would be violent protests if Trump won. So far that hasn't materialized.
 
L
michaelskis said:
The January 6th insurgency was 100% his fault. No one is questioning that. But let's talk about what if that group had been successful at taking the capitol building. Then what? Do you really think the VP, Joint Chiefs, and the Cabinet would not have stepped in and invoked the 25th Amendment, called in the armed forces, and it would have ended a whole lot worse than it did. But Democracy would still stand.

Besides, if we are going to talk about these violent actions, look at all the riots that have occurred from those who prescribe to an extremist left agenda. Neither side have clean hands with this one. To be frank, I am impressed with how most people are behaving at least thus far. I was positive that there would be violent protests if Trump won. So far that hasn't materialized.
Click to expand...

False equivalence.

Just a ridiculous comparison.
 
Well, I ws
Hawkeye66 said:
My whole career has been a waste. Pointless.

Honestly I wish the aneurysm had just finished me off 5 years ago.
Click to expand...
The last thing my father said before his stroke in 2016 was, "I wasted my life." :-( Don't talk like that--it's distressing.

I had a brain aneurysm too!!

Jim
 
I was expecting there to be widespread civil unrest after the election. I had been anxious about it for months.

I don't see any signs that is happening, so that's one good thing.

JIm
 
SlaveToTheGrind said:
Changing the actual words of the Constitution does take an amendment, as does actually deleting, or repealing, an amendment. Including the first 10 amendments, the Bill of Rights, which were ratified in 1789, the Senate historian estimates that approximately 11,699 amendment changes have been proposed in Congress through 2016. Only one amendment, the 18th Amendment that established Prohibition, was later repealed by the states. The Constitution’s Article V requires that an amendment be proposed by two-thirds of the House and Senate, or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures. It is up to the states to approve a new amendment, with three-quarters of the states voting to ratifying it.

Not happening.
Click to expand...

Sure, I'm with you that on a scale between simply waving a wand and altering the most fundamental laws of the US, a constitutional amendment is a far foray into the complex. Maybe you are correct that it would require too much effort and cooperation to be worth the political capital (I hope so). Nevertheless, a Trump presidency and (potential) Republican control of both houses with such a decisive win of both the electoral and popular vote is, essentially, a mandate from the voters. What is the mandate exactly? I don't think it has anything to do with higher tariffs...it leads me to believe we are all now spectators waiting to see where Trump will go, how far he will take his agenda; we just don't know what the administration will be capable of accomplishing (but I'm sure it will be more than hot air).

It also forces me to ask myself at this point what percentage of the population still believe the 2020 election was false. Is there even a point trying to have any debate or dialogue when something as fundamental as the validity of an election is now, and potentially forever will be, disagreed upon based on party affiliation?
 
jumbach said:
Well, I ws

The last thing my father said before his stroke in 2016 was, "I wasted my life." :-( Don't talk like that--it's distressing.

I had a brain aneurysm too!!

Jim
Click to expand...

It was an aortic one in my case. I shouldnt really be alive.

I lived through it for this?

God was Albert Camus right.
 
1730940613807.png
 
dw914er said:
I think the first few days will be the signifyer of things to come. But the checks and balances have been heavily removed, and the repercussions of the MAGA influence are going to remain for decades. The house and senate majorities, the stacking of the supreme court (and possible expansion for even more imbalance) along with their trend to reverse precident and offer immunity, plus the number of judicial appointments (which have been exploited by conservative groups) means that the rule of law is going to be drastically shaped towards MAGA-conservatism for many of our foreseeable lifetimes.

There are reports that the transition team has already been soliticing firms to build the internment camps, so I am less likely to think that his proposed actions were simply a bluff. But again, we'll know how things look as the transition and the start of the presidency begins.
Click to expand...

May be some good opportunities for planners. How would you design an interment camp? You would need how many barracks buildings, how many cooking and dining facilities, how much length of railroad spur?

Would the guests wear striped suits and hats? How would they be de-liced?

Don't Haitians mostly speak French? How would that work if they all go to Venezuela?
 
You know what Biden should do? Step down as President on January 1 and let Kamala Harris be our 47th President for 20 days. It will sure piss off Trump, that's for sure and you can't put a value on that. At the very least, all those countless assholes who spent millions on 47 hats and shirts will have utterly worthless apparel overnight.

Of course we are all still all fucked on January 20th, but why not for those three weeks of the year, let her be our President. What's really to stop him?

ANYTHING to piss off those tens millions of MAGA degenerates and lowlifes who are multiplying like cockroaches. And I think that it will especially be a blow to Trump's ego, being usurped by a woman President, if only for 20 days.

If she could pull this off, it will be one bright spot in centuries of suffering and misery to come.
 
Super Amputee Cat said:
You know what Biden should do? Step down as President on January 1 and let Kamala Harris be our 47th President for 20 days. It will sure piss off Trump, that's for sure and you can't put a value on that. At the very least, all those countless assholes who spent millions on 47 hats and shirts will have utterly worthless apparel overnight.

Of course we are all still all fucked on January 20th, but why not for those three weeks of the year, let her be our President. What's really to stop him?

ANYTHING to piss off those tens millions of MAGA degenerates and lowlifes who are multiplying like cockroaches. And I think that it will especially be a blow to Trump's ego, being usurped by a woman President, if only for 20 days.

If she could pull this off, it will be one bright spot in centuries of suffering and misery to come.
Click to expand...

I'm as angry as you,.but it's not sustainable. I am worn out today. I feel like I did a century ride today and I am probably close to a stroke.

I simply give up working for the demographic that elected him. I have been wanting to work on traditionally underprivileged groups anyway, even before this disaster. I am going through the stages. Try to turn it into something productive.
 
Super Amputee Cat said:
You know what Biden should do? Step down as President on January 1 and let Kamala Harris be our 47th President for 20 days. It will sure piss off Trump, that's for sure and you can't put a value on that. At the very least, all those countless assholes who spent millions on 47 hats and shirts will have utterly worthless apparel overnight.

Of course we are all still all fucked on January 20th, but why not for those three weeks of the year, let her be our President. What's really to stop him?

ANYTHING to piss off those tens millions of MAGA degenerates and lowlifes who are multiplying like cockroaches. And I think that it will especially be a blow to Trump's ego, being usurped by a woman President, if only for 20 days.

If she could pull this off, it will be one bright spot in centuries of suffering and misery to come.
Click to expand...
I like the idea, but I think Biden is too classy for that.
 
jumbach said:
I didn't agree with all his policies, but in terms of decorum and the way he carried himself, Obama was a model of what a President should be.
Click to expand...
^^^This. Policy-wise Obama was mediocre as a President, but I'd happily grab a beer with the guy. Trump, not so much, but the meltdown by a couple of our esteemed colleagues here yesterday is a wee bit of an overreaction. Just sayin'...
 
Super Amputee Cat said:
You know what Biden should do? Step down as President on January 1 and let Kamala Harris be our 47th President for 20 days. It will sure piss off Trump, that's for sure and you can't put a value on that. At the very least, all those countless assholes who spent millions on 47 hats and shirts will have utterly worthless apparel overnight.

Of course we are all still all fucked on January 20th, but why not for those three weeks of the year, let her be our President. What's really to stop him?

ANYTHING to piss off those tens millions of MAGA degenerates and lowlifes who are multiplying like cockroaches. And I think that it will especially be a blow to Trump's ego, being usurped by a woman President, if only for 20 days.

If she could pull this off, it will be one bright spot in centuries of suffering and misery to come.
Click to expand...
I get the vibe, but that accomplishes nothing and would really be disrespectful towards women in leadership, granting Harris no opportunity to actually lead.

One thing we probably know at this point is that Biden was declining around a year ago, perhaps even a touch longer. Not enough that there was true risk (like what has generally been acknowledged with Reagan many years later), but enough that I'm sure he was aware. That would've been the time to take the pride pill and step aside. It also would've planted a useful flag in the ground as precedent for anyone at his age to be "too old to serve," undermining Trump and perhaps helping to provide cover for the GOP to have pushed him out early.

Had he done that, Harris would've "presided over the cutting of inflation in half in just a short year," and had opportunity to drive some level of policy. It would've raised her profile and granted people more familiarity with her, and provided space to separate from "Biden's ghost" in defining her policy agenda and perhaps giving some meaningful samples. She would've been able to leverage incumbency to travel more, demonstrate command of the office, etc.
 
Suburb Repairman said:
I get the vibe, but that accomplishes nothing and would really be disrespectful towards women in leadership, granting Harris no opportunity to actually lead.

One thing we probably know at this point is that Biden was declining around a year ago, perhaps even a touch longer. Not enough that there was true risk (like what has generally been acknowledged with Reagan many years later), but enough that I'm sure he was aware. That would've been the time to take the pride pill and step aside. It also would've planted a useful flag in the ground as precedent for anyone at his age to be "too old to serve," undermining Trump and perhaps helping to provide cover for the GOP to have pushed him out early.

Had he done that, Harris would've "presided over the cutting of inflation in half in just a short year," and had opportunity to drive some level of policy. It would've raised her profile and granted people more familiarity with her, and provided space to separate from "Biden's ghost" in defining her policy agenda and perhaps giving some meaningful samples. She would've been able to leverage incumbency to travel more, demonstrate command of the office, etc.
Click to expand...
I mean, he could've even just stepped out of the running in time for a primary to happen and a candidate to lay out their policy direction and establish their differences from Biden as the incumbent.

BUT

20/20 Hindsight here- people are really mad about inflation (and I think even more acutely feel the lack of mobility in the housing market), and they pull the lever for change even if that lever is attached to a slot machine with an unpredictable (but 99/100 BAD) outcome. And people have short memories. "Was Covid really that bad? Was Trump really that bad last time? All I remember is gas was real cheap in 2020." and so forth.

I'm not sure anything could have changed this outcome.
 
Suburb Repairman said:
I get the vibe, but that accomplishes nothing and would really be disrespectful towards women in leadership, granting Harris no opportunity to actually lead.

One thing we probably know at this point is that Biden was declining around a year ago, perhaps even a touch longer. Not enough that there was true risk (like what has generally been acknowledged with Reagan many years later), but enough that I'm sure he was aware. That would've been the time to take the pride pill and step aside. It also would've planted a useful flag in the ground as precedent for anyone at his age to be "too old to serve," undermining Trump and perhaps helping to provide cover for the GOP to have pushed him out early.

Had he done that, Harris would've "presided over the cutting of inflation in half in just a short year," and had opportunity to drive some level of policy. It would've raised her profile and granted people more familiarity with her, and provided space to separate from "Biden's ghost" in defining her policy agenda and perhaps giving some meaningful samples. She would've been able to leverage incumbency to travel more, demonstrate command of the office, etc.
Click to expand...

No. If Biden had stepped aside sooner, there would have been a primary and either Whitmer or Newsom would have been the candidate.

Newsom is the de Facto opposition leader now.
 
In my county, with a tad more than 66% turnout, 60% pulled a straight party ticket (36%R/24%D). Interestingly, that percentage mostly held across the board for all partisan offices, and only one D managed to eke out a win.

I'm thankful there are no city races in presidential years ...

trainwreck GIF
 
The NC State races went in the opposite direction of the national election.

D's won Governor, Lt. Gov., Sof Education, AG, Sof State & the legislature lost their supermajority (by 1 seat).

We got that going for us.
 
HomerJ said:
It also forces me to ask myself at this point what percentage of the population still believe the 2020 election was false. Is there even a point trying to have any debate or dialogue when something as fundamental as the validity of an election is now, and potentially forever will be, disagreed upon based on party affiliation?
Click to expand...

Too many...

What I find interesting is that the right was harping all last week about voting irregularities and that democrats were cheating. Once the votes looked favorable, magically all their concerns disappeared.

Another observation I have had is that on Instagram/Threads(Meta), I am now seeing a bunch of the pro Harris/Walz posts coming in that are dated several days ago. I do not have Facebook, so I am not sure how that translates. I am also aware that Musk has significantly modified X’s (formerly Twitter) algorithm to promote his posts above others, and he certainly has been unabashedly pro Trump.* I continue to worry that the source of our news will continue to be regulated by their owners and throttled under their direction to sway public opinion.

* I did see a pro-Trump/Musk meme that joked about Musk spending 44 billion to buy Twitter, and what he got was all three branches of the US government. I feel like we should be worried about that.


elon-spent-44-billion-on-twitter-and-all-he-got-was-control-v0-9yzntw9j5czd1.jpeg

Faust_Motel said:
I mean, he could've even just stepped out of the running in time for a primary to happen and a candidate to lay out their policy direction and establish their differences from Biden as the incumbent.

BUT

20/20 Hindsight here- people are really mad about inflation (and I think even more acutely feel the lack of mobility in the housing market), and they pull the lever for change even if that lever is attached to a slot machine with an unpredictable (but 99/100 BAD) outcome. And people have short memories. "Was Covid really that bad? Was Trump really that bad last time? All I remember is gas was real cheap in 2020." and so forth.

I'm not sure anything could have changed this outcome.
Click to expand...

Hindsight is 20/20. The Biden attempt to hold on as long as he could certainly created issues. People’s memory or understanding of what was happening also hurt. Yes, inflation has been an issue. But we also managed to have the lowest rate of any industrialized nation and had the lowest unemployment. Ultimately, issues are much more nuanced that people can understand and it’s easier to attack the situation than explain them. Fear is also a better motivator for votes, too.
 
SlaveToTheGrind said:
Changing the actual words of the Constitution does take an amendment, as does actually deleting, or repealing, an amendment. Including the first 10 amendments, the Bill of Rights, which were ratified in 1789, the Senate historian estimates that approximately 11,699 amendment changes have been proposed in Congress through 2016. Only one amendment, the 18th Amendment that established Prohibition, was later repealed by the states. The Constitution’s Article V requires that an amendment be proposed by two-thirds of the House and Senate, or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures. It is up to the states to approve a new amendment, with three-quarters of the states voting to ratifying it.

Not happening.
Click to expand...
I dont' see him changing the Constitution. I see him ignoring it altogether and ruling by fiat rather than rule of law. When it goes to the courts the Supreme Court will back him and then what can you do?
 
As the emotion of it calms down for me I am still left with the fact that 70 some million people voted for hatred, bigotry, misogyny, and a man that has pretty much defiled all our political customs and traditions. Because we had 6% inflation for a year? I am not as emotional now, but my feelings for the country are not the same at this point. I really do wonder what my place in this country is. I am not going to do anything rash, but it certainly changes what my path is. I am am fortunate enough to have a lot of experience that I can use and that gives me options.
 
estromberg said:
I'm sorry that you work with such a brain dead colleague. That must create a lot of extra work for you.
Click to expand...


No, not brain dead at all.

They were making a joke about that promise tRump made & that now he is elected, make it happen.

We both know it's not practical to do it at all. Oil will have to come down to about $22 / barrel which ain't gonna happen.
 
Hawkeye66 said:
No. If Biden had stepped aside sooner, there would have been a primary and either Whitmer or Newsom would have been the candidate.

Newsom is the de Facto opposition leader now.
Click to expand...

If Newsom was on the ticket, I could imagine some sort of headline/comment asking Kimberly Guilfoyle to compare sizes between Gavin and Don Jr.

sick cringe GIF
 
dw914er said:
* I did see a pro-Trump/Musk meme that joked about Musk spending 44 billion to buy Twitter, and what he got was all three branches of the US government. I feel like we should be worried about that.
Click to expand...
I have a lot of Tesla stock in my IRA, so that's helping to mitigate some of the disappointment. The duloxetine, too, I guess.

Seriously, I've been thinking about where the Democrats went wrong. There's too much I can say about it, and I don't want to make a long, rambling posts about it. So, more later. "More" being nice, succinct bullet points.

But first, this.

 
Faust_Motel said:
20/20 Hindsight here- people are really mad about inflation (and I think even more acutely feel the lack of mobility in the housing market), and they pull the lever for change even if that lever is attached to a slot machine with an unpredictable (but 99/100 BAD) outcome. And people have short memories. "Was Covid really that bad? Was Trump really that bad last time? All I remember is gas was real cheap in 2020." and so forth.

I'm not sure anything could have changed this outcome.
Click to expand...
Gas was cheap in 2020 because nobody was going anywhere.
 
Moderator note:

Everyone chill out. We're heading toward interpersonal communication problems and it's unnecessary.
 
Easy boys, let's not ruffle our petticoats. We're all a little testy here at this moment in time.


Up until Monday, I was reading a lot about the election fraud going on...then on Wednesday, crickets.
 
Back
Top