• CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Maybe he should reverse just about every single thing he’s been doing in his second maladministration, too. That could definitely help.

    That, and remove nearly all of his admin, get them on the path to prison, and replace them w/ people of integrity and competence.

  • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    79
    ·
    2 days ago

    Filibuster ends. Trump adds 7 new justices to the Supreme Court. The next democratic president adds 14 justices to offset Republican picks. The next Republican president adds 28 new justices and on and on…

    Within 40 years the entire population of the United States is on the Supreme Court.

    • Doomsider@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      Having a hundred or more people on the Supreme Court would actually make a lot of sense. Why do we concentrate power so much when we know it results in corruption?

      Furthermore, Congress should have around 12,000 members.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        12,000 members is hyperbole, but Congress should be bigger. They used to increase the size of Congress with every census and reapportionment. But about 100 years ago, they couldn’t agree on how to do it, so they just didn’t. And it has stayed at 435 ever since.

        From https://thirty-thousand.org/house-size-why-435/

        By keeping the size of Congress fixed, the average population in each district gets higher and higher. But small states still get at least 1 representative! This increases the power of small states (who already get 2 Senators) even further.

        • Doomsider@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          30,000 people per Representative. Do you think the wealthy could really control a congress that had this much representation. Perhaps, but it would be a hell of a lot harder. The concentration of power is one of our biggest problems.

    • londos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Within 40 years the entire population of the United States is on the Supreme Court.

      Sounds great

    • MrVilliam@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 days ago

      So then we’ll become a true democracy? Right now, land is getting more equal representation than people are getting.

      Soon: “In a 200M to 130M decision, the SCOTUS has ruled that abortions, sex work, and weed are legal, student loans are predatory and hereby forgiven and future interest rates capped, and income over $1M in a year is taxed at 100% while corporate tax rates have been raised to 70%. The increased revenue will fund healthcare, social safety net programs, and boost infrastructure programs. In other news, the execution of the traitor in chief will be at the Capitol at noon and be televised live to deter future attempts at fascist takeover. Thankfully he was stupid enough to accidentally give power to the people.”

      • anomnom@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Sounds a bit like some smaller US states. Which makes sense when you consider that Switzerland isn’t much bigger Massachusetts or New Jersey geographic and population wise.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    2 days ago

    “The Democrats are far more likely to win the Midterms, and the next Presidential Election, if we don’t do the Termination of the Filibuster (The Nuclear Option!),” Trump wrote.

    trump doesn’t understand it’s called “the nuclear option” because it blows up the sham system the oligarchs put in place.

    As long as there’s a threat of a filibuster, both sides have an excuse not to do anything productive.

    Right now all it it takes is someone saying “I heard someone might filibuster” and that prevents a vote. That’s why it feels like nothing has been done for over a decade.

    Without a filibuster, votes are going to have to happen. Politicians stop being able to claim they would vote for something, and actually have to cast a vote.

    trump just assumed “the nuclear option” has to mean it’s the biggest possible move, and no one is going to be able to convince him to drop it because of that nickname.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart—you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you’re a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what’s going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it’s all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don’t, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.

  • Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    Well, yeah. Without the filibuster, Republicans would be able to completely rewrite election laws, giving them total control over the outcomes.

    The only way they can win, is to cheat.