327
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 59 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I’m pretty convinced that inside of a year, Trump is going to try to use the DoJ and various other agencies to specifically target CA in a ton of fucked up ways, and that it might ultimately be a dynamic that sparks a serious movement to secede. Which would of course spark CW2 under Trump.

This includes specifically targeting Newsom and trying to figure out a way to politically imprison him. This will be the American version of the Navalny/Putin conflict, which ended up with Navalny dying in a Siberian gulag.

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago

One thing we know about Trump though, is that he's bad at math. The Magats want CW2 so bad, but they don't understand anything beyond 'guns and men'

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

They forgot the butter side of that equation, which is to say I kinda doubt their logistics would be good enough to sustain a war. Worse case scenario ya get some lefty rednecks give em some horses and tell them to got wild on the infrastructure.

[-] Schmoo@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago

Lefty redneck here, looking forward to receiving my free horse.

[-] leadore@lemmy.world 23 points 1 month ago

He did fuck around with Blue states in his first term. For just one example, he withheld federal disaster aid from California after a 2018 wildfire. His aides had to convince him that republicans who supported him were also impacted by the disaster before he would approve the funds:

“We went as far as looking up how many votes he got in those impacted areas … to show him these are people who voted for you."

Oh yeah I remember. And the weaponization of tax code against blue states.

[-] leadore@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Yep. and halting COVID testing efforts at the beginning when they thought it was mostly going to hit just blue states.

[-] nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

It's not hard for the feds to illegally imprison someone. We have a political dissident illegally locked up under house arrest for bringing a lawsuit against Chevron in Ecuador.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Donziger

Yeah but we have never done that to a sitting governor of a state that’s also the 5th largest economy in the world before, so that’d be a bit of a new bridge to cross

this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
327 points (97.1% liked)

politics

19246 readers
2798 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS