That is literally nonsensical. Krokodil a bit too strong for you these days?

Your point is valid and well-taken; the only reason I did not go as far as that is because while Trump has absolutely done as much as he can personally, via the executive, to fuck Ukraine in the ass, he has also hidden behind others – like Musk cutting off the military arm of Starlink – and been restrained from the worst of his excesses by the Republicans that still very much support Ukraine. So I could write it and be technically correct, but I would not readily be able to source it as fact. You know, and I know, but sourcing it would be a prolonged undertaking.

Also, keep in mind that as an older American, every time I type the name of that great country Ukraine, I am reminded of how Ukraine would not even been in this position had they not traded their nukes for American assurances, among others (including Putin himself on behalf of Russia) that if Ukraine were attacked we would readily defend them.

Ukraine had gained independence, and to be a good world neighbor they willingly disarmed. Here we are, twenty-two years later, and of all the signatories and supporters of the Budapest Memorandum in 1994 and its terms – Ukraine, Russia, the United States, the UK, France, and China – one of them is the primary aggressor and the rest have all fucked right off or are providing only minimal support. It is deeply, deeply shaming to me as an American citizen that we have not supported Ukraine with all our might.

Well luckily Hakeem Jeffries who she endorses is going to do nothing about it.

You’ve twisted her words, and she’s already explained it.

The Speaker selection takes place in roughly three weeks via a fixed ballot. There are no write-ins. Candidates who want to be considered have to write a letter to the entire Democratic house caucus announcing their intention.

Right now, today, there is no one other than Jeffries on that ballot.

So explain to the rest of us how she – or any other House dem – can elect a different candidate for Speaker when there is no other candidate currently running.

You think donald trump is a tankie?

Let’s see, hmm, is President Krasnov – who has business in Russia, who helps Putin at every turn, having secret meetings with him and overturning established sanctions on Russia and low-key betraying Ukraine as much as possible while trying to appear as though he is not, who even has a fucking Russian operative code name – is he, could he possibly be, a tankie?

My god man. We will never know. It is a mystery of the goddamn universe.

As an Aussie, your nation has two safeguards that we do not have, and absolutely need: compulsory voting, and paper ballots. Our corruption flourishes in the absence of voter engagement, which is why you have always seen so much voter suppression in ex-slavery states that never really got away from an extractive, exploitative economy, but now in other states as well.

Our founders knew the dangers of a demagogue, and that the “American experiment” would fail in the absence of a participatory democracy, but we have fallen so far away from it that we’ve made voter apathy and now even widespread voter suppression an art form.

Yet, there is hope. Earlier this year, I don’t know if you remember, social media and even Lemmy was overrun with “Peaceful protests don’t do anything!” But they really do: all those protests put people who wanted to stop the ICE violence and the illegalities and the corruption – literally, who wanted to be engaged – in touch with each other, under a tent big enough to hold them all: No Kings. And they all took it from there.

Thus when Bernie and AOC went out again this year, they met with organizers and activists who were already working in their communities, with a populace that was already pissed off and far more interested than they’d been ever before, and it all just kept growing. I don’t know that there was any magic, only that the progressives never gave up and made sure to field really good candidates.

And of course, Trump had NO idea just how enraged citizens of color are with his bullshit: when you see Senate wins in states like South Carolina and Mississippi, you are also looking at wins brought largely by a return of voters of color to the polls. That means they came out in numbers big enough to overcome all the voter suppressions there, and did so in spite of having no guarantee that it would just be another effort done in vain, and even with the threat of ICE violence at the polls. No one really had high hopes for this election beforehand.

So when Election Day rolled around, there it was. A pissed off, truly engaged electorate, and with it – I hope – a return to real democracy. Give us compulsory voting and paper ballots, and we might even keep it this time.

I don’t mind taking the time to answer, I don’t sleep much and I’m glad you’re interested. To be honest I wasn’t sure because I have been trolled by .ml before, but I took a chance. Thank you for your gracious reply, and for telling me about Australia, I love that stuff. I used to have a friend in the Blue Mountains but never made it over there personally, which I regret. Australia is a great country.

She and Bernie Sanders are each, and together, EXCELLENT at getting the progressive message across to average, uninterested voters and getting the vote out. And they’ve been doing it all along; they just never gave up. And here we are.

While Republicans have been hiding from their constituents, all summer and fall Bernie and AOC have been traveling the country and meeting with everybody they can, from activists and organizers to average voters, to get people registered to vote and to educate them on the workings of power, what we can do, and how exactly we can do it.

The video you didn’t watch is just another example of what AOC does on the regular: she fully described with examples what a speaker does, how their position is both legislative and political, the necessary qualities that a speaker should have, why she doesn’t think she has them, and how the speaker is selected.

The recent progressive turnout across all fifty states has a lot to do with AOC and Bernie, and others like them, working as hard as they can, in every way that they can, to get voters actively engaging with the process of democracy again.

Thank you for looking this up, I really appreciate it. I think your estimation is right, but that would seem to scupper Neguse’s chances for speaker, if the selection works the way AOC says it does.

She says that the actual party caucus Speaker vote in November (not the floor vote in January) is not run as an open thing. It has a fixed ballot, and a challenger has to formally put their name forward for consideration prior to the party vote by sending a letter to the rest of the House Democratic Caucus. If they do not, and their name is not already on the ballot, the process itself does not allow them to be chosen. This seems to be quite different than the Republican Speaker elections we’ve seen, especially in October 2023.

If you’re interested, AOC just recently put out a video on her IG reels explaining the Speaker position and selection process at length. It’s a long video but well worth the listen; scroll to the end of this article for the Instagram link. I downloaded it and ended up skipping at lot of the intro (“hey everybody! hey!”) and sped it up to 1.25, but I learned a lot.

But in the end it was functionally irrelevant to the vote.

Not necessarily. Impeachments are privileged and handled differently than a regular bill. This was not a vote on the impeachment itself; this was a vote on whether to send it to committee (where it would obviously time out and die) or to advance it to a full floor vote. Eleven Dems and seven Rs skipped the vote, and it passed 211 to 204.

But had ALL the Dems showed up, the vote on sending it to committee would have passed by too narrow a margin, and the process would have automatically progressed the eight articles of impeachment to a floor vote.

They COULD have pulled a win out of a loss, forcing each member of the House to vote on the articles of impeachment individually and thus be seen for what they are, and chose not to.

Just a reminder that every single day that passes with war in Iran, Palantir is making insane profits from keeping it going.

Also, Hakeem Jeffries takes money from Palantir.

Not that these two facts taken together have anything to do with Jeffries not whipping the Hegseth impeachment, though. No. Not a thing. Pure coincidence, I’m sure.

I think I misread this entire thread, lol. Take your upvote.

I deeply regret our current course of idiocy toward the best friend and ally this country has ever had, or could have.

Oh I blame Jeffries too, with everything I have.

You’re preaching to the choir. Many of us are doing everything we can to get this paid-for shill out of the Speaker role.

Jeffries has taken a LOT of money from not only AIPAC, but Palantir, a company that is making insane profits out of the war in Iran.

Neither Palantir nor AIPAC want Jeffries to allow any censure for Hegseth or anyone else involved in the war, or for anyone advancing their own profiteering to suffer any kind of consequences at all.

This is the same Congress that it was two weeks ago. The new Congress does not get sworn in until January 3rd. That’s not a conspiracy, it’s just the way things work.

Why are you blaming voting and the new Congress when they’re not the ones in power?

And there’s no way a Dem can win the Senate in Florida, or Mississippi, so why even try?

Haven’t seen the news? Scott Colom is over 4,000 votes ahead of Cindy Hyde-Smith in the Mississippi Senate race right now, and is now projected to win because his lead is strong enough to overcome any legal objections/vote exclusions under Mississippi law.

And Angie Nixon lost her Senate race in Florida by the narrowest of margins: with a little extra support she may well have crossed the line.

Or in other words, YES, hell is in fact experiencing its first snowflakes in a very long time.

That doomer shit is no longer believable, and I’m glad to finally be able to prove it an outright lie.

It’s still the same Congress as it was two weeks ago. The new Congress has no power until January 3, when they are sworn in.

I guarantee if the 11 Dems had shown up to vote, the 5 NV Repubs would have shown up too, so its a moot point. The outcome was known before the vote even went to the floor.

Not necessarily. This was not a vote on the impeachment itself; this was a vote on whether to send it to committee (where it would obviously time out and die) or to advance it for a vote. Impeachments are privileged and handled differently than a regular bill.

Had ALL the Dems showed up, the vote on sending it to committee would have passed by too narrow a margin, and the process would have automatically progressed to a floor vote on the impeachment itself.

There is already a proposed constitutional amendment in the works to do just that, among various other measures at the state level, and it already has state approval for ratification by twenty-five of the necessary thirty-eight to pass.

Essentially, Citizens United and other corrupt rulings like it operate on two legal grounds: making artificial entities (groups, PACs, corporations) legally the same as individual citizens with the same protected rights such as free speech, AND barring states from limiting the amount of cash that flows into the elections they constitutionally control. This amendment addresses both of these legal bases.

Here’s the text of the proposed amendment:

Section 1. We the People have compelling sovereign interests in the freedom of speech, representative self-government, federalism, the integrity of the electoral process, and the political equality of natural persons.

Section 2. Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to forbid Congress or the States, within their respective jurisdictions, from reasonably regulating and limiting contributions and spending in campaigns, elections, or ballot measures.

Section 3. Congress and the States shall have the power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation and may distinguish between natural persons and artificial entities, including by prohibiting artificial entities from raising and spending money in campaigns, elections, or ballot measures.

I know it’s hard to believe, but getting big money out of politics really is a bipartisan issue. It keeps good people out of office altogether and the rest unable to address the power of cash concentrated in a very few hands.

If your state isn’t already on this list, look it over and see if it’s something you can support. It needs to happen not just with an amendment, but at all levels. Every bit helps.

Yes. Note that the person telling us is a new progressive elect with nothing to lose, no corporate support, and absolutely nothing to gain by hiding how it all works.

When possible, broadcasting an extortion attempt is the absolute best way to handle one, and they picked the guy with absolutely no reason to keep this hidden.

I hope and expect to hear more attempts in the near future: I can think of no better way to end the current practices than for those employing them to try them on this new crowd only to have them broadcast for the rest of us.

That would be three days too late for the floor vote and over a month too late for the actual decision. The Speaker of the House will be decided in roughly three weeks, according to AOC’s recent IG video; the floor vote is just a formality.