He's right. They're stealing the country from us and ending democracy. "Bloodless if the left allows it to be" is a threat to kill anyone who fights back
Heritage Foundation president celebrates Supreme Court presidential immunity ruling: "We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be" www.mediamatters.org/project-2025...
This is the difference between the left and right. We critique every effort to highlight the crisis we’re in while the right universally and wholeheartedly backs every single batshit scheme they come up with.
That’s why heritage is telling us to surrender. It’s the most practical option after all.
Forgive me for being a little skeptical that this will actually work, considering the last time we tried to impeach.
Highlighting doesn't do anything. Pointing to a building fire and saying "That building is on fire!" doesn't actually put the fire out.
Saying that the building is on fire and trying to get people to treat it as a building which is on fire does a hell of a lot more than telling those people “ehh, that won’t work”
You can support AOC's attempt at impeachment without pretending that it will be effective.
Pretending like pointing out how ineffectual it will be is what keeps the left from mobilizing as well as the right is riduclous.
The reason we don't have a consensus is because liberals love fascism.
The "Left" cannot have a coalition because at the end of the day all of the people in power "on the left" are Center Right and at their heart like many of the policies of the Right and therefore cannot effectively combat them.
It has nothing to do with griping about useless impeachment attempts.
Complaining that other people are trying to do something is not praxis. It’s wallowing.
I understand wallowing in fear and grief. But maybe this isn’t a helpful way to work out those feelings.
I mean, if someone does something that is ineffectual, then yes, it's pertinent to criticize that. But more to the point the complaint wasn't even that she's attempting something useless, it was that the first poster thought it would accomplish anything.
You're also doing the thing yourself.
We disagree about what "effective" means. What can a representative in the minority do, exactly? They certainly can't get anything passed. Probably can't even get something up for a vote. So should they just take naps and post online?
I believe messaging bills can be useful.
I think it's good for her to do it because it's good for Democrats to actually be seen trying to do things.
But it isn't going to stop anything or change anything or make anything better.
I don't think that trusting the system is even something anyone should be doing at this point.
