• Welcome to TalkWeather!
    We see you lurking around TalkWeather! Take the extra step and join us today to view attachments, see less ads and maybe even join the discussion.
    CLICK TO JOIN TALKWEATHER

2025 Political Thread

Let me just get this out of the way while it's on my mind... So sick and tired of this gerrymandering bs.

Newsom has campaigned to pass a 28th Amendment that would ban so-called "assault weapons" - but I say the 28th Amendment should be something that actually makes sense, like a formal ban on gerrymandering.

Because voters themselves have now become a huge part of the problem. In 2008, California voters approved the independent, non-partisan Citizens Redistricting Commission. But a lot has changed since 2008. In 2025, those same voters now largely support Newsom's gerrymander - not because it's fair, but because it entrenches their preferred party.

And I guess blind loyalty to one's political party is more important than transparency and accountability these days. In today's ever more polarized political climate, voters are either indifferent to or openly INVITE authoritarianism if their team is the one calling the shots.

At least the Texas GOP are upfront and honest about their authoritarian power grab - which does NOT make it right, but hey, they get one point for honesty I guess. California Democrats' gerrymander is authoritarianism with a smiley face - by implementing it with a "free" election that's de facto predetermined based on the state's party majority, they have a flimsy justification for "defending democracy".

And of course, a 28th Amendment to ban gerrymandering would never pass in today's political climate, because the parties see each other not as opponents, but as existential threats. And anything that could potentially take power away from one's party would be automatically opposed, even if it also takes power away from the other party.

There is indeed an existential threat to American democracy. But it's not one party or the other, or even the parties themselves - it's blind voter loyalty to them. Modern voters care more about entrenching their own party's power than upholding democratic principles.

And until that stops, America can never truly heal.
 
TH2002 said:
Modern voters care more about entrenching their own party's power than upholding democratic principles.
Click to expand...

I'm no expert on American history but have the impression that our founders, with some religious roots at least, as well as Europe's long, sad example before them, had a pretty jaundiced but accurate view of human nature and of politics.

They were practical, in other words, and expected such power grabbing by various factions. They worked that into their design for a democratic republic.

The democracy would take care of itself. And it does. It's hard to see the big picture, and would be even if control freaks weren't constantly using mass media these days to blast me with counsels of despair ("Democracy is self-executing"), and often it's frustrating and ugly to me because I'm not getting all of what I want.

Trite as it is, the idea is that everybody should get some of their own way. And it's just impossible to see if that is happening sometimes in the short term.

None of that addresses California, of course. The gov sounds like a pain. He must be feeling insecure, to drag out that tired old chestnut of an assault-weapon-ban division maker. Maybe there's a good alternative to him and/or his policies that he doesn't want Californians thinking about?
 
What's unhealthy in a democratic republic is the sort of widespread unity that I saw prevail throughout my younger days from the Sixties right on through the late 1980s/early 1990s when H. Bush shattered it by addressing pro-life groups and when Operation Rescue was doing its thing.

You had to be there, maybe, to understand what a shock that was to all of us Boomers who liked the unity and thought we were living in a post-revolution Utopia. Really, though it has taken me decades to see that.

Many of us and our descendants have not gotten over it yet. I did, fortunately. Other Americans showed me their long-stifled but equally valid points of view, most notably:

  • A pro-life group up in Troy, NY, who posted a billboard image of a baby and the words "It's not a choice. It's a baby." Slipped in subliminally while I was driving, under all the hoopla that would have kicked in had I thought about it, and I realized they were right. (City made them take it down for some BS reason, and that was an eye-opener, too.)
  • A very drunken black man at the truck stop in McCalla, Alabama, the very first time I went there to see my father and stepmother. He saw my Lady Liberty New York vehicle plate and said, "You come down here to IN-te-grate us?" I can't begin to convey the sarcasm he put into that one word. Aghast, I just mumbled a bit and he staggered on his way, having made his point: PBS's "Eyes on the Prize" and other celebrations of white saviorhood were not the whole story by a darned lot.
Sigh. America is a wild place.

Anyway, awful as these days are, maybe the democracy is a little bit better off now than it was thirty, forty, fifty years ago.

That said, we've got to flush out all this hate.
 
2 victims have died as well as the shooter committed suicide when confronted by officers.

* It was detainees that where shot. Awful just awful.
 
A question I have is... where is Charlie Kirk's body? As far as I know, it wasn't lying in state at the memorial service (aka MAGA Trump rally). I haven't read of a burial or cremation. So where is it? An autopsy would have been over several days ago... ???
 
Cause of death is pretty clear, whatever the actual sequelae of such a gunshot wound might have have been.

It probably will be a while before his burial site is widely known. In his family's position and presumed condition psychologically right now, I certainly wouldn't want to deal with possible demonstrations/counter demonstrations, desecration, souvenir hunting, selfies, sensationalists and political haymakers posing for pix, etc., at the grave of a loved one I have just lost.

The lightning having struck once already, I would not put up a potential new rod until the weather clears.
 
Mike S said:
I've already said a lot in the previous post, but when we talk about looking back on presidencies, I feel like W's will be seen differently. I poo-poo'd all over his "compassionate conservatism" schtick back then, but we sure could use some of that now. We could use anything than what we have now.
Click to expand...

On September 11, I had to force myself to work and it was only transcription -- not requiring any high-level decision making. Can't imagine what a strain it must have been to be President that day. He did it well, and he got us through that, too, while the media continued to crucify him.

He must be over that trauma by now, I hope, and maybe he does want to help -- but would the Republican party let him?

I don't trust Obama, for the same reason that Stonewall Jackson didn't use whiskey -- I like the taste of these "fireside chats" too much.

It wouldn't surprise me much to hear that Clinton, behind the scenes, might be egging his fellow Epstein client on.

I'd listen to W. Bush and take seriously what he said if he were to speak informally to the nation as The Carrot is now doing.

I don't usually get hepped over politics -- my sounding off here is just a shock reaction to seeing what I truly believe is a Business Plot 2.0 fascist soft coup in America.

For starters on basic politics, I tried following Pence on X and just couldn't take the "we must unite behind the president's agenda" stuff, over and over again.

Murkowski has said that there is a sense of fear among her peers.

The Democrats, as far as I can tell -- I've not followed online news for a few days -- seem to be pushing their national socialism stuff and perhaps drooling at the possibilities for them in later years as Trump seizes power by handfuls now.

Jeffries and Schumer, last time I looked, were taking a partisan stand against a budget bill adamantly enough to show that they do NOT intend to build the kinds of bipartisan bridges that are needed to get impeachment articles with teeth -- still our best way out of this crisis.

Can the Republican party survive this as anything other than a brand name in the future for a wing of the fascist uniparty?
 
Last edited:


Yo, Donald, the rest of the state doesn't need a federal occupation either.

Well, at least they released that Oregonian they took off a fire line up in Washington, but only last week and reportedly only after a federal lawsuit.

I don't know how the Washingtonians that were taken are doing, or how the faceless tens of thousands who can't catch a senatorial or editorial eye are faring.

In a way, it's another form of swatting flies with a railgun and then boasting about it. We are very poorly led.

But I've got a couple senators with a pulse and respiration rate, and many other living, breathing, kickin' state leaders and officials. :)
 
bjdeming said:
The Democrats, as far as I can tell -- I've not followed online news for a few days -- seem to be pushing their national socialism stuff and perhaps drooling at the possibilities for them in later years as Trump seizes power by handfuls now.
Click to expand...

This is the thing people can't seem to grasp. All the power they're giving Trump will come back to bite them bigly.
 
Mike S said:
This is the thing people can't seem to grasp. All the power they're giving Trump will come back to bite them bigly.
Click to expand...
That is why we must demand -- now -- extraordinary responsibility from those who assume (illegally and impeachably, in my opinion) such extraordinary powers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top