#gop supermajority

[rosielindy]

Evil personified 👺

With Lilly and Purdue pharma lining pockets we will never see legal cannabis in Indiana. I’m surrounded by states that are much more progressive, even Ohio has a ballot measure in November.

I’m gonna do all I can to turn the tide here but if Mike Braun becomes governor in 2024, I’m Audi 5000!

[subliminalbo]

Tbh J.D. Vance should be removed from office for pushing the Springfield story, which appears to have originated entirely on a Facebook post. Absolutely unhinged that a US senator could turn an angry mob on the national stage against his own constituents and not face any consequences.

[macmanx]

In 2023, a mass shooter attacked The Covenant School, a private Christian school in Nashville, Tennessee, and three mothers were compelled to act. Their mission: help pass some kind of gun control in one of the reddest states in the country, a state where the Republican Party has a supermajority in the legislature. But these women aren't your typical gun control activists. They're lifelong conservatives, believers in the Second Amendment and – at first – sure that their own party will understand their concerns. In episode 1 of Supermajority from NPR's Embedded, host Meribah Knight follows the women as they enter the state capitol for the first time in their adult lives. Will these political newcomers get what they came for? And what happens if they challenge those in power to do it?

[montanabohemian]

so then they'd better get registered to vote. and fucking vote. and none of this purity politics bullshit. vote democrat or shut the fuck up forever. this doesn't mean you can't hold them accountable; you should. but ya ain't gonna have shit if the GOP rips away all your rights (including voting rights) which is literally what they are actively doing.

This is why the Fascists are doing everything they can to steal power now.

[ponydanza-in-a-canza]

Blue state Republicans would get devoured in red states

[palant1r]

not proshipper not anti but a secret third thing (person who has a career in the media and, through covering legislative politics, has watched "associating with problematic fiction or entertainment is an indicator of moral degeneracy" rapidly become a mainstream GOP position that they are encoding in legislation to target the queer community under the guise of protecting children, thus coming to the conclusion that positioning the "can people enjoy things that would be immoral IRL in their fiction" debate as a proship v anti fandom debate is akin to pretending that "should we have the death penalty" is a discussion that only matters in Death Note discourse — the extent and manner to which fiction affects reality is an issue that is immediately relevant to today's US politics, and to summarize my opinions on the matter in fandom terms would be to diminish the ways this debate is affecting america Right The Fuck Now. and i have stopped taking "this person is bad for shipping the wrong anime thing and being horny about it" in any sort of good faith ever since I saw it literally used as part of a GOP smear campaign against a transgender state legislator in an attempt to defend the right from backlash after they used their supermajority in the Montana house to prevent her from speaking on the floor. Anyway I think everyone on this site, especially Americans, could benefit from ceasing to think in proship v anti vocabulary and instead developing coherent political positions on the nature of fiction that do not directly align with current fascist political tactics)

[thebeckiest]

Hello! I'm a teacher in Indiana, and things have been getting steadily more dire since I started teaching. Indiana is not a great place to teach because we have a GOP supermajority and, wow, do those guys hate public educators.

Anyway our attorney general (who I have no kind words for so I'll keep them to myself) has set up an "Education Transparency Form" so concerned members of the public can report "socialist indoctrination." He didn't bother to tell the department of education or schools that he was doing this.

Anyway, would you all do me the kind favor of spamming this thing?

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Maybe you’ve been asking yourself:

1. “How could Donald Trump have won 51 percent of the popular vote?”

2. “How hard is it to immigrate to New Zealand?”

3. “What the actual fuck?”

Fair questions. Let’s try a thought experiment. Could Tuesday’s election results have been any worse?

Well, what if, instead of 51 percent, the Republican nominee had won 59 percent? Or 61 percent? And what if he had won 49 states?

Those aren’t hypotheticals. Those were the results of the 1972 and 1984 landslides that reelected Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.

With thumping victories like those, what could possibly go wrong for the winners?

If history’s any guide, some nasty surprises await Donald Trump.

In 1972, the Democratic presidential nominee, George McGovern, won just 37.5 percent of the vote, carrying only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia for a total of 17 Electoral College votes. He didn’t even win his home state, South Dakota.

In 1984, Democrat Walter Mondale did carry his native Minnesota, but that was as good as it got for him. In the Electoral College, he fared even worse than McGovern, with a whopping 13 votes.

In the aftermath of these thrashings, the Democratic Party lay in smoldering ruins, and Republicans looked like indestructible conquerors.

Now, some might argue that those GOP victories, though statistically more resounding than Trump’s, weren’t nearly as alarming, because he’s a criminal and wannabe autocrat.

But Trump’s heinousness shouldn’t make us nostalgic for Nixon and Reagan. They were also criminals—albeit unindicted ones. And they were up to all manner of autocratic shit—until they got caught.

The Watergate scandal was only one small part of the sprawling criminal enterprise that Nixon directed from the Oval Office in order to subvert democracy. For his part, Reagan’s contribution to the annals of presidential crime, Iran-Contra, broke myriad laws and violated Constitutional norms.

The hubris engendered by both men’s landslides propelled them to reckless behavior in their second terms—behavior that came back to haunt them. Nixon was forced to resign the presidency; Reagan was lucky to escape impeachment.After the Watergate scandal forced Richard Nixon from office, this bumper sticker helped Massachusetts voters brag that they handed him his only Electoral College loss in 1972.

Of course, Trump would be justified in believing that no matter how reckless he becomes, he’ll never pay a price. He’s already been impeached—twice—only to be acquitted by his Republican toadies in the Senate. And now that the right-wing supermajority of the Supreme Court has adorned him with an immunity idol, he’ll likely feel free to commit crimes that Nixon and Reagan could only dream of. Who’ll stop him from using his vast power to persecute his voluminous list of enemies?

Well, the enemy most likely to thwart Trump in his second term might be one who isn’t on his list: himself. The seeds of Trump’s downfall may reside in two promises he made to win this election: the mass deportation of immigrants and the elimination of inflation.

Trump’s concept of a plan to deport 20 million immigrants is as destined for success as were two of his other brainchildren, Trump University and Trump Steaks. The US doesn’t have anything approaching the law-enforcement capacity to realize this xenophobic fever dream.

And as for Trump’s war on inflation, the skyrocketing prices caused by his proposed tariffs will make Americans nostalgic for pandemic-era price-gouging on Charmin.

It's possible that Trump’s 24/7 disinformation machine, led by Batman villains Rupert Murdoch, Tucker Carlson, and Elon Musk, will prevent his MAGA followers from ever discovering that 20 million immigrants didn’t go anywhere. And it’s possible that if inflation spikes, he’ll find a scapegoat for that. (Nancy Pelosi? Dr. Fauci? Taylor Swift?)

And, yes, it’s possible that Trump will somehow accomplish his goal of becoming America’s Kim Jong Un, and our democracy will go belly-up like the Trump Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City.

But I wouldn’t bet on it. I tend to agree with the British politician Enoch Powell (1912-1998), who observed that all political careers end in failure. I doubt that Trump, with his signature blend of inattention, impulsiveness, and incompetence, will avoid that fate.

And when the ketchup hits the fan, the MAGA movement may suddenly appear far more fragmented and fractious than it does this week. You can already see the cracks. Two towering ignoramuses like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert should be BFFs, but they despise each other—the only policy of theirs I agree with.

If things really go south, expect MAGA Republicans to devour each other as hungrily as the worm who feasted on RFK Jr.’s brain—and that, my friends, will be worth binge-watching. I’m stocking up on popcorn now before Trumpflation makes it unaffordable.

One parting thought. Post-election, the mainstream media’s hyperbolic reassessment of Trump—apparently, he’s now a political genius in a league with Talleyrand and Metternich—has been nauseating. It’s also insanely short-sighted. Again, a look at the not-so-distant past is instructive.

In 1984, after Reagan romped to victory with 59 percent of the popular vote and 525 electoral votes, Reaganism was universally declared an unstoppable juggernaut. But only two years later, in the 1986 midterms, Democrats proved the pundits wrong: they regained control of both the House and Senate for the first time since 1980. Those majorities enabled them to slam the brakes on Ronnie’s right-wing agenda, block the Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork, and investigate Iran-Contra.

The lesson of the 1986 midterms is clear: the game’s far from over and there’s everything to play for. If we want to stem the tide of autocracy and kleptocracy, restore women’s rights and protect the most vulnerable, we don’t have the luxury of despair. The work starts now.

Andy Borowitz

[bigmammallama5]

well. at least NC did okay besides the presidential seat. dem governor and lt governor, dem nc schools superintendent (his opponent was a literal fucking nazi), dem nc attorney general, and we broke the gop supermajority (again) in the state house. so maybe we can do stuff locally.

[traegorn]

The outcome of the presidential election sucks, there's no denying that. But the smaller elections do matter, as a bunch of democrats won or maintained seats in Wisconsin's state assembly and senate. Thanks to the new less-gerrymandered districts, the GOP's supermajority was broken. It's a small thing but something to be celebrated.

Absolutely.

And while we lost the Senate, we still prevented them from getting a filibuster proof majority, and we kept Tammy Baldwin in office.

Shit is going to get really bad at levels we've never seen before for the next few years, but I still choose to have hope. We're going to save as many folks as we can, and keep fighting.

[anghraine]

This isn't going to turn into All US Politics All The Time blog for four years (all going about as well as possible). And I don't begrudge anyone finding comfort where they can from the various state-level small victories—the GOP losing their incredibly corrupt supermajority in NC and failing to take the governor's seat, various state measures to protect or at least advance abortion rights, my candidate for governor winning in my own state, decent performances in a lot of House races, the predictable Senate disaster not being quite as bad as it might have been in this environment.

But for me, there is something discouraging about these as well, and something overlooked in the comparisons to the 2020 election. To me, the obvious point of comparison is less 2020 than 2016.

[This is not an even slightly positive post—putting most of it below the cut so you can skip if you don't want further doom 'n gloom.]

Trump's victory in 2016 was more shocking, yes, but it came with a lot of qualifications. Most obviously, the majority of people who voted in 2016 didn't vote for him, and while this didn't change the result of the election, it did affect the sense of what was going on nationally. Hillary Clinton, a flawed candidate under investigation during the election (however obviously politically motivated that investigation—and it was reopened right before Election Day) and the object of a 30-year misogynistic campaign of relentless, unabashed right-wing and journalistic hatred, and the leader of a campaign that made some clear tactical missteps, was preferable to Trump for the majority of voters even without certainty about what his administration would do. And people could and did lie to themselves about what a Trump administration would be like because he was a posturing blowhard who'd never held office. I always thought "Trump's just saying stuff, he's really going to outflank Hillary from the left!!!" was stupid as fuck, but it's a thing people convinced themselves of.

But in 2024, we know how bad the Trump administration would be (and there's no reason to think this one won't be worse—quite the opposite). We saw how his COVID response made a bad situation orders of magnitude worse to the point that morgues were overflowing with dead bodies. We know about how unethical he is because he's been found legally liable in relation to crimes of corruption and rape. He encouraged a coup to overthrow the last election. And Kamala Harris has far less political baggage than HRC did, is more progressive, ran a better campaign, had no October Surprise, and yet is losing the popular vote quite badly (right now, with 89% of the vote counted, Trump is ahead by about five million votes).

And seeing that people are voting to protect abortion rights in their state or ousting obviously corrupt state officials etc and then also voting for Trump is on one level—okay, so ordinary voters only sort of align with the cackling evil of GOP politicians' schemes and will at times vote to restrict their awful policies even in very red states. On a pragmatic level, that's better than being fully aligned with those policies. But on another level, I find it appalling. This loss isn't about any particular policy and I think you're fooling yourself if you think any One Magic Trick could have changed this result—that was possible in 2016, potentially, but not in this election. A lot of people are voting against specific Republican agendas and then voting for Donald Trump and JD fucking Vance.

Obviously racist misogyny (and misogynoir particularly) is likely a major culprit given that this disparity wasn't present even in far more unfavorable-on-paper conditions in 2016 against a profoundly unpopular white woman after an eight-year Democratic administration. There's the weird cult of personality around Trump. Etc. But I'm also thinking about how the most successful period for Democrats during this cycle was when they veered away from anything to do with actual policies and were like "these Republican politicians are the weird freaks with bad vibes actually." I'm thinking about how the vast majority of the country went significantly rightwards even in many places that Harris or Democrats won.

And it's like... maybe we won't become an autocracy, maybe he'll have another disastrously awful administration that isn't as much worse than the first as we fear, and public opinion will turn against him again and his sheer unpopularity will drive backlashes favoring Democrats in 2026 and 2028. But even that best case scenario isn't fixing what's wrong here.

[rosielindy]

I’ve been shouting into the void that was once Twitter trying to get attention from National Dems for Indiana. A couple of my recent posts here for reference and Jaime Harrison’s post about Indiana candidates today. It could easily be a coincidence but I’m counting it as a win either way. 💗💗💗💗

[contemplatingoutlander]

DeSantis faces pushback in Florida as voters tire of war on woke

It's about time that Florida citizens started to push back against DeSantis's far-right "anti-woke" agenda.

The bill banning rainbow flags from public buildings in Florida sounded like a sure bet. State Rep. David Borrero (R), the legislation’s sponsor, argued that it was needed to prevent schoolchildren from being “subliminally indoctrinated.” That rationale echoed other measures championed by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) as part of his “war on woke.” But instead of sailing through the Republican-dominated legislature, the DeSantis-backed bill died a quick legislative death, making it only as far as one subcommittee. It wasn’t the only culture war proposal from conservative lawmakers to end up in the bill graveyard during the session that ended Friday. One rejected bill would have banned the removal of Confederate monuments. Another would have required transgender people to use their sex assigned at birth on driver's licenses — something the state Department of Motor Vehicles is already mandating. A third proposed forbidding local and state government officials from using transgender people’s pronouns. Some of those ideas have come up in the past and may surface again next year. But the fact that the bills failed, even with public support from DeSantis, marks a change from the days when the GOP supermajority in Tallahassee passed nearly everything the governor asked for. [...] But the pushback is growing. Parents and others have organized and protested schoolbook bans. Abortion rights advocates gathered enough signatures to put the issue on the ballot in Florida in November. A bill that would have established “fetal personhood” stalled before it could reach a full vote. Judges are also canceling some of DeSantis’s marquee laws, including the “Stop Woke Act.” A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled Monday that the law “exceeds the bounds” of the Constitution’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech and expression.

[wilwheaton]

So. Point one. Americans are now experiencing the bitter, brutal reality of authoritarian collapse. Point two, that needs to called what it is, or else, Big Lies win, and self-deceit pervades a society, which is how collapse hardens and curdles. The first two points can also be thought of as Big Lies. Big Lie number one: both sides are equal, and so this is just politics as usual. Sorry, do you see our side trying to…inspect anyone’s genitals? Take anyone’s rights away? Didn’t think so. Big Lie number two: it’s just something innocuous, temporary, over-your-head, like “minority rule.” Not the very thing we read about in great books, which not coincidentally, are what they’re trying to ban — authoritarianism. That brings me to Big Lie number three. “America’s a divided country.” LOL. Are you kidding me? The vast, vast majority of Americans agree. On every single issue the GOP is now trying to push down their throats, and suffocate them with the antithesis of. Supermajorities of Americans agree on all the following things. Guns are out of control, and they need to be far better regulated, especially any crackpot being able to collect weapons of war. Women should have access to reproductive healthcare. Kids should be able to read books. Everyone should have healthcare. Taxes should be higher, especially on the wealthy and ultra-wealthy. Nobody’s asked, but I’d bet they’d also agree that there’s something very wrong with inspecting kids genitals, too.

Americans Are Now Experiencing the Everyday Reality of Authoritarian Collapse

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Dave Jamieson at HuffPost:

Last week, attorneys for SpaceX and Amazon began arguing cases in federal appeals court that could upend the U.S. collective bargaining system that’s been in place since the New Deal. The aerospace company, owned by billionaire Elon Musk, and the world’s largest online retailer have both been accused of violating their workers’ rights. To defend themselves, they now claim that the structure of the agency enforcing the law, the National Labor Relations Board, is unconstitutional. Powerful employers mounted similar — and ultimately unsuccessful — legal challenges against the NLRB after its founding 89 years ago during the Great Depression. But there is one crucial difference today: a right-wing judiciary shaped by President-elect Donald Trump that’s steadily chipping away at the regulatory state.

The repercussions could be immense. The NLRB oversees private-sector union elections and investigates thousands of allegations of illegal union-busting every year. Although it barely has enough funding to enforce a highly imperfect law, the labor board is often all that employees have to turn to when companies violate their rights to form unions or speak up about working conditions. Other employers accused of breaking labor law have adopted the arguments of SpaceX and Amazon, and a slew of similar cases are working their way through the federal court system. The question could eventually end up before the Supreme Court, where a conservative supermajority could all but gut the agency with an aggressive ruling in corporations’ favor. The litigation falls against the backdrop of a new Trump administration that may fire the board’s Democratic members before their terms are up, or decline to defend the agency’s constitutionality in court. Though workers and unions are accustomed to a corporate-friendly takeover of the board following a GOP presidential victory, they now face the prospect of the board falling into dysfunction.

[...]

‘A Perilous Place’

The constitutional challenges worry not just unions and their attorneys but many of the workers who’ve turned to the board for help. The NLRB has no ability to fine employers or seek damages for workers who’ve been illegally fired or retaliated against, and its cases often drag on for years due to appeals. But it still can serve as a check against companies’ worst behavior and deliver some justice to employees who’ve been wronged.

Erin Zapcic, who helped lead a union organizing effort at Medieval Times, said her blood “ran cold” when she learned about the SpaceX case. [...] Congress passed the law establishing the labor board in 1935, to create order around collective bargaining at a time of economic and social upheaval. The independent NLRB has a bipartisan five-member board in Washington that reviews decisions handed down by administrative law judges. It also has a prosecutorial arm led by a general counsel. The president gets to nominate the general counsel and new board members as their staggered terms end, reshaping the agency’s agenda when the White House changes hands. The cases brought by SpaceX, Amazon and other employers attack the board on several grounds. They claim that the board members and administrative law judges are unconstitutionally protected from removal by the president, and that the way the NLRB handles unfair labor practices violates the employers’ right to a jury trial.

[...] Jennifer Abruzzo, the board’s current general counsel appointed by President Joe Biden, has called the lawsuits a distraction from the companies’ own alleged lawbreaking. Her office has accused SpaceX of illegally firing several workers because they had criticized Musk, and Amazon of refusing to bargain with the Amazon Labor Union after its groundbreaking 2022 election victory at a New York warehouse.

[...]

‘A Pandora’s Box’

Despite his glaring conflicts of interest as SpaceX’s owner, Trump ally Musk now has the president-elect’s ear and could end up advising him on NLRB matters. That includes whether to fire board members, who to replace them with and whether the Justice Department should defend the agency against Musk’s lawsuit. Trump’s only labor pick so far is surprisingly moderate: For labor secretary he has tapped outgoing Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer, an Oregon Republican who has supported pro-union legislation. But his approach to the NLRB may be far less gentle, especially given Musk’s history with the agency. SpaceX has called the labor board’s structure “the very definition of tyranny.” Jeff Hauser, director of the Revolving Door Project, a nonprofit that tracks corporate influence on the executive branch, said he finds Musk’s cost-cutting advisory role to Trump particularly concerning, since it won’t have the same kind of oversight as a Senate-confirmed Cabinet position. He doesn’t believe Musk’s influence bodes well for workers or the NLRB. “He hates unions almost as much as he hates trans people,” Hauser said. (Musk has a long history of making derogatory comments about transgender people, including his own child.)

Elon Musk and his hatred for unions knows no bounds.