#term limits for Dems only???

[blunderpuff]

actually i'm making a post about it.

HOW COME NO ONE HAS THE "PASS THE TORCH" ENERGY FOR THIS ANCIENT BITCH???

[puranami]

✿ Omelette ✿

A/N: A little fic based on one of the prompts I have~

Summary: Sanji finds you cooking an omelette in your underwear at an ungodly hour.

Content: Warning - my really bad attempt at writing anything outside of lil paragraph points (blz help, I have no idea what I'm doing)

Despite the scenario - it's all SFW and fluffy like dem eggs! A light dusting of pining, G/N reader. ✿

(Part 2) - (Part 3)

You had tried to sleep and ignore the rumbling in your stomach, but the harder you tried, the more you felt it, and you had finally reached your limit. If you were to be at all functional tomorrow, you needed to eat something. Only then could you try to sleep again.

Exhausted, you drag yourself from the safety and warmth of your blankets, slowly ambling towards the ship's kitchen, single-minded in your endeavour. All that mattered was appeasing your stomach, leaving you completely unaware of the sudden cold that embraced you once you had left the confines of your quarters.

Flicking on the kitchen light, you quickly gathered everything you needed, deciding that the best thing to make would be an omelette. It's an easy dish, filling, and doesn't take long to make. In other words; it was perfect!

You make quick work of prepping the eggs, seasoning to taste, even considering throwing a little cheese in there before deciding against it. It's not like you believed the myth of cheese giving people nightmares if eaten before bed, but you were so desperate to be able to sleep afterwards that you didn't want to risk it. Stranger things have happened on this ship.

The pan hisses as you pour in the eggs, sounding much louder in the empty kitchen, only amplified by the late hour.

"Don't you sass me," you grumble, "The middle of the night is a perfectly acceptable time for an omelette!"

Unbeknownst to you, you weren't the only one awake on the ship, and your late night excursion had attracted attention, clearly not having noticed any of the noise you were making.

"I thought Luffy had snuck in on a midnight raid with all the clattering," a groggy voice behind you laughs, but you are too tired and focused on cooking to even register that you had been joined by anyone. Sanji leans against the table opposite the kitchen island, fidgeting with the hem of his nightshirt, waiting for an answer that never came.

Surely you heard him, right?

"Is everything alright, darling?"

Nothing.

Terms of endearment usually prompted some kind of response, be it a dismissive laugh or an equally fond term of your own, clearly thinking they meant nothing in particular. He'd accepted pretty quickly that they wouldn't be the way to win you over, but it certainly didn't stop him using them, at least on you. The same couldn't be said about everyone else, as he was no longer vying for the affection of anyone but yourself. Sanji wondered if you'd ever noticed that.

A clumsy flip of the omelette brought him back into the moment, honestly surprised that you hadn't dropped it on the floor.

He moved his way to your side of the kitchen, round the central island toward the stovetop.

"Why are you cooking at this hhhh-" he wheezed at the end, only now seeing that you weren't in the pyjama bottoms he'd assumed you'd be wearing, but in your underwear.

He clasped one of his hands over his mouth, the other grabbing the island for support as he felt his legs begin to fail him. Keeping his eyes fixed firmly on the floor, he blurts out, "W-WHERE ARE YOUR PANTS?" as his face went fully crimson.

That finally gets your attention, but you are slow on the uptake, mind completely glazing over the fact that you had at some point gained an observer. Finally, furrowing your brows a little, you murmured a soft "What?" You knew a question was asked, but nothing else beyond that.

"Your pants, darling!" he gestures wildly, continuing to look down, knowing if that he caught sight of your bare legs again, he would lose his mind.

You stand there, pan hovering in the air away from the stove in one hand, a plate in the other, looking absolutely lost; you had completed your mission of acquiring omelette, and so your brain had decided it was no longer needed. Looking down, you see your legs and feet, wiggling your toes a little, then you look back up at the mess of a man in front of you, things finally starting to fall into place in your overtired mind.

"Oh, Sanji, what are you doing here," you ask, sweet as anything, completely ignorant to the battle he was waging internally. Once you plate your omelette, you place it on the island before putting the pan back on the stove to cool and grabbing a fork to tuck in, oblivious to Sanji frantically unbuttoning his night shirt beside you. He refuses to look directly at you until he has covered you with it, cheeks noticeably burning with how flustered he is.

"Darling, you can't do that to me," he says, almost breathless, "I am a weak, weak man; I can't handle seeing you so bare!" He manipulates your arms into the sleeves of his nightshirt, ignoring your protests when he briefly pulls the fork out of your hand in the process, before buttoning you up, doing his best to preserve your dignity.

As you feel the warm sustenance finally begin to settle in your empty stomach, you feel your brain booting back up, at least a little bit.

"Ah, shit I forgot to put on pants..." You giggle, wondering why everything was always funnier when you were tired. Taking another bite of food, you look down at your legs once again, starting to fully comprehend the situation you found yourself in. "I guess I was just too hungry." He can't help but sigh at how nonchalant you are.

Looking back up, your brain once again decides to abandon you, not from how tired you are this time, but from your eyes being met with his bare chest and abs, causing your own face to turn a charming shade of red. Sanji was always so neatly dressed, so he most you ever saw was his forearms when he rolled up his sleeves to work. It made sense that he was in good shape given his fighting ability, but it never really hit you until you saw his body tonight. There wasn't really any way to get accustomed to it, not like there was with someone like Zoro, who had his shirt off at least half the times you saw him, flashing his man tits whenever and wherever he damn well pleased.

Sanji's eyes never left you during this quiet minute, one that felt like hours, and he couldn't help but feel a hint of pride when he watched your eyes dance over his shirtless body, clearly flustered, bringing a confident smile to his face.

"Everything alright down there, sweetheart," he laughed softly.

You were clearly lost in your thoughts, it finally clicking why he was shirtless; he'd put his shirt on you. You brought a long sleeve up to your face as you dragged your eyes away, looking awkwardly to the side to your recently emptied plate. The shirt smelt like him, only without the lingering scent of cigarette smoke. It was sweet and musky. Maybe it was the lack of sleep, but you felt a wave of feelings crash into you. Feelings you knew were there but had simply brushed aside, assuming they were just a result of his natural charm more than anything. But, you couldn't so easily disregard them now.

Sanji followed your gaze. "Ah, don't you worry about that, my dear," he says, grabbing the plate and bringing it to the sink, leaving you standing in a bit of a daze. "I'll take care of things here, so you go and get yourself back to bed, alright?"

"Oh, no!" You couldn't help how loud that ended up being, surprising the both of you. "You shouldn't have to clean up my mess," you say with a more regulated volume. If there's one way to get you back in the present, it's offering to do something you feel solely responsible for.

"In all fairness, darling, you shouldn't have been cooking in my kitchen in a state of undress," his cheeks started to go pink at the recent memory. He clears his throat before continuing, "Do you know how dangerous that is?" Ah, the professional chef just can't help himself when it comes to kitchen rules.

You pout slightly as you lean back against the centre island.

"Sorry, Sanji. I wasn't really with it. Too tired, too hungry..."

He makes quick work of the dirty items you had used, all while prattling on about safety and other things you probably should have listened to. Drying his hands, he makes his way back to you. It is evident you hadn't really been paying attention.

"At least promise me this," you look up at his warm, smiling face, "if you ever find yourself in this predicament again, please come and get me."

He brushes back some loose strands of hair, tucking them neatly behind your ear.

"You know that I'm always happy to cook for you, right? Whatever you want, whenever you want it."

Returning a gentle smile of your own, you nod.

"I promise."

With that, Sanji leads you out of the kitchen, plunging it back into darkness as he flicks the light off.

You reach his quarters first since he's closest to the kitchen. He pauses outside his door, hesitating for a moment. There are so many things he wanted to say to you, yet he couldn't bring himself to utter a single word.

Oblivious, you carry on toward your own room, turning back to him to wish him a good night, nearly falling over your own feet in the process, to which he smiles, letting out a soft chuckle.

"Bonne nuit, ma chère."

Guys, gals, and non-binary pals; I tried my best! This is my very first full fic ever, so if the grammar, wording, presentation, literally anything is bad; it's bc I am completely winging it! ∠( ᐛ 」∠)＿

[darcylindbergh]

I have no idea what Harris' actual views on I/P are, but even if she is fully pro-Palestine wouldn't she still have to meet with Netanyahu? I mean realistically any change the US can possibly make would have to involve talking to Israel, right? Presidents meet with Putin even if they hate him/Russia's actions because that's how international politics works, it doesn't mean they like/agree with him

Well, theoretically, there's a bit of political game playing involved yes. But because the ICC has issued warrants for Netanyahu's arrest, if we're strictly following international law, Netanyahu shouldn't have been meeting anybody, he should have been arrested. But we're not doing that because the US currently thinks the ICC is wrong, which is a bad look for the US and which undermines the strength of international law, so I think this is bad and also wrong, but that's what's happening at present. And although US presidents etc have historically met with Putin, they would not at this point because Putin also has warrants out for his arrest. The difference between how the US has treated Putin v Netanyahu is, as it seems, pretty hypocritical.

Practically speaking, as you say, meeting with Netanyahu is a bit of a political game. The US has historically been a very strong ally to Israel and the US has historically been very much involved in the normalization of relations vis a vis Israel and the rest of the Middle East, and the US would very much like to remain involved in brokering a lasting peace, which involves not seriously alienating Netanyahu and Israel et al. Netanyahu and his far-right government are the ones holding up the ceasefire, and the US is only able to exert pressure so long as they are a valuable ally to Israel - if Israel has nothing to lose, in other words, the US loses its ability to exert pressure. And Harris wants very much to hang onto that ability, because she's setting herself up to exert more pressure than Biden has.

Harris has been critical of Israel. Harris is the highest-ranking Dem that has been critical of the situation in Gaza. She has been upfront about highlighting the suffering in Gaza. She's not oblivious to the conversations going on re: Palestine and the ongoing genocide. She's not sticking her head in the sand on it.

“The images of dead children and desperate hungry people fleeing for safety, sometimes displaced for the second, third or fourth time - we cannot look away in the face of these tragedies. We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to the suffering and I will not be silent.”

But she's trying to walk a very careful line on public sentiment re: Israel and Palestine. She's going to be very cautious to condemn anything with even a whiff of antisemitism in strong terms. She's going to be very cautious to affirm Israel's right to exist and to defend itself, which she does in the article linked above, with the caveat that "how it does so matters." But her willingness to call attention to the crisis ongoing in Gaza and her willingness to imply wrong-doing by Israel in how that crisis has been created signals to Netanyahu that her government will have stronger limits than Netanyahu has encountered previously. Will she be a perfect candidate? No. Will she always align with my moral compass? No. Will she be totally evil? Also no.

As voters, what does this mean for us and how we support Gazans and Palestinians?

To me this is very simple. Harris is a candidate who is willing and able to exert pressure on Israel to end the genocide and, ideally, to broker a long-lasting peace. Trump is a candidate who is willing and able to exert pressure on Israel to blow Gaza off the face of the earth. Between "willing to tell Netanyahu this is unacceptable" and "willing to tell Netanyahu to break out a nuke," I'm voting for the former every fucking time.

Not voting or voting third party doesn't actually tell Democrats anything except that you didn't care. They don't have a list of people who would otherwise have voted blue if only they'd taken harder pro-Palestine stance, they're not cross-checking your voting status against your social media posts and going, oh, nuts, we lost that one. Not voting or voting third party doesn't exert pressure on the Dems to go more left, you're not "teaching them a lesson," you're not making a point. It's non-information. It's not a boycott - it's a white flag. It's giving up.

You know how you exert pressure on politicians? You call. You write. You protest. Are you still calling your representatives about Gaza every day? Are you going to town halls and asking them about what they're doing to stop the genocide? Pressure is exerted through participation.

Progress is made by the people who show up.

If the Dems lose, you can pressure them all day and it won't make a difference because they don't have any power to make a difference. And the racist, anti-Muslim, anti-Middle East far right won't be listening no matter how much you shout.

I'm not giving up on Palestinians just because some greyface anon on the internet tells me I'm a bad person for choosing to vote for the candidate I can pressure to make a change.

I'm also not going to give up on people here at home who's lives are hanging in the balance. I'm a queer woman with a uterus and a pre-existing condition - I simply do not have the luxury or the privilege to stay home in November. I do not have the luxury or the privilege of being a single issue voter. I'm not going to give up on trans kids or immigrants or BIPOC or women or disabled folks or poor folks. I'm not going to give up on healthcare or on libraries or on public schools or on the environment or on the court systems. I'm not going to give up on safe workplaces and livable wages and safe products. I'm not going to give up and let corporate monopolies and censorship and AI and five rich dudes decide what the future will be.

Don't you care? Don't you look around you and care about the people in your own communities? Or are those people too real, too complicated? Do you only care when you can win points off it in someone else's inbox on tumblr dot com?

Is Kamala Harris going to be the perfect pro-Palestinian candidate? No. But I'm not inviting her to brunch. I don't need her to be my bestie. I don't need her to be my moral compass - I have one of my own, thanks.

I just need her to step forward instead of back.

Progress is made one step at a time.

[callsign-novara]

Valeria Garza HC's

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~♡~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hii so this is my first post on tumblr, and I know this..probably won't be the the best but we'll see 💋

☆content warnings: violence, foul language, Valeria garza (she needs a warning herself...that I'm gonna ignore.), NSFW, SFW, No use of y/n☆

•When you and Valeria meet she treats you like any other Cartel member, she's cold, tough, ruthless and pushes you to your limits. What truely makes her attracted to you is your willingness to do anything and everything to keep this cartel safe.

•it would take years for Valeria to actually trust you, and even then she would only act like a friend or a lenient boss. She'd let you get away with things she'd normally wouldn't let others get away with. (EX, being late, not doing exactly what she says to a t, bothering her while working, etc)

•Valeria probably has a deep routed homophobia towards herself because of her time in the Army and how she was raised. When she first figures out she's inlove with you, she denies it, ignores it and you, and tries her best to not fall further dor you...but there's something in your eyes, in your devotion to her that makes you impossible to resist.

•she also has misogynistic thoughts towards herself. Because of her time in the Army she doesn't think she could ever be femme and feels that she would be considered weak if she was dem presenting. She's trying to ease those thoughts out by painting her nails.

•When Valeria finally comes to terms that she's inlove with you she'll outright tell you straight up. Demanding, Asking you out directly.

•If you say yes, be prepared to be taken out to the fanciest diner, and being spoiled rotten.

•if you say no, however, well...then they won't find you or your remains.

•It takes her alot of time for her to say 'I love you' but when she does it makes you cry with how domestic it is. You both are sitting on the couch, her arms around you cuddling while watching your favorite TV show and you're starting to fall asleep. She'll smile at you, glad to have someone as loyal and sweet as you and she softly press kisses on your face and she'll whisper an 'I love you' thinking you were asleep.

•Valeria wast keen of giving physical affection until she met you- that's when she started dealing with it, loving it. Her main loge Languages are Gift giving and Acts of service. She loves to give you home made gifts, or pretty expensive thing for you even if you don't ask for it. She also loves making you tea, coffee, fresh juice, smooties and homemade meals for tourists when she knows you had a hard day. She'll massage your shoulders and kiss away your frustrations and give you anything you could ever desire.

SPICY

•The first time is..unexpected. it's definitely in her office. She'd have a long, frustrating day,, and she'll call you to her office and dismiss her gaurds and men. She'll pull you into her lap and rest her hands on your plush thighs, kissing up your neck. She'll rile you up until you're silently pleading her for more.

*corruption kink to the fullest. You still have your V-card? She'll ruin you for anyone else because you're hers. And her little play thing should only want her, no?

•eats you out like she's a starved voman. Worships you in bed like you worship her in work...unless your bad. The loves wat hing would squirm and cry under her and beg for more and more until it's too much and you beg her to stop and stop.

•has a mommy kink.

•If you're a brat, you're in for a long night. She'll push you to the edge but won't let you finish until your fucked dumb and can only let out sweet broken whimpers of what sounds like her name, and pleas for more.

☆

So this was my first post, I'm sorry if it's not the best! I prefer WLW stories and will mostly be focusing on that on this page but if requested I will do a collective HC where the boys are in it of whatever Fandom requests. Feel free to request some in the comments and I'll ltry my best. ♡♡ thank you all so much for reading if any of you see this!

~Nova

[kvetchlandia]

Time For...

One of My Occasional Rants.

So, we in the United States are on the verge of a presidential election. I'm sure all of you lovely people already know that. This particular election is beyond ghastly and grim in its implications. You have one candidate who is a representative of the long term status quo and another who is more dangerous not only to the people of the United States but to the people of the entire globe than my own meager command of words allows me to express.

I'm no particular fan of Kamala Harris. As a lifelong socialist, I see her as a candidate of capitalism, and a socially moderate one at that, essentially a Clinton Democrat, the sort of Dem who would have been a Republican 60 years ago. In other words, the sort of candidate that under normal circumstances I'd never consider for one moment voting for. However, her opponent is a veritable monster; a multiply convicted felon; a man found civilly liable for sexually assaulting a woman and then libeling her after his conviction; a serial liar of astronomical proportions; a man who is supported by open fascists and KKKers; a man whose own open racism and antisemitism is decades old; a man who bragged on television about assaulting women; a man who coddles autocrats and openly aspires to be one; a man who urged his brownshirt wannabe followers to commit a putsch against the legally elected government then referred to those putschists as "heroes" and has promised, if elected, to pardon those convicted of their violent crimes; a man so self-interested that the only thing he really accomplished during his previous presidency was to give himself (and, as an after effect, his fellow billionaires) a whopping tax cut, paid for by raising taxes on the working class; a man who bragged about depriving women of their right to control their own bodies; a man void of culture and knowledge and one so ego-damaged that his own aides admitted that they had to place his name in huge all caps in his daily briefing books to get him to even skim them, since the only thing he was interested in was himself; a man who completely botched the response of the United States to the COVID epidemic and who then recommended to his followers that they inject bleach and that they shine lights on their bodies to cure the virus while he, when he contracted it, of course got state of the art medical care; a man who will reshape the courts, as he's already done to the Supreme Court, so that they're little more than a voice of medieval religious obscurantism and political reaction and a man who has already promised to use the military to quash demonstrations against him and his policies and to go after those who have or who continue to oppose him. I could go on and on, but you get the point. If Trump is elected, which is a distinct possibility, that's the end of American bourgeois democracy, always a limited and partial thing at its best.

Trump has promised to drill for even more oil and to end this country's investment in alternative sources of energy, thereby all but ensuring that complete environmental collapse due to global climate change will take place in the next few decades, if not sooner. It's already an ongoing process.

If Trump is elected, he's promised to deport more than 10 million people. That, of course, is nearly impossible, but that won't stop him from trying. Should he really undertake that blind, racist endeavor, it would of course be politically and morally wrong, but it would also cost trillions of dollars to do (where would they be placed before they were loaded on trains and deported? Camps would have to be built. Who would guard those camps? Tens of thousands of people would have to be hired, trained and armed). And then, of course, the American economy would collapse, since it's those people who do so much of the work that keeps the economy running. I don't see many Americans lining up to harvest the fields or work in the garment sweatshops for starvation piece-work wages, nor do I see many Americans willing to work at the tough, usually non-union, low skill construction jobs that keep the economy rolling. Needless to say, those millions of deportees won't be buying any of the commodities they now purchase on a daily basis to support their families. Bye bye, profit.

All of this is well known. None of it takes any research to uncover. The voting age population has lived through it and everyone is aware of it. Nonetheless, and this just boggles my mind, the polls keep telling us that the race is a toss up. That means that tens of millions of people either don't care or support the horrors that Tump embodies and stands for. That is truly frightening. I'm not convinced that Trump is a fascist, for a number of historical and analytical reasons that I'm sure none of you are interested in, although a number of his supporters are members of fascist organizations. Fortunately, as of right now, the United States still doesn't have a mass fascist movement and I don't see one developing soon, for reasons related to why I don't consider Trump a fascist. He is, though, openly disdainful of the bourgeois democracy that is represented by the American status quo and he's both expressed his desire to be a dictator and has said he made a mistake by leaving office in 2020, despite losing the election (which he pretends was rigged, although he damn well knows it wasn't). If he's re-elected, the only way he'll leave the White House is when he's rolled out on a gurney. Yet this is all OK with millions of Americans. I don't like to draw inappropriate analogies with the catastrophe that befell Germany starting in 1933, but it's hard not to see similarities despite the very significant differences. One of those similarities is the passivity of that part of the population that might not be hardcore MAGA cultists and worshippers of their bloated demigod, but will nevertheless vote for Trump, for whatever reason they cite. That's how Hitler came to power and many of those passive non-nazis had no problem when the Nazis began the roundups of Jews and political opponents of the regime. As a person who has long been politically active, I don't think I'm being at all paranoid when I say that I fear, soon after a re-elected Trump took office, that we would quickly start having those midnight knocks at the door and disappearances into the night and fog.

OK, rant over. Now I've managed to depress and terrify myself even more. I need a stiff drink.

[presidentkamala]

Voting in my district is great bc i can not only vote for jamie raskin but also madeline albright's daughter for judge AND for enshrining reproductive rights OH YEAH AND ALSO sticking it to the salty county republican who lost to marc erlich last cycle and now wants to impose term limits. Sorry but actually locking in dem power for as long as possible is now the best move to serve the people cry more!!!!!!!!!!

[roga-el-rojo]

Mad World - Micha Frazer-Carroll

Hello friends!

For my last recommendation this Disability Pride Month I wanted to especially highlight "madness" as a dimension of disability that’s often glossed over or de-politicized entirely, specifically focusing on the way class society benefits from this state of affairs and how the Left should promote emancipatory alternatives: “Mad World: The Politics of Mental Health” by Micha Frazer-Carroll.

Micha Frazer-Carroll is a prolific writer, editor, and advocate who delves into the radical politics of madness, mental health discourse, racial justice, and disability justice. A columnist for the Independent, and a former editor with the Guardian and gal-dem, she also founded Blueprint, a magazine exclusively dedicated to mental health issues as well as radical mental health organizations built on abolitionist frameworks.

"Mad World" critiques not only the ways we practice mental health care, but also the terms we use in these spaces, and reveals the deep anti-people ideology at play in professional and lay thinking. Frazer-Carroll also highlights the limits of liberal "awareness" and "de-stigmatization" approaches to "madness" as failing to address how capitalism, white supremacy, cis-heteropatriarchy, and ableism always already condition class society to respond in oppressive ways.

Among my favorite aspects of this text, I really appreciate the emphasis on recovering lost histories of "madness" and mad resistance to inspire our future politics. The critique of the asylum system, for example, is a wonderful introduction to the fact the UK is still haunted by "madness" and its ableist subjugation. It's also helpful in finding out how modern resistance to these institutions have their footing, whether it be through artistic expression as a way to process this trauma or building alternatves to mainstream mental healthcare.

As someone aspiring to enter the field, this is an incredibly sobering read which reframes what we ought to be doing under capitalism. I highly recommend y’all read this to see how “maddening” class society is and how we can move beyond it!

[sidewalkscienceguy]

do you think Trump getting shot will win him the election? there's a lot of people suddenly saying that it did, or it'll at least help him in the polls, but I can't imagine anyone who wasn't already voting for him becoming convinced by this; I think if anything this will just make his base more violent and turn ppl against him... I do worry it could drown out talk about Project 2025 and the Epstein files though

I believe everything you just said is pretty much how things will more or less go down. Winning? Who knows. I doubt this will convert so many people to him that it tips the election. And Biden isn't tied to this so it doesn't play unfavorably toward him.

It will polarize the masses, obviously. You have people like TX Gov Greg Abbott who is saying "THEY tried to kill him" which is harmful on a greater stage. There will absolutely be unrest; I'd be shocked if we don't see retaliation from this. A line was just crossed and there isn't a single person at any level in our government who has the ability to quell things.

Trump shouted "Fight!" when he pumped his fist as he stood up. Someone will take that and run with it. Too many loud Repubs spew their hate for Biden. Too many loud Dems spew their hate Trump. We're trapped in this spot where our only two options are both incredibly polarizing to the "other side". We need 4, 5, 6 viable candidates on the ballot, not two.

I don't see how we move forward from this in this moment. The option, in my eyes, doesn't exist. Maintaining civility will come down purely to people on all sides not reacting, and also not antagonizing. This cycle of reactionary politics the past three general elections has funneled us into this lesser of two evils over and over and over. We need a rebound that involves legislation and political infrastructure and regulations that limit campaign financing and donations, that put 3, 4, 5+ parties on debate stages and the ballot. Lower Congressional and Senate term limits. Cap presidential age. Eliminate donors from organizations; all donations must be small, and under, say, $1000. (idk I just tossed out a number)

And in my opinion? All federal legislative work should be voluntary. No pay. I've said this a lot in the past. Volunteering in the government will inherently attract better people to the roles. It removes money, and it removes power. So many people would never think of touching the federal government for those reasons alone.

Just my immediate thoughts.

[tomorrowusa]

I frequently complain that people, especially on the liberal side, don't pay enough attention to state government. I hope that our readers in North Carolina take notice of this.

North Carolina Republicans have just nominated a candidate for governor who actually makes Trump seem slightly more moderate.

The Republican standard-bearer in the most competitive governor race of the 2024 election is now officially a man who has quoted Adolf Hitler, called LGBT people “filth,” and threatened to use an AR-15 on federal officials. North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson secured the Republican nomination in the state’s governor race Tuesday night. He was projected the winner of the primary by the Associated Press less than an hour after polls closed. Robinson defeated rivals Dale Folwell and Bill Graham, who were backed by figures in the GOP establishment uneasy with Robinson’s incendiary rhetoric and far-right views. Robinson’s primary win was expected. Now, he will face Attorney General Josh Stein (D) in a general election battle that is a top priority for both parties—and one that could have broader implications because of North Carolina’s status as a presidential battleground. [ ... ] A relative newcomer in politics, Robinson has quickly won many supporters and many detractors thanks to his eagerness to embrace controversy whenever possible. From making Islamophobic jokes to dismissing the Holocaust as “hogwash” in an old Facebook post, Robinson’s record offers seemingly endless opportunities for Democrats to craft attack ads. “There’s no reason anybody anywhere in America should be telling any child about transgenderism, homosexuality, any of that filth,” Robinson said at a Baptist church in June 2023. “And yes, I called it filth. And if you don’t like it that I called it filth, come see me and I’ll explain it to you.”

The good news is that this is a winnable contest for Dems if moderate and liberal voters take it seriously.

While Democrats have not won a statewide federal race in North Carolina since 2008, their track record in statewide races for governor and attorney general has been strong. Gov. Roy Cooper (D) is term-limited after winning election in 2016 and re-election in 2020. The state has only had a GOP governor for four out of the last 30 years.

Never assume that because candidates are perceived as being too extreme that they will automatically lose. Just think back to 2016.

If we want democracy to survive we need to drive a stake through the heart of electoral slackerism. There is no such thing as an unimportant election. When we vote, we win; just look at Minnesota.

[whatiwillsay]

I know it's been a lot of politics lately so not to be annoying but one thing that irritates me the most with dems is how they only seem to be able to get shit done when they're on their way out of office. Biden's plan to reform the suprem court is a great proposal with term limits for the judges and stricter ethics code and if he would've just done it in the beginning when he had the democratic super majority a lot of bullshit could've been avoided and he never codified Roe v Wade like he said he would even though he literally has executive power and could've done it day one and it's because dems love dangaling rights so they have an easier way to get elected when they hold peoples rights hostage but if he simply would've codified it he would have won the reelection against the guy who's been spending years bragging about killing peoples right to choose imo

you can't codify roe with executive power he needs congress to pass something like that. he did use executive power to try and increase access to abortions:

but executive power can't grant nationwide access to abortions. america has checks and balances and alone the executive branch isn't THAT powerful. this was a good read:

he put forth some proposals about the supreme court but it's not going to change anything unless congress supports it.

while we had a supermajority in name, senators like sinema (who fully went republican once in office) and manchin don't always vote with the party line.

i do agree dems should hustle up and try to do more but i also understand why a lot of it never happens. we need to ungerrymander the districts of the house and push for voting rights in red states and flip them blue. if every liberal/dem/leftist/progressive in america always voted we'd never lose the presidency and we would probably always have the house and i think even the senate.

we just have to put our heads down and get out the vote and then pressure our policiticians to actually do the progressive shit they run on. but it's a little more complicated than just having the president issue executive orders. it's a long game and we need to show up at every election for a few dozen years and then i think america will actuall progress.

[deadpresidents]

Do you agree with the idea that one of the more politically astute things Biden could've done in early 2021 was push for an amendment that limited presidents (including himself) to a single term?

I ask this as someone who feels that a Biden-Trump rematch in 2024 is very much not in the national interest. Such an amendment would've guaranteed two different nominees next year, and more broadly, I think there are arguments for limiting presidents to just one term (second terms have been pretty awful in the modern era, if we consider Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, and G.W. Bush).

Btw, I realize presidents don't have a formal role in the amendment process, but I think if Biden had gotten enough Dems behind it, there might have been enough support in Congress to send it to the states. In early 2021, the GOP would've almost been happy to have Trump term-limited, and ambitious Republicans like Scott, Cruz, and Rubio probably would've supported such an amendment.

That's an interesting question. From our perspective, I can totally understand the reasoning behind it, too. And that would have been a better time to attempt it for the reasons you pointed out.

However, I just think it's nearly impossible to amend the Constitution, especially in the political climate we've been living in for the past decade. It's also difficult to imagine any President actively seeking to impose further term limits on themselves. These are people who work practically the entire lives in order to get into that particular job, so it would require a superhuman act of selflessness to get them to advocate for changing the Constitution so that they only serve one term. We can't even get modern Presidents (or serious candidates for the Presidency) to voluntarily pledge to only serve a single term, so I just don't see any of them trying to change the Constitution to legally prohibit running for re-election. President Biden had been seeking the Presidency for at least 35 years, with three official campaigns for the job, before he finally was elected in 2020. I don't think there was ever a realistic chance of him voluntarily giving up a chance at a second term. And I wouldn't be so sure that ambitious legislators who have obviously been eyeing the Presidency for years would have supported a single term limit. You know how there are people who are opposed to raising taxes on the super wealthy because they are still holding out hope that they'll someday strike it rich? I'm guessing there would be a similar line of thinking and members of Congress with Presidential aspirations wouldn't want to support a single term limit just in case they eventually find themselves in the White House.

I've written about this before, but my personal opinion is actually in support of eliminating Presidential term limits altogether. As I've said in the past, the Founders did not explicitly place term limits on the President, and while most Presidents before FDR followed George Washington's tradition of serving two terms and retiring, term limits weren't imposed until after World War II. The Constitution was amended 21 times for over 150 years before Presidential term limits were finally instituted. And, even then, it was largely because Franklin D. Roosevelt won four straight Presidential elections. I question whether the Founders would see it as a proper balance of power to place term limits on the Executive Branch, but not on the Legislative or Judicial branches. So, my personal belief has been that there should either be term limits on the President, Congress, AND the Supreme Court, or there should be no limits at all. Of course, that might result in someone shitty, like Donald Trump, running for a third term, but it also provides options that voters otherwise wouldn't have. Imposing a two-term limit on Presidents may prohibit a terrible President from being elected a third time, but it also might prevent someone proven to be a good, responsible, popular leader from continuing in office.

Ultimately, the decision should be left to the voters, but I sure would feel better about 2024 if Barack Obama could be on the ballot again. We place limits on who can be candidates for what is arguably the most powerful and important job in the world, and then we complain because we don't like our choices. We prohibit the only people in the world who have actually DONE the job of President (and seemingly should have some understanding and experience on how to do that job) from being President for more than two four-year terms. Yet, nearly all of our Supreme Court Justices leave the bench by dying, and many of the most powerful legislators (in both parties) are alarmingly old and frail -- and probably running for re-election. Barack Obama has been term-limited from running for President since leaving office in 2017. Obama was 55 years old when he left office; he'll be 63 on the next Inauguration Day, in 2025 -- eight years after leaving office and sixteen years after his first inauguration. That's still younger than Ronald Reagan (69), George H.W. Bush (64), Donald Trump (70), and Joe Biden (78) were when they were first inaugurated as President!

So, if we're going to amend the Constitution regarding term limits, I say get rid of all of them or impose them on every branch of the federal government.

[feckcops]

What can the Left learn from Nigel Farage?

“Farage’s mercilessness is notable. Only once did he hold back from running against the Tories – in the 2019 election when Boris Johnson’s Brexit purism and the threat of a Jeremy Corbyn-led government persuaded him to stand down ... In 2015, he almost cost the party its slim majority ...

“Contrast this with the approach of the ‘green blob’ of centre-left climate NGOs ... Their strategy was also clear: ask nicely and get what you can, not what’s needed to avert the climate crisis. Don’t take risks or rock the boat ... This focus on soft power alone – the inside game of cajoling and persuasion, being in the room and having the ear of a potentially sympathetic minister – is extremely limited ...

“The election of five pro-Palestinian independents – including Corbyn – along with four Green MPs has changed Starmer’s electoral calculation. Assumptions about the viability of independent and third party candidates have been swept away. The Greens came in second in 39 constituencies (most with a suspiciously Corbynite demographic), and some pollsters have suggested the collapse in Labour’s Muslim vote isn’t a momentary response to the party’s blunders on Gaza, but part of a longer-term trend.

“The left would do well to look to Farage for instruction. With a club in one hand and an olive branch in the other, he torments the Tories from the outside while organising sympathetic MPs within. He wages war on the party, while openly flirting with the idea of swooping in and rescuing it from the carnage he helped create ...

“If Farage was paying attention, he’d laugh at the never-ending argument on the left about whether to stay in Labour or leave ... Farage has always cultivated links with ideologically aligned MPs within the Conservative party. He’s left open the idea that he may one day join. Every vote he takes from them strengthens the hand of hard right Tory MPs. And the more viable Reform becomes, the more leverage his Tory allies have, as they can always go elsewhere ...

“The relative silence of the Socialist Campaign Group of MPs wasn’t due to a moral failing, but their status as Labour MPs being in the gift of a hostile leadership. They fairly assumed that running as independents was electoral suicide ...

“Now, emboldened by the success of independent and Green candidates, these Labour MPs can be strident in their criticism of Starmer and leverage the public’s indifference towards him. They can form a leftwing caucus across party lines, exposing the prime minister’s politics by forcing him into deals with the Lib Dems. They can identify their own small boats issue, and use their platform to court controversy. And they can do all of this safely in the knowledge that they can cross the floor to the Greens or run as independents and have a decent chance of success.”

[furryprovocateur]

man it sucks hugely that basically none of the dems are willing to criticize joe biden, including but not limited to the fact that he objectively lacks the mental acuity to be president for a second term, if not arguably a first as well. so like if you say any of this, the fucking proud boys fox news type will be the only ones who take you seriously

[bethanythebogwitch]

When I was a kid first taking social studies I was taught about how the founding fathers set up the three branches of government to have check and balances so that none of them could get absolute power. However, I was confused because the way the supreme court was described made it seem like they had the final say and nobody could override them. I assumed I was missing something and went about my way because what middle schooler gives a damn about the internal working of government when there's Pokemon to play? Then I grew up and found out I was right all along.

In its current from, the supreme court is a group of unelected overlords with lifetime appointments, no oversight, and unlimited power to decide the law as they see fit. Because nobody has power over them and there are no practical limits to their power, they are effectively kings. And because they have no term limits and the only way to check them is to get republicans to work for the best interests of the nation instead of themselves and their billionaire owners, there's nothing we can do to stop them. The result is a few unelected god-kings with unlimited power owned and controlled by ultraconservative billionaires. And the only way out is for democrats to win a supermajority in both houses, Biden to be reelected in 24, and for Biden and the centrist dems to pull their heads out of their asses and expand the court, add term limits, and a code of ethics, then actually enforce that code of ethics. In other words, nothing will ever happen to fix this complete override of democracy that the supreme court has become.

If the government won't fix its shit, it's up to the people to force them. Peaceful protests are protests that can be ignored. Burning down the supreme court building can't be ignored.

Riot, bitch.

[crimsoncircle2]

CC ENDGAME STATEMENT

Hello, operatives:

As the fifth chapter of Crimson Circle comes to a close, we have an important update regarding the state of the game. At this time, the moderator team is choosing not to continue through endgame, and we will be concluding the roleplay on December 22nd.

We know this may come as a shock to some, but we wanted to be honest and underline that we’ve been dealing with a great deal of ingame issues throughout the course of the group. If you’ve ever taken notice of this and felt dissatisfied with your experience, we recognize this and apologize. We hope that everyone understands that this was not due to lack of effort — we in the mod team have been pushing past our limits dealing with a variety of issues with the group behind the scenes, but we can only push ourselves so far from the specific position we occupy. Please know that this decision was not made lightly, and we felt that ending here was the best and healthiest option for all of us.

For full transparency, the main reason for not moving forward with endgame is simply that we do not have enough power role material to present. There’s been a lack of development on the power role plot until now, and we’ve come to a point where it isn’t feasible to contrive something that would serve as a satisfactory ending to the game. We’ve been working with our power roles, Leviathan (Nightshade) and Ouroboros (Libra), to come up with an alternative solution — but ultimately, we couldn’t justify putting our players through a last-minute rewrite just to drag ourselves over the finish line. 

In addition, we’ve been struggling to keep up engagement with the MKG itself, due to a waning interest in very central mechanics (such as case investigations, map investigations, motives, and puzzles). Most importantly — while we're thankful to those who came forward, and feel honored to be part of your characters’ arcs — we had difficulty getting case volunteers in nearly every chapter, and murder cases are the essential building blocks of a mutual killing game. It’s been a challenge for us to understand what direction we should move the plot in when we’ve received minimal input on all of the core mechanics that drive it. 

Compounding all of the above, we’ve also been running the game as a two-person team after losing a moderator. This has been an immense workload to juggle between our other obligations and unforeseen offline circumstances, and our engagement has not always been taken seriously in return. This group has been a huge commitment for us in every way — and given the issues named above, we’re currently at the point where we cannot mentally or physically justify the input.

In light of all this, we want to stress once again that we believe this is the most responsible answer to this situation that we can provide. We’ve seen roleplays that might have ended on better terms had they been curbed at an earlier point, and we don’t believe it would be fair to anyone to force an ending we didn’t believe in for the sake of completion. While a number of alternative avenues were explored before we arrived at this conclusion, we strongly felt that none of them would have treated this group’s time and energy with the respect that it is our role to provide. As such, the two of us are confident in this decision to be honest with you and ourselves, and we hope to model a professional and clean break together with you all.

We understand there may be loose plot threads in your own individual character arcs, so we will remain open for threads until December 22nd at 17:00 EST. After this point, you are encouraged to reach out to your fellow players and close anything out that you need to in your DMs.

Thank you for all your time, interest, and participation up until now.

—The mod team, Dem and Ritz

[obstinaterixatrix]

the thing is leftist infighting has been a staple of us politics it’s standard it’s expected leftists are always squabbling (and I know some folks will disagree but in terms of us politics I’m including dems in leftist infighting). and what’s been really annoying is that right-wing politicians for the most part have been able to project a unified front and to strategize and appeal to their audience (😒) and while there *has* been *some* pushback or some pretty weak ‘well that’s a little too far’ from an outside pov they’ll still rally behind each other which is really annoying. more of a monolith. so it is SO INTENSELY SATISFYING to see right wing infighting take the center stage for once because 1) after years of courting and protecting and supporting and coddling more and more right wing extremists, now *they* have to work with them and as it turns out they are stubborn and unreasonable piece of shit bastards who are now their problems. how could this have possibly happened!!! who could’ve guessed!!!! eat shit eat fucking shit how do you like working directly with fox news brainpoisoning huh what’s it like huh good it doesn’t seem, 2) I don’t want to minimize leftist infighting because there are some solidly divisive and significant issues within that, but like. leftist infighting is moral/logical/ethical debates and angry letters and people Clapping 👏🏼 Back 👏🏼 On 👏🏼 Twitter 👏🏼 (for now), there are very specific limitations because the people who engage with it tend to be nonviolent, there are standards. the right loooves to play up Leftist Extremists and The Organized Threat Of Antifa (😒) but you know what leftist “extremist” action *doesn’t* look like? murder. you know what right wing extremist action looks like? murder. I remember a couple of years ago a liberal city official was killed by a couple of republicans, like this isn’t hypotheticals, it turns out when you emphasize to your audience YOU are a victim so use YOUR gun to DEFEND YOUR RIGHTS you end up with a bunch of people with no distress tolerance who are willing to violently oppose any difference in opinion. I think it’s their turn to suffer for the the atmosphere they created! You did this! It’s not only our problem now! Have fun with your coworker who insists on open-carrying right fucking next to you! Sucks to be you! I hope this kickstarts an era of right-wing infighting and decentralizes them so positive changes can be made while they’re going thermonuclear and also I hope they’re miserable. and I hope there’s some kind of shift where politics suck less in general and maybe right vs left could be more about low-key differences instead of I Think Women And Racial Minorities Should Be Second-Class Citizens That We Can Shoot Whenever We Want vs Well Vote For Us Because We Don’t Think That but that’s only in my wildest fantasies.