feelingbluepolitics

@feelingbluepolitics

Democratic Politics

In Venice, Italy, a historical position of Doge held the highest role of authority within the republic, empowered to conduct operations beyond "provincial boundaries."

The Doge:

- acted as the head of state, athough lacking actual, official decision-making powers;

- represented the height of the economic, cultural, and military force of the time;

- was the head of the oligarchy;

- held the position of chief magistrate, influencing issues of morality, law, and religion;

- held the position for life and as a hereditary one, and so might have brought a favorite son to work;

- the earliest doges were entirely unregulated as to both public and private behavior, although Venetians subsequently wised up and set some constraints;

- determined trade partners and controlled trade routes;

- had coin struck in their honor;

- was the military leader, acting as supreme commander either symbolocally or in fact;

- had authority to declare war or peace, negotiate treaties, and appoint military commanders to lead forces.

Power waned over centuries, but the concept of the doge never died. Many centuries later, for example, Benito Mussolini adopted a related Italian word, duce, derived from the same Latin root as doge, and calling himself "Il Duce," reigned as a fascist dictator for decades.

But sure, Elon Musk was only thinking of a meme about a dog.

Watch legitimate news, see footage of protests happening throughout the country. Note that there do not seem to be trump-loving counter-protestors showing up spontaneously. That's an interesting development.

FACT:

Politics isn't everything. But everything is politics:

- what happens when you flip your light switch

- how much shoes cost

- everything about cars

- where your child goes to school, and what they learn, and whether they are safe while there from dangers ranging from lead pipes to guns

- what's stocked at the grocery store, and whether it is safe to eat or will make you sick

- the health of each and all of us, and whether we can access care or afford it

- our work conditions

- how our money is earned and taxed, and why

- the air we breathe and the water we drink

- what we can read

- whether we can travel and when and where (and why)

- news, and "news" that is misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda

You can't "check out" of politics; whether you are paying attention or not, you will live it. Beliefs are not facts. Ignorance is not bliss. Inaction can threaten more risk than action.

An Ethical AI-generated Prompt Sheet for Those Thanksgiving Conversations

*based on a neutral question

Question:

On issues relevant in our politics right now, which political platform is more beneficial to us, Democrat or Republicon, and why?

Response:

Analyzing the two major U.S. political platforms—Democrat and Republican—requires a clear, issue-by-issue comparison based on policies and their likely impacts on society. Below is an overview of how each party approaches the listed issues and which platform tends to benefit the majority of Americans, based on available evidence and historical actions.

1. Climate Change and Energy

• Democrats: Support renewable energy investment, international climate agreements (e.g., Paris Accord), and regulations on emissions.

• Benefit: Reduces long-term environmental risks and creates clean energy jobs.

• Republicans: Focus on deregulating fossil fuels, questioning climate science, and prioritizing short-term energy independence through oil and gas.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Climate science overwhelmingly shows the urgency of reducing emissions to prevent global warming and its catastrophic effects.

2. Wealth Inequality

• Democrats: Advocate for higher taxes on the wealthy, expanding social safety nets, and raising the minimum wage.

• Benefit: Promotes economic fairness and reduces poverty rates.

• Republicans: Favor tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, arguing it boosts economic growth (“trickle-down economics”).

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Data shows tax cuts for the wealthy primarily widen inequality, while social programs reduce economic disparity.

3. Reproductive Rights

• Democrats: Support access to abortion, contraception, and reproductive healthcare.

• Benefit: Empowers individuals to make personal medical decisions, reducing maternal mortality rates.

• Republicans: Advocate for restricting or banning abortion, often without exceptions for rape or incest.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Restricting abortion leads to unsafe procedures and worsens healthcare outcomes for women.

4. Healthcare Access

• Democrats: Push for expanding Medicaid, lowering drug costs, and supporting universal healthcare.

• Benefit: Reduces the number of uninsured Americans and improves public health.

• Republicans: Seek to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and reduce government involvement in healthcare.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Expanding access improves health outcomes, while Republican policies risk leaving millions uninsured.

5. Gun Violence

• Democrats: Advocate for universal background checks, assault weapon bans, and red flag laws.

• Benefit: Reduces gun deaths and mass shootings, according to studies from countries with similar laws.

• Republicans: Oppose gun control measures, emphasizing Second Amendment rights.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Data consistently shows that stricter gun laws correlate with lower rates of gun violence.

6. Education and Student Debt

• Democrats: Propose reducing student loan debt, increasing public education funding, and making college more affordable.

• Benefit: Expands access to education, which drives economic mobility.

• Republicans: Support school choice, privatization, and reducing federal involvement in education.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Underfunded public schools and high student debt hinder social mobility, which Democrats address more effectively.

7. Voting Rights

• Democrats: Work to expand voting access through early voting, mail-in ballots, and combating voter suppression.

• Benefit: Increases voter turnout and strengthens democracy.

• Republicans: Focus on voter ID laws, restricting voting methods, and questioning election integrity.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Voting restrictions disproportionately harm marginalized groups and undermine democratic participation.

8. Judicial Integrity

• Democrats: Push for judicial appointments that preserve civil rights, voting rights, and environmental protections.

• Benefit: Ensures balanced courts that reflect public values.

• Republicans: Focus on appointing conservative judges, often with corporate or religious biases.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Progressive judicial rulings better protect individual freedoms and minority rights.

9. Media and Information Integrity

• Democrats: Support policies to combat disinformation and promote media literacy.

• Benefit: Encourages informed citizenry and accountability for platforms spreading falsehoods.

• Republicans: Often align with narratives undermining trust in mainstream media and fact-checking.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Misinformation destabilizes democracy, making this issue critical.

10. Immigration

• Democrats: Advocate for comprehensive immigration reform, including pathways to citizenship and humane treatment of migrants.

• Benefit: Bolsters the economy, addresses labor shortages, and upholds human rights.

• Republicans: Emphasize border security, including walls and mass deportations, often framing immigration as a threat.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Immigrants contribute significantly to the economy, and humane policies align with democratic values.

11. Corporate Accountability

• Democrats: Push for stronger regulations on corporations, including anti-trust actions and environmental accountability.

• Benefit: Prevents corporate abuse and ensures fair competition.

• Republicans: Advocate for deregulation and reducing corporate taxes.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: History shows unchecked corporations exploit workers and the environment.

12. Digital Privacy and AI

• Democrats: Support regulating tech companies and protecting digital privacy.

• Benefit: Balances innovation with individual rights.

• Republicans: Often resist regulation, favoring corporate interests.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Without regulations, tech monopolies and privacy violations harm consumers.

13. Infrastructure and Transportation

• Democrats: Invest in public transit, green infrastructure, and broadband expansion.

• Benefit: Improves quality of life and creates jobs.

• Republicans: Focus on traditional infrastructure projects but resist spending on green initiatives.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Comprehensive infrastructure plans address future needs.

14. Military Spending vs. Human Needs

• Democrats: Aim to reduce excessive military budgets and redirect funds toward healthcare, education, and climate action.

• Benefit: Balances security with societal well-being.

• Republicans: Advocate for high military spending, often at the expense of domestic programs.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Excessive military budgets often neglect urgent domestic priorities.

15. Food Security and Safety

• Democrats: Support sustainable farming, SNAP benefits, and food safety regulations.

• Benefit: Addresses hunger while ensuring food safety.

• Republicans: Focus on reducing regulations and cutting food assistance programs.

• Why Democrats are more beneficial: Robust food programs and safety regulations are vital for public health.

This analysis generally favors the Democratic platform across these issues, as it aligns more closely with data-supported policies that prioritize equity, sustainability, and public welfare.

FACT:

Politics isn't everything. But everything is politics:

- what happens when you flip your light switch

- how much shoes cost

- everything about cars

- where your child goes to school, and what they learn, and whether they are safe while there from dangers ranging from lead pipes to guns

- what's stocked at the grocery store, and whether it is safe to eat or will make you sick

- the health of each and all of us, and whether we can access care or afford it

- our work conditions

- how our money is earned and taxed, and why

- the air we breathe and the water we drink

- what we can read

- whether we can travel and when and where (and why)

- news, and "news" that is misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda

You can't "check out" of politics; whether you are paying attention or not, you will live it. Beliefs are not facts. Ignorance is not bliss. Inaction can threaten more risk than action.

No one seems to be pinpointing this issue, but this election makes one concern rise above all others. If we survive as a democracy in the richest country in the world, instead of handing it over to trump, we must throw all resources possible toward education. Civics and history, financial literacy and the economy, critical thinking, evidences of truth, and science versus misinformation, lies, and propaganda. That is how to move beyond the MAGA blight infecting half of our country.

Americans need help with how to do their own research.

* well, this was before the election. It's pinpointed now. And we're realizing we don't know how, and it's too late. Still, trying is the point now.

In conservative-controlled parts of the United States of America, women are suffering medically-supervised preventable deaths, for no medical reason. Think about it.

Trump's handlers convinced the convicted felon to try on an inmate's trash pick-up work crew vest today. It makes sense to try to introduce him to his future circumstances gradually, since he's both belligerent and confused.

What a Willy Wonka moment The Los Angeles Times is having, except Veruca Salt, now named Nika Soon-Shiong, already won the lottery in this lousy re-write.

So screw working-class Charlie, his sandwich generation family, and his grandparents, who all need full-time home care.

Dr. Soon-Shiong, biotech billionaire and newspaper owner: "Our editorial board has prepared a detailed endorsement of Kamala Harris for this most important election."

A gasp of displeasure from Nika: " NO, Daddy! NO! Harris didn't stop the war in Gaza when I wanted! We can't endorse HER!"

"But darling, not endorsing her is endorsing Donald Trump! In the LA Times!"

"I don't care!", screams Nika. I'm being VERY MORAL! AND I'M REALLY PROUD OF THAT!"

"But darling, in this American democracy, our Vice President doesn't stop another country's wars. A Vice President doesn't have that power! At least," added Daddy, "not yet. Who knows what will happen if Trump and Vance get power... Can't you just let us endorse Harris, and do our part to get her elected, and then put lots of pressure on her? It's not like Trump would care what people want, you know."

"DADDY!," says Nika. "Don't you love me anymore?"

"Of COURSE, DARLING! I love every little thought you have SO MUCH MORE THAN I LOVE THIS COUNTRY! But you know, there's lots of Israeli people who don't want this terrible war to continue, but their country got taken over by a hard right government that will never listen to its people. You know, I'm just thinking...".

Nika folds her arms and taps her foot.

Daddy adds hastily, "And dearest darling, don't you care about American women losing rights and dying for lack of reproductive health care? About the increase in both mother and infant mortality already? Or what about common sense gun control, so that guns won't continue to be the cause of most deaths of American children? Sweetie," he adds, cajoling, "what about climate change? You know, Trump wants to drill, drill, drill! Children EVERYWHERE will die of starvation and disease, and wars will break out planet-wide over scarce habitable lands. You used to care about that, too!"

"I don't care! I'm very progressive, Daddy! You know that! I'm so progressive I don't care if Trump wins! Or Putin and the other vicious autocrats. I have my morals! How often have I had the chance to say 'genocide' a LOT, with unassailable self-righteousness? You wouldnt try to take that away from me, would you, Daddy? "

"No!" Daddy says hastily. "This is terrible, what's happening in Gaza! Of course decent people want it to end! Although, really, um, this isn't the first genocide...I mean, and all wars slaughter children, you know...And, gosh, there's rarely been peace ever in that part of the world, since 1967! Or before that, too! Isn't it maybe better, just overall, you know, if America doesn't become an absolute force of ignorance and evil under Trump...?"

"Daddy. You are not doing what I want when I want you to. You know how I feel about that."

"Niki, darling, don't say that! Of course our paper won't endorse the not-fascist candidate!" He picks up the phone, mumbling to himself. "Well, we might get some nice tax cuts. Or, not get shut down right away under Trump." But Niki is watching, so he just shrugs. It's his paper, he can do what she wants to.

Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s newest member, Brett Kavanaugh, have voted in tandem on nearly every case that’s come before them since Kavanaugh joined the court in October. They’ve been more likely to side with the court’s liberal justices than its other conservatives.

The two justices, both alumni of the same District of Columbia-based federal appeals court, have split publicly only once in 25 official decisions. Their partnership has extended, though less reliably, to orders the court has issued on abortion funding, immigration and the death penalty in the six months since Kavanaugh’s bitter Senate confirmation battle ended in a 50-48 vote.

This article brims with wishful thinking about a reasoned approach by both Kavanaugh and Roberts, although it does note Gorsuch as the extremist legal clone of Thomas that he is.

Regarding Kavanaugh and Roberts, the last two paragraphs of this article were really all that were needed:

“For now, Kavanaugh and Roberts ‘are just treading carefully,’ said Lisa Blatt, who has argued more cases before the Supreme Court than any other woman and was a character witness for Kavanaugh during the confirmation process. 

“When the subject turns to abortion, guns, race or religion, Blatt said: ‘Then call me back up. That’s where they throw down a marker.’”

Roberts, and Kavanaugh too, are concerned about the institutional legitimacy of the Court because they present a dire threat to it.

When core conservative agendas come before them – and add the destruction of any balance of power for workers versus wealth – this extremist court will transform the country unless the other two branches are controlled long-term by Democrats, and until the Court is remediated.

Roberts is defined by his Shelby opinion, attacking both voting and civil rights. As in that opinion, and always, he is a master of fake reasonableness.

The conservatives are simply stocking the politically unimportant or less important column with wins to hold up as a pretense of judicial balance when departure from that balance becomes blatantly, egregiously highlighted.

The inoffensive, ultimate political bipartisanship that can rationally and enthusiastically meet in the middle turns out to be Diet Mountain Dew.

Who knew?

The Happy Warrior and the Political Capybara.

Kamala Harris.

Tim Walz.

Let's go!

Kamala Harris is the charismatic prosecutor to take down the weird bully convicted felon.

Tim Walz is a political capybara. Joe Manchin called him a good pick. (Now he can shut up.) Bernie has endorsed him.

If anyone can, Walz can help Harris pull this post-trump, Biden-Band-aided country further toward a decent United States.

On the subject of what is foreseeable.

trump has been attacking wives and families for a long time. Just two examples: 2018, Jill McCabe, wife of Andrew McCabe, the former FBI deputy director trump fired days before his pension would have vested; 2023, Judge Merchan's wife and daughter. This article includes other examples:

It's part of trump's long-term persona that he doesn't have to follow any rules -- not the Constitution of the United States of America, and not the old school mafia prescript that families -- the women and children -- should not be harmed.

Currently, trump is again gagged from attacking Judge Engoran's law clerk. So now he's been attacking Engoran's wife. Of course, the attacks are malicious lies. That's a given. Judges with integrity are very careful to avoid any appearance of impropriety in using their position and power to their own benefit in any way. (Obviously, some judges, like Roberts, Gorsuch, Thomas, Alito, do not meet this standard.)

trump can assess correctly that none of the judges involved in his "legal challenges" (a favorite media euphemism, which likely enourages trump), will explicitly prohibit him from attacking themselves or their families.

Plenty of people opine that it is stupid for trump to antagonize the judges.

Plenty of people note that trump is well aware of his power as a stochastic terrorist, with "credible threats" swamping those he spotlights, or rather, targets:

And plenty of people recite that trump's favorite legal defense strategy is, "Delay, delay, delay." (One big delay would do.)

More decent people -- not just trump's base -- should be considering that trump would be very pleased if one of his followers physically attacks Judge Engoran's wife, or makes an actual attempt.

No matter how much integrity a judge has, no one could see any judge as impartial whose family member was literally attacked as a consequence of trump's manipulations.

trump would like a mistrial declared. It seems evident that he is, in his stochastic terrorist way, trying for one. It's even more disgusting that trump's base would declare this a win.

After a Manhattan grand jury indicted Donald Trump late Thursday afternoon on reportedly 34 felony charges, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg took one more step to preserve the rule of law: Friday morning, via his General Counsel, he sent the top three Republican House Chairmen attempting to interfere in his office’s investigation and prosecution of Donald Trump a stern warning.

The letter, addressed to House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, Oversight Chairman James Comer, and Administration Chairman Bryan Steil spans six-pages. Its letterhead does not say District Attorney’s Office, but “District Attorney,” and has Bragg’s name in the upper corner, although it is signed by Bragg’s General Counsel, Leslie B. Dubeck. Politico has published the full letter.

It clearly states Bragg is drawing a red line: “What neither Mr. Trump nor Congress may do is interfere with the ordinary course of proceedings in New York State.”

The letter also accuses the trio of “an improper and dangerous usurpation” and “attempted interference with an ongoing state criminal investigation.” And it warns them against “unlawful political interference.”

Sponsored

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.