Trump/Republican Coup Thread

[Broomstick]

Because I don't think someone that served his country for say, 20+ years, risked injury (or was injured) in combat, etc, should be short changed in any way.

Yeah, it was not an elected job.

Most veterans going into politics enter at a lower level than Federal.

I don't think the skillset that makes a great soldier is the same that makes a great politician. You could make the same service argument about firefighters or police.

I'll also point out that not everyone who serves in the military serves 20+ years, most serve only one enlistment and make spend all of that as a file clerk. Start saying "oh, combat veterans" means that if the US doesn't have a war going on for a generation or two that counts against folks who do serve decades in peace time and/or suddenly gives more incentive to meddle abroad. And the US military needs to meddle less, not more.

There is already too much worship of the military in this country. Let's not make it into a stepping stone into politics. Someone gets done with their military service they can start in lower political positions like everyone else.

"Career politician" has been turned into something of a dirty word over the past half century, but someone coming up through through the ranks does have time to learn the skillset for the job. Someone stepping into higher office "off the street" so speak can be a real wrecking ball, as we've seen these past for years.

[Vendetta]

If you want to put some kind of prior experience on being a politician, it should be "not allowed in politics unless you've done five years in front line retail or service on minimum wage".

[Solauren]

If you want to put some kind of prior experience on being a politician, it should be "not allowed in politics unless you've done five years in front line retail or service on minimum wage".

I like that, but want to add in '10 years in a government public service job'. (I've had both, and sometimes the Government ones can be WORSE)

[Zaune]

Define "public service job". Here in this country, the first independent MP to be elected in several decades had never run for any office or worked for the civil service, but it's hard to describe a foreign affairs journalist who reported on every notable war from Vietnam to Bosnia and spent several years heading the BBC's Washington desk as lacking in political experience.

[Jub]

Define "public service job". Here in this country, the first independent MP to be elected in several decades had never run for any office or worked for the civil service, but it's hard to describe a foreign affairs journalist who reported on every notable war from Vietnam to Bosnia and spent several years heading the BBC's Washington desk as lacking in political experience.

Literally working the frontline dealing with the public at the DMV or unemployment office. Mucking it up with pimple-faced teens, bored managers, and angry Karens (and worse) for a decade of your life for whatever low wage that position offers, so you can understand what people go through before making choices that may damn them.

[LadyTevar]

Gentlemen, Ladies,

Putting ANY KIND OF RESTRICTION on who can run will in the long-term cause a bottleneck. What you should be looking at right now is the TRUE dampener on running for Federal Office -- MONEY.

Money for Advertisement. Money to pay Staff/rent buildings and push your agenda. Money to travel around, "shaking hands and kissing babies". Money to convince those with Money to back you. Right now in the US, if you don't already have (or are seen to have) Money, you don't get backed.

[Jub]

Gentlemen, Ladies,

Putting ANY KIND OF RESTRICTION on who can run will in the long-term cause a bottleneck. What you should be looking at right now is the TRUE dampener on running for Federal Office -- MONEY.

Money for Advertisement. Money to pay Staff/rent buildings and push your agenda. Money to travel around, "shaking hands and kissing babies". Money to convince those with Money to back you. Right now in the US, if you don't already have (or are seen to have) Money, you don't get backed.

Even if you take money out of the equation you'll still get a class of career politicians because the party system all but ensures this. Are we also going to abolish the idea of the political party and try to make each official stand alone? How do we square that with the idea of each geographic area being represented at the highest level by somebody from, or at least nominally living in, that area?

[Solauren]

Define "public service job". Here in this country, the first independent MP to be elected in several decades had never run for any office or worked for the civil service, but it's hard to describe a foreign affairs journalist who reported on every notable war from Vietnam to Bosnia and spent several years heading the BBC's Washington desk as lacking in political experience.

Literally working the frontline dealing with the public at the DMV or unemployment office. Mucking it up with pimple-faced teens, bored managers, and angry Karens (and worse) for a decade of your life for whatever low wage that position offers, so you can understand what people go through before making choices that may damn them.

Actually, some front-line/interact regularly with the public government jobs pay considerably more then 'low wage'. You still deal with the full cross-section of humanity, however.

[Raw Shark]

Literally working the frontline dealing with the public at the DMV or unemployment office. Mucking it up with pimple-faced teens, bored managers, and angry Karens (and worse) for a decade of your life for whatever low wage that position offers, so you can understand what people go through before making choices that may damn them.

After nearly a year working for the Unemployment office dealing with said angry Karens, I can assure you that what little inclination to run for office I may have had previously is, if anything, diminished. One of them even had the audacity to pull out, "I'm the customer, and the customer is always right!" on me once (I'm sorry, do you think that you're buying something from us?), and it's a virtual guarantee that anybody who raises their voice to me is going to demand to speak to my supervisor (spoilers: They can't).

[Jub]

Actually, some front-line/interact regularly with the public government jobs pay considerably more then 'low wage'. You still deal with the full cross-section of humanity, however.

Yeah, but I don't want our future leaders 'enjoying' those jobs. I want them in the bottom rung level positions so they can feel what it's like to work in a department ravaged by budget cuts from the elected officials above them.

After nearly a year working for the Unemployment office dealing with said angry Karens, I can assure you that what little inclination to run for office I may have had previously is, if anything, diminished. One of them even had the audacity to pull out, "I'm the customer, and the customer is always right!" on me once (I'm sorry, do you think that you're buying something from us?), and it's a virtual guarantee that anybody who raises their voice to me is going to demand to speak to my supervisor (spoilers: They can't).

See, you have the kind of everyman world experience that I'd want running something and the wisdom to know you don't want the responsibility.

[loomer]

By instituting such a policy we also lose out on a number of disabled candidates whose experience of being reliant on a cold, uncaring bureaucracy that would as soon see them die as not far exceeds that of any abled low-level public servant or retail worker.

[Jub]

By instituting such a policy we also lose out on a number of disabled candidates whose experience of being reliant on a cold, uncaring bureaucracy that would as soon see them die as not far exceeds that of any abled low-level public servant or retail worker.

True, but this is a spitballing of ideas and not a comprehensive policy outline. It wouldn't be hard to bring in disabled people to the candidate pool as well or allow them some other form of community service as a means of giving something to the community before being allowed to run for office.

[loomer]

By instituting such a policy we also lose out on a number of disabled candidates whose experience of being reliant on a cold, uncaring bureaucracy that would as soon see them die as not far exceeds that of any abled low-level public servant or retail worker.

True, but this is a spitballing of ideas and not a comprehensive policy outline. It wouldn't be hard to bring in disabled people to the candidate pool as well or allow them some other form of community service as a means of giving something to the community before being allowed to run for office.

I'm not sure why it just being spitballing renders commentary on an idea's issues unnecessary. When we think an idea is worthy of public consideration, we accept the idea that it may be subject to critique from those we're suggesting it to - that's a central part of the next step beyond mere spitballing and brainstorming (mere spitballing being nothing more than 'there are no wrong answers, say whatever comes to mind', which can only meaningfully function as a prelude to a more detailed analysis of the ideas generated), to take ideas and either run with them or ask questions. To drill a little deeper, if we permit a pool of candidates an alternative form of 'community service' than working retail (which... is not a community service) or as a low-ranking public-facing civil servant, we'd need to first adequately identify what form of community service it is we're actually seeking.

Is it experience in being at the mercy of the state and struggling to negotiate bureaucratic madness and overbearing and unwelcome interference? If so, why should any form of community service be necessary for those whose existence is, in itself, an experience in this? Is it specifically experience in community-centric action - in which case, retail work is out, while unpaid organizing, volunteering, and community-based activism is in? Is it the experience of having to struggle with the stupidity of customers and managers while barely scraping by, as originally suggested by Vendetta? These are not the same experiences, even if all three might be experienced by those engaged in precarious employment in the community-centric service sector. Which one - or is it all of them? - is necessary for a good politician? If none of them are necessary, why are we proposing making it a requirement?

[Solauren]

What if, instead of work-experience qualifications, exams then?

i.e an extensive exam on how the Government of the United States (one per branch), the Constitution, etc?
(Pretty sure Trump would have failed that)

[MKSheppard]

So rumors are the Capitol lockdown will be extended to 3 FEB and that parts may become permanent.

it's like Oklahoma City all over again, before the Murrah Bombing you could just walk into the Smithsonian without anything -- after, metal detectors and bag checks

[Solauren]

I honestly think that all government facilities should have metal detectors and bag checks. Too easy for a nut job (or nut jobs) to walk in carrying a concealed firearm and shot the joint up.

[Vendetta]

Is it experience in being at the mercy of the state and struggling to negotiate bureaucratic madness and overbearing and unwelcome interference?

No, it's experience in being at the mercy of capitalism. The experience of having to do a shit thing all the time that you can't stop doing because if you do you'll just starve. (ofc. this would require a suspension of any prior resources so they can have the proper experience).

And it's necessary because it's the only way to pound some empathy into the motherfuckers. That's the actual point.

[Jub]

To drill a little deeper, if we permit a pool of candidates an alternative form of 'community service' than working retail (which... is not a community service) or as a low-ranking public-facing civil servant, we'd need to first adequately identify what form of community service it is we're actually seeking.

Is it experience in being at the mercy of the state and struggling to negotiate bureaucratic madness and overbearing and unwelcome interference? If so, why should any form of community service be necessary for those whose existence is, in itself, an experience in this? Is it specifically experience in community-centric action - in which case, retail work is out, while unpaid organizing, volunteering, and community-based activism is in? Is it the experience of having to struggle with the stupidity of customers and managers while barely scraping by, as originally suggested by Vendetta? These are not the same experiences, even if all three might be experienced by those engaged in precarious employment in the community-centric service sector. Which one - or is it all of them? - is necessary for a good politician? If none of them are necessary, why are we proposing making it a requirement?

I think there should have to be some form of experience at the bottom of the ladder required for all government officials. To this end, I would add a requirement for community service equal to the term served by able members of the candidate pool to prevent any attempts to backdoor past a term of living at the bottom of the well. As for why these things are required I don't have any expectation that our political candidates will be coming from anywhere but the upper echelons of society any time soon, I would like to see these types of people experience life as a minimum wage service worker for a few years so they have empathy for those people who may be wishing to form a union, fight for a higher minimum wage or call for a working transit system. Ideally, every politician would experience every annoyance that their constituatants do so they might actually be inclined to fix some of them.

[LadyTevar]

OK, all this talk about making changes in Who Can Run for What Office needs it's own thread. Does someone want to make that thread, or do I come back in 24hrs and create it for you by removing all this?

--LadyT

[MKSheppard]

https://apnews.com/article/biden-inaugu ... 1acfac2a8f

WASHINGTON (AP) — Amtrak announced all Northeast Regional trains south of Washington D.C, which includes all stations in Virginia, will be canceled Tuesday and Wednesday amid heightened security concerns following the attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Amtrak auto train services will be unaffected but The Carolinian, a daily train that runs between Charlotte, North Carolina to New York City, will only operate between Raleigh and Charlotte, the company said Saturday in a news release.

“After last week’s violent attack on the U.S. Capitol, we are taking extra steps to continue ensuring the safety of our employees and customers in Washington DC and across our network as we prepare for the Inauguration,” the statement said.

Additionally, Interstate 66 and Interstate 395 bridges connecting Virginia to Washington will be closed from 6 a.m. Tuesday to 6 a.m. Thursday, the Virginia Department of Transportation said. The Arlington Memorial Bridge also will be closed.

President-elect Joe Biden, who had a preference for riding the trains during his 36-year Senate career, will not be taking one to Washington for his inauguration because of the security concerns.

[Zaune]

You'd think it'd be the airlines instead, really. It's got to be somewhat difficult to hijack a train for a kamikaze attack on the inauguration, not that I'd put it past some of the more dimwitted militiabros to give it the old college try, and to give them what very little credit is due they haven't gone in for completely indiscriminate attacks like hiding nailbombs in litter bins so far.

[Broomstick]

I don't think it's concerns about kamikaze attacks, I think it's an effort to make it more difficult for would-be agitators to move around, either into or out of an area.

[Gandalf]

Or putting an IED down and blowing it up as a train came.

[Formless]

I don't think it's concerns about kamikaze attacks, I think it's an effort to make it more difficult for would-be agitators to move around, either into or out of an area.

Agreed; the kamikaze threat is sufficiently dealt with by putting the agitators on the Do Not Fly list as well as all the changes in standard operating procedures on planes since 2001 to protect the cockpit and pilots from hijackers in general. This is definitely a move to prevent another MAGA mob from coming in from outside the city, and the fact many from the previous mob are also on the Do Not Fly list will also help. That doesn't mean the city's multiple police agencies can relax, though... hopefully anyone from inside the department that is suspected of aiding the previous mob have been dealt with so they can't sabotage things tomorrow.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

At least 12 National Guard service members have been removed from president-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration after authorities discovered they have ties to right-wing militia groups or posted extremist views online.

The discovery follows Defense Department and FBI efforts to screen National Guard members as more than 20,000 troops support law enforcement in Washington DC ahead of the swearing-in ceremony, days after a far-right mob breached the US Capitol.

Two service members were identified on Tuesday morning, according to the Associated Press. At least 10 others were identified by the FBI “as having ties to fringe right-wing groups or had posted extremist views”, according to the outlet.

Federal authorities have identified a growing number of law enforcement and military personnel who joined the insurrection on 6 January.

Link.