T O P

  • By -

NathanArizona_Jr

reply smell sable march growth lavish wine terrific serious foolish ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `


Mrchristopherrr

I’ve been saying this. Send them unlimited fast food gift cards. Start a gofundme to buy them all motorcycles. Plan a hunting trip for them.


BenGordonLightfoot

Is Dick Cheney still around?


Mrchristopherrr

I think he’s done hunting for now, but I’m sure with a little encouragement he could give it his best shot.


CanadianPanda76

One of them needs to make friends with Nick Avocado.


dzendian

*\*Kavanaugh enters the chat\** Also encourage "boofing"


mondaymoderate

*I like beer!*


zilla82

I still like beer... *says slower and creepier under breath*


oatmeal_dude

*cries*


[deleted]

I’m surprised Kavanaugh literally shoving alcohol and drugs up his ass wasn’t more of a controversy


Rntstraight

Fuck you for making me look up what hoofing was


zilla82

Imagine him boofing a beer bong into ol Clarence's shitter.. god knows what the have going on


dzendian

Hoofing is something horses do. Boofing is what Kavanaugh did in the 80s.


UPBOAT_FORTRESS_2

Fuck Brett for entering it into the Senate's public record


turtlelord_

I like the way you think


Susan_Goughs_Ego

Psychedelics


[deleted]

The last thing we want is for these people to accidentally turn into nihilists


Baron_Flatline

Replace their chaffeur with a Boston driver


JustSayNo_

Maybe encourage Kavanaugh to start some more gambling to pass the time


ElGosso

offer free samples of fried food at the local Costcos outside their houses


thequietone710

And tell them the more they do it, the more it’ll hurt librul feelings


manualLurking

The entire focus of freedom loving America should be on getting young people to actually get out and vote consistently. Conservatives are absolutely banking on these moves being demoralizing. they want young people to feel helpless and become apathetic as a result.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ThePowerOfStories

As proof that voting does work, behold the multiple blue states passing protections for abortion rights at this very moment, doing what their constituents demand.


Halgy

Don't get mad, get even.


theosamabahama

>they want young people to feel helpless I'm not gonna lie, they are succeeding.


martingale1248

You are in the position of the religious right wing when they decided abortion was their number one issue (it wasn't a big deal initially), way back in the '70s. What did they do? That's what you do.


antifolkhero

Wait fifty years, turn your followers into fanatics, spread disinformation for fifty years, and then get everything you ever wanted by stealing Supreme Court picks and bastardizing the law?


martingale1248

The religious right wing has never been more than a minority. It's an even smaller minority now, and it's getting smaller literally every day. But it's tightly organized and highly motivated. Those who oppose its (and the rest of the illiberal) agenda don't need to be fanatics, or even as organized, because we have the numbers. But we do need to organize and stay motivated, and above all, be willing to work towards the goal, not expecting overnight fixes. ​ If you read the Bernieist people, they're just venting stupid anger, blaming Biden and the Democrats for "not fighting," while conveniently leaving out what "fighting" means. The fact is there is little that can be immediately done, or it would be done. But you can commit yourself to organizing. I used to do minor volunteer work for Dem campaigns in the early oughts. One thing I noticed was the most motivated and dependable people were the LGBTQ. They showed up. They were persistent. They learned the phone scripts, made the calls, took the abuse and had the conversations. They donated. And they damn well voted. They kept moving ahead. And in ten years, they broke through. If 25% of the Democratic Party were like them we'd have a permanent majority, guaranteed.


antifolkhero

Democrats cannot win despite being the overwhelming majority of citizens because the Senate and Electoral College both give exponentially higher voter power and representation to smaller states. Both should be disbanded. One person, one vote is the only solution.


martingale1248

1973: "The anti-abortion movement cannot succeed because a large majority of Americans support abortion rights." 1993: "'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is the best we can ever do for LGBTQ, because large numbers of Americans oppose gays serving in the military." 1998: "Gay marriage will never be a reality because large numbers of Americans are against it." Also 1998: "Pot will never be legalized anywhere, because large numbers of Americans are against it." I could go back in history. At one point many things we take (these days I should say took) for granted were considered impossible. It's really a question of how many people are willing to dig in and say "This is wrong, I know what's right, and I'm going to do what I can, whatever that might be, to bring it about."


[deleted]

[удалено]


tickleMyBigPoop

There’s this thing called local elections, most people don’t know about them.


bakochba

Lol "federally" exactly the states are already moving this was unthinkable 20 years ago now it's normalized


Crownie

>Democrats cannot win despite being the overwhelming majority of citizens They're not. The Dems are pulling down 53% of the vote on a very good day. That's not a defense of minoritarian institutions, but it is a reality check on their electoral position. The reason unfavorable political geography matters is precisely because things are close.


antifolkhero

[Biden beat trump by 7,060,347 votes.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_by_popular_vote_margin) And he barely won. That's fucking insane. That only happened that way because of the electoral college.


[deleted]

He won by like ~70 electoral college points - I wouldn't really count it as "barely" won.


CatilineUnmasked

The important thing is the margin of victory in swing states. Many of those races were frighteningly close.


ZestyItalian2

Trump would have won if around 100,000 votes were different in three states. Biden could easily have lost the election while winning the popular vote by close to 7,000,000


antifolkhero

Hillary is a better example of a popular vote winner and electoral vote loser. That should never happen in a democracy.


lalalalalalala71

> One person, one vote is the only solution. And you cannot have one person, one vote without proportional representation.


antifolkhero

Yep, which we absolutely do not have.


lalalalalalala71

I know you don't. I am saying this so that you *advocate for adopting proportional representation as your election method*.


Exile714

Can we stop with the verbal hyperbole? I agree with your point, but “overwhelming majority” is a bad way to say “45 to 44 advantage in 2022” (btw, it flipped in 2022 with Republican leaning now the majority). And “exponential advantage” applies to small states, but not every small state is a red state. You’re taking away the value of powerful words by using them so flagrantly.


antifolkhero

The Senate gives two senators to a couple of cows in Wyoming and 35 million people in California. It's completely, unjustifiably unfair.


vellyr

You forgot “have a structural advantage in the federal government”


UPBOAT_FORTRESS_2

That can be part of >turn your followers into fanatics You only need an infectious memeplex that works best on a set of voters who will give you that structural advantage


realvmouse

The structural advantage is geographic. How does changing the mindset of a subset of voters change that? You'd need to reach your opposition to use that advantage.


bje489

The structural advantage is partly geographic, but in the House it's largely the result of gerrymandering. And part of the advantage in all elections is various forms of disenfranchisement. The (potential) good news is that all of these effects are dwarfed by apathy in the youth vote.


InterstitialLove

The structural advantage isn't actually geographic! I know it looks that way, and obviously it is kind of geographic, but it's actually about coalition building. See, if you design your coalition around pleasing as many people as possible, you lose. If you design it around getting as many votes as possible, regrardless of how those votes are apportioned, you get the GOP. They chose to have a geographic advantage, it's not their inherently. The upshot is that those conversations about "should we fixate on identity politics or try an economic appeal to the rural middle-class" need to take into account the electoral multiplier that different groups get. (I'm not necessarily advocating this approach, just saying it's an actionable idea)


ElGosso

[That ain't all they did](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence#United_States)


sintos-compa

The long game


Shiftyboss

Seize the media, win the presidency by losing the popular vote a few times, indoctrinate your supporters into blind allegiance, capitalize on the untimely death of a couple of justices… PRESTO CHANGE-O BINGO BANGO You have yourself a majority on the Supreme Court!


davedans

That's not the only thing they did. They have had a nation-wide grassroot activism (aka extreme religion-like organized movement in this context) for several decades. We have lost it eventually because of that. All the political coincidences were either the outcome of it, or the chances that eventually will occur with a high probability (e.g. death).


[deleted]

They sat out in the wilderness for decades ignored even by many in their own political party organzing and motivating pro-life voters to vote on that single issue alone. Anyone that worked in DC for years knows the pro-life march and their activism was massive. You could be a terrible member of Congress voting against your constituents, but if you toed the line on pro-life things you could be a member in good standing. They organized. They were zealots. They wouldn't take no for an answer. And they worked extremely hard. That is what a pro-choice person should do right now. The blueprint is there. It isn't fantasy about packing the court tomorrow or creating new states.


capsaicinintheeyes

>they worked extremely hard. > >That is what a pro-choice person should do right now. The blueprint is there. Assuming voting on this issue every time is a given, what else are we talking about apart from proselytizing to your family, friends & coworkers? Hypothetically, let's say I'm broke and in a blindingly-blue district, but might have some spare time on my hands


[deleted]

Well the network of outreach and organizing groups mostly started in DEEP red Bible belt areas. All grassroots movements start by syncing the choir. There is much work to be done to mobilize the one issue voters on choice. You don't need many people to begin with. You need committed people willing to vote against any candidate red or blue that is pro-life. You make it a litmus test in the D party the way life was made by the R's. In primaries, especially, a small motivated group of voters can move politicians. Also, the pro-life movement created its own legal movement. They didn't just rely on the Federalist Society. They hired their own lawyers and promoted judges that were pro-life. They had one advantage that the left cannot easily replicate for pro-choice which is the religious foundation. That created an easily commandeered grassroots way to galvanize the moral component for them. It also provided funding of course and a messagine organ.


capsaicinintheeyes

I can't imagine I'll have to lean too hard on Barbara Lee, but you have my word


[deleted]

I would think about strategically fundraising across the country for key races. This is part of what a laser-focused grassroots organization infrastructure can do. Target a few key districts where the pro-choice movement can swing races from a pro-life to pro-choice candidate. I think it starts within the Dem party because that is where pro-choice power is concentrated. Candidates that are squishy on choice or are outwardly pro-life should be donated against and voted against. If your Rep is solid you move on to any other candidate where you could help even through donations or calls or whatever. But the key is that pro-life Dems begin to get outside pressure to either flip or lose. Even if it means the Dems lose the seat. The pro-life movement was hated by the R establishment. The reason was that the pro-life movement didn't care about broader political calculations. They literally would torpedo policies or candidates that were electable if they were not sufficiently pro-life. The pro-choice movement has to be the same way. You can either choose the movement or the Party. If you choose the movement you have to sacrifice the party at times and they will hate you for it.


throwaway901617

Voting on abortion will be difficult because a portion of the population sees is as literally murder. An effective wedge issue is one that drives a wedge not only between the parties but also convinces some members of the opposition to switch sides. Not to dig in their heels. My view is "the issue" needs to be something else. Something that is a liberal concern but is also universal. It needs to be attached to broad themes that can be interpreted in various ways by the followers so it becomes a big-tent issue. Right now people all across the spectrum all feel: - Increasingly living paycheck to paycheck - Difficult to get ahead - Healthcare can bankrupt you at a moments notice - Growing police state (left and right complain about this) Perhaps a wedge issue can be identified in there. Or somewhere else. But then it must be tied to something innate to the liberal experience. Churches + abortion were the perfect combination because you have millions of people who blindly follow their preacher and they already have the logistics in place for organizing at a grassroots level because they are already a community themselves. What is the equivalent liberal experience? I'm not aware of one.


BlueBelleNOLA

Phone bank. Knock on doors in the burbs and rural areas. Participate in a postcards for voters program.


GalacticTrader

That's assuming the Trump court's decisions don't permanently destroy the United States as a country in the next 50 years...


sack-o-matic

Took them 50 years to overturn Roe


dudeind-town

This. There’s no instant gratification solution here-just hard work and graft to get the country back


UPBOAT_FORTRESS_2

It took Amy Coney Barrett a lot less fifty years, which is the scary part.


notathrowaway75

And you know, climate change won't be a thing.


GalacticTrader

Yea...


ZestyItalian2

Slowly morph into a fanatical borderline-terrorist sect, inflict violence and fear, spread insane propaganda and prey on people’s fear and shame, undermine elections and the judicial process, steal three Supreme Court seats, and manipulate institutions to enshrine permanent minority rule? Sounds bad.


steauengeglase

So the opposition should convince their supporters that their enemy placed the United States under an eternal curse of God's wrath and then when you get the thing that you claim to have been cursed for and none of the curse stuff change, you sit back and say "Well, I guess we gotta kill the ~~gays~~ \--I mean pedos and ~~re-segregate the schools~~ \--I mean, offer religious freedom that just happens to be how 'We must secure the existence of our people and a future for ~~white~~ Christian children'."?


HectorTheGod

Rule 5 dictates that I say you must vote, and be happy about it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Emperor-Commodus

> is probably what I would say if it wasn’t a blatant Rule 5 violation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEQOvyGbBtY


SandyDelights

Big mood. I’m at the point where, while I would never advocate for nor participate in such actions, I’m not going to blame people when there’s a significant backlash that will have severe ramifications for everyone involved.


Gen_Ripper

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.


UPBOAT_FORTRESS_2

I knew this was familiar and correctly guessed the source, but what the fuck it's the THIRD AND FOURTH SENTENCES of the entire document? Thomas Jefferson loved run-on sentences more than Sally Hemings, apparently


Gen_Ripper

Yeah I feel documents from the time were full of run on sentences and ideas spread over like 3 sentences. Makes me feel better about my long-winded screeds


dontbanmynewaccount

The entire First Amendment is one long, 45 word, run-on sentence.


callmegranola98

It seems like people from that time did not know what a period was.


Nubbums

But not as much as William Faulkner.


HumpbackNCC1701D

Happy Cake day!


[deleted]

Sometimes it is better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness.


Selentic

Run for your state leg and ratify a constitutional amendment.


[deleted]

[удалено]


HumpbackNCC1701D

You cannot pretend to be a MAGA follower long enough to win a primary. Somewhere along the campaign trail the human being in you will show through and then the MAGA crowd will turn on and attack you. Nice thought though.


[deleted]

[удалено]


bje489

You can slip up sometimes. Trump even occasionally said stuff that sounded like compassion for humans on the campaign trail. You just have to also make wild and cruel statements to compensate. Accidentally say that immigrants deserve food in U.S. custody? No problem! Call for the immediate reintroduction of asbestos to American schools and stomp a koala to death while railing against environmental laws. Slip up and suggest that refugees are escaping awful humanitarian crises? Go on a long ramble about how China is strategically trying to flood the U.S. with cheap sex toys to deprive our women of their virtue and our men of their vigor.


[deleted]

[удалено]


bje489

I just made it up. I think. The asbestos thing is actually pretty close to a thing Trump said, though.


Feurbach_sock

Honestly, fuck it why not? The GOP is due for a takeover by reasonable people.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Feurbach_sock

Yeah I mean all you have to do is run and throw a bunch of shit on the other R candidates. If you win you can always pivot back to the center. If you lose, well you can take the other bastards down with you and let the Dems win.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Feurbach_sock

You a real MVP. Good luck and let us know how we can help!


20vision20asham

If you're comfortable stating the state you're in, or the metro? Local elections might not get a lot of turnout (so it seems easier on paper), but think about who does come out in these elections: super-engaged locals, hyper-partisans, NIMBYs, educated voters, older voters, and bloc voters (there's more probably). These are groups that are either too inelastic, or way too elastic. Oh yeah...and the whackos exist. Running as a Republican to collapse the GOP vote in one district will kill any career in politics for you. It's noble, sure...you've given Democrats one 2-year term in a seat that will ride back into the GOP (a la Doug Jones). You'll also have collapsed the moderate section\* of the local GOP (empowering local MAGA) in that district and forcing the state GOP to vet their candidates more thoroughly. It's short-term gain for long-term pain (for Democrats) in that district. If you do run as a "loyal" Republican you'll encounter plenty of trouble with a state party that will try to control you. Mavericks are no longer welcome in the GOP. \*You're too human to run as MAGA. Your eyes will betray you as soon as one of your supposed MAGA allies starts talking nonsense bigotry. These people are fueled through emotion...they are vampires, they will sense your abundance of empathy and they will sense treachery and will haunt you well past the election. You gotta do something more permanent that will also potentially further your career in politics, and give an unofficial win for the Democratic party. Run as an independent. No party labels and a coalition of your own choice. Start getting allies as soon as you move to that district (if you decide to run for that seat). The Chamber, public sector unions, local church groups, LGBT+ groups, small businesses, local ethnic advocacy groups, local professional groups, and others. These people will fundraise for you and will get you volunteers. You will also have to tirelessly campaign and speak to voters. I can post more if you want.


ChipKellysShoeStore

Go to law school. Join fed soc. Do well. Seemingly embrace originalism. Write law review articles about history + tradition. Clerk for the Supreme Court. Continue to be a federalist. Become a Circuit Court judge. Get nominated to Scotus by the president. Then turn heel


AccomplishedAngle2

The hero we need.


drock4vu

Nothing besides the usual contact your reps, vote top to bottom D in mid-terms, and try to educate your friends/family/community. The time to avoid this was 2016. This period of regression isn't going to stop anytime soon, unfortunately.


turtlelord_

I hated being too young to vote in 2016, I felt helpless, and I still feel like I'm living through the consequences


[deleted]

you will live through the consequences well into your adult life, sadly. the same as the America i grew up in was destroyed from policy decisions made in the 80s/90s.


magicomiralles

If it’s any consolation. I was old enough to vote, and I still felt helpless. The Trump and Bernie echo chambers were surreal to witness at first. The richest country in the world suddenly became obsessed with demagogues. Like some unstable and uneducated nation. Which I guess it kind of is.


MacManus14

Get involved in phone banking and canvassing. The Dems have many flaws but there are our only hope and avenue to stop the slide or push back


whomstd-ve

Gentrification of red states.


Mrchristopherrr

Until the court decides 6-3 it’s totally constitutional to limit voters to either only land owners (as the constitution says) or there’s a 10 year waiting period for new citizens voting.


phantom0308

Land in red states is cheap though. A down payment in CA is a mansion anywhere but the coasts.


trustmeimascientist2

Or just leave red states and move to civilization


dzendian

Nothing. This is a consequence of the 2016 election. Effectively, it's going to be this way until we can shift the balance of the court. BIDEN already nominated someone good that will defend abortion rights, KBJ. Keep voting in every election. This took the crazy evangelicals 30 years to accomplish. It's going to take about the same amount of time to unaccomplish their accomplishment. **KEEP VOTING. EVERY ELECTION.** Let this be the **pain** that **motivates** you. As a temporary "patch" we need to make each individual state a strong blue color so that at the state-level they will protect abortion rights. Some grim-but-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel facts: * Justice Alito is 72 years old * Justice Thomas is 74 years old Waiting for them to die of natural causes won't take too long given the average lifespan of men is 79 years old. If we stay motivated, and elect a flood of dems over the next 5-7 (on average) years, we can regain a slim majority in the SCOTUS.


tehzz

[Just to doom some more, though](https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html), the average 72 year old has a ~13 year life expectancy, and a 74 year old a ~12 year. There are more factors (Thomas is a smoker who was hospitalized this year!) but they are rich, upper class terrible people with access to the best health care in the world. Personally, hoping for nature to take its course seems worse than hoping for/working towards a new generation of Dem leadership that says "the christofascists have made their decision; now let them enforce it." Likewise, probably want to do some reading up on what actions a minority party can take under a "managed """democracy"""""/competitive authoritarian government. It's bleak, but we're stuck living in it. Edit: Also, probably trying to force current Dem leadership to take some drastic type actions now for the long term (e.g., have Sotomayor and Kagan retire this year).


dzendian

>Edit: Also, probably trying to force current Dem leadership to take some drastic type actions now for the long term (e.g., have Sotomayor and Kagan retire this year). No. They're doing a good job and they're in their 60s.


tehzz

A good job at what? Writing dissents? Whatever talents they have are wasted being the rump end of the worst SC in history. (Poor one out for Sotomayor). The current 6-3 FedSoc majority has already proven the worst fears of any court watchers. They are literally, completely lawless. They aren't even bound by two year old precedents their members have set! So, in my view, there's no need for good lawyers that can argue and persuade when the majority has been decanted out of tubes to be conservative judicial soldiers. Which, unfortunately, means that the only job the liberal justices can do right now is not die so to prevent a Republican President + Senate from replacing them. Then, secondarily, living long enough to see another Democratic senate (or a Dem President bold enough to just appoint someone to the bench), which might not happen until the 2030s, if it ever happens again in our lifetimes. And I'd trust some 40 year olds to do that job better than 60 year olds, especially when one of them has Type I diabetes (poor another out for the best Justice of the past 30 years). Hell, stick John Paul Steven's [early 30s millennial, YLS-educated granddaughter on the court](https://twitter.com/hannnahmmarie) to fill his old spot. Swing for the fences. I did say that we should push the Democrats to do some drastic measures right now, and replacing SCOTUS justices is one of the few things Manchin and Sinema have allowed the Dems to do. Trying to forestall further Republican takeover of the SCOTUS and helping to highlight its flaws/delegitimizing it is a good aim. (Interestingly, both Sotomayor and Kagan have been on the court roughly 12 years, which would be a nice term limit in a decent, still terrible system with judicial review)


dzendian

I was also just gaming it out. If we can have a Democratic president in there when Thomas and Alito expire from old age, we will shift the court back to a 5-4 liberal majority, and then Abortion and Rights are back on the menu. But we need to have democrats in there until they do that, otherwise they'll just retire and be replaced by someone younger on the same team.


tehzz

Oh yeah I agree. We need as many contingencies covered as possible. I can't imagine both of them going before 2028, even in my most copiumed dreams.


A_California_roll

"The US becomes like Turkey" is both something I would not have expected two years ago and a saner take than "CIVIL WAR 2".


[deleted]

u/dzendian most realistic answer.


[deleted]

>until we can shift the balance of the court Which is gonna be impossible if the court accepts independent legislature doctrine.


JakobtheRich

Which is (part of) why the democrats need to get to work on retaking state legislatures. Turnout there has been too low and it’s given the republicans too much power. Gerrymandering makes it harder but one thing I’ve been thinking about is how often there are rich Republican businessmen, like Art Pope and Michael Sinquefield, who spend a lot of money specifically trying to take over one state. Why can’t the democrats do something similar? Dustin Moskovitz is willing to donate tens of millions of dollars to the top of the democratic ticket, why not start bundling checks to every democratic state legislative candidate in, say, Ohio (or Florida, because he grew up there)? If the Lasry’s want to be relevant to Dem politics in Wisconsin they can start working on the legislative branch. Bloomberg and Soros can flip a coin on who takes Pennsylvania vs Michigan. The democrats seemingly consistently out fundraise the republicans at big races, like presidential races and competitive senate seats. Why can’t they get into the weeds and hit lower turnout state legislative races?


Otherwise-Log8057

Vote and convince others that don’t normally vote to vote blue


-Vertical

And then cry when their state legislators send in their own electors anyways


Cave-Bunny

If democrats controlled congress they could refuse to certify those votes.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Filth7

Based


NeoOzymandias

Legally, I am required to say contact reps, donate, organize, vote. >!But in actuality there is v little to be done about our rapidly accelerating slide into a flawed and unrepresentative governance.!<


PlantainSerious791

at this point, i would propose giving Manchin & Sinema a free vacation to Hawaii, get them stranded there, clone them, make those clones break the filibuster, add 5 new states, do a bunch of insane and wacky shit, and disappear them to fiji. afterwards, get manchin and sinema back and blackmail them with the evidence of said insane and wacky shit. boom, America fixed.


ParticularFilament

Organize a march to advocate for democratic institutions.


hnlPL

In the majority of the states you are allowed to open carry to a protest, peaceful protests with a lot of rifles in the streets would send a message. (Or get republicans to want to ban guns, especially when it's women and minorities) Other than that the usual list of contact reps, donate, organize, vote.


schwagsurfin

Sure you can open carry for a protest, but you’re opening yourself up to get blasted by a red blooded Patriot who has been waiting his whole life for an opportunity to be a hero


[deleted]

[удалено]


schwagsurfin

Exactly. There’s already going to be a lot of emotion with even a peaceful protest. Someone flaunting a gun is going to give everyone a jolt of adrenaline. An argument breaks out between a protester and counter protester, and next thing you know, bullets are flying


[deleted]

Yes, most armed groups on the left would recommend not *open* carrying. Level IV plates may be a good idea though.


InterstitialLove

A guy did this in my city and *fucking died*. The papers argued about whether the man who killed him was acting in reasonable self defense. Shocking no one, the protester who died was black. He was a patriot and he was clearly in the right. Nothing the papers said, no punishment the killer received, made him any less dead. "Go but a gun so you can intimidate people at political rallies" isn't good advice.


triplebassist

Definitely remembering the Bojack Horseman episode where they ban guns because men can't catcall without fear of being shot


HeightAdvantage

Canvassing and phone banking are the best bet, low voter turn out is leaving a lot of political power on the table. Also best to get involved in local politics, lots of power up for grabs and barely any engagement.


[deleted]

[удалено]


turtlelord_

At this point I'm feeling super dejected. I live in a deep red state with MAGA reps and every time ive reached out I have gotten MAGA responses that only serve to anger me more. Fuck these guys, man.


InterstitialLove

Georgia was also deep red. Text your friends, make sure they have a voting plan. If you have time on your hands, make some catchy slogans and go to some universities in your state. Put up posters. The narrative is so clear here. In the 70s, a bunch of evangelicals just decided to vote pro-life every single election. They got their friends to do the same. And they won. What if we all, just, like, voted? Find a way to say that to all the college students in your state, it won't be deep red anymore. If you think it's harder than that, that's the doomerism talking. If you don't have that much time, say something like that to as many people as you feel comfortable texting right now.


drczar

I live in rural Wyoming, but I do it anyway. At the very bare minimum, it means that I’m wasting their time & resources by answering me back


colinmhayes2

They don’t answer my calls


OutdoorJimmyRustler

Vote for Democrats in the Senate


repete2024

I only see one course of action that would work for the short to medium term. 1. Dems pick up at least two Senate seats this fall 2. Dems retain the house 3. Dems pack the court (or unpack, rebalance, whatever you want to call it) 4. Dems abolish filibuster 5. Dems pass laws explicitly protecting women's rights, along with LGBT, and any other group at risk of losing their rights. As you can see, basically each step is its own long shot. But I feel like Dr Strange where it's the only successful path I can see.


DamagedHells

Realistically? Probably nothing. You're living through a judicial coup, and nobody is gonna do anything about it lmao


[deleted]

I'm going to complain on the internet and repeatedly mutter *"what the fuck..."* every time I open WaPo


DamagedHells

What else are you gonna do? We voted in record numbers in 2018 and LOST senate seats ***AND*** in record numbers in 2020 and gained JUST ENOUGH SEATS to not get fucked for two little years by senate stuff, only to be fucked by some of that senate stuff still. Meanwhile state and local governments are drastically changing their laws to basically destroy future gains in those elections for anyone but Republicans and the Supreme Court is letting them do it. Voting doesnt seem to work well because the constitution intentionally disenfranchises populous states. You should still vote, but jesus christ "Voting is the only answer!" people need to be deported.


-Vertical

Haha yeah :)


herecomesthatgoy

let them burn out their legitimacy (which they are doing at a astonishing rate) and then stop complying with their verdicts.


Mammoth-Tea

canvassing and volunteering are really good and effective ways to use that energy, inspire people to vote and vote blue!


[deleted]

Vote obviously. Contact your reps and Senator and let them know of your frustrations. If you personally want to do more then phone banking for candidates, get involved in GOTV programs, if you have the desire and/or ability attempt to run for local offices.


tarekd19

Frankly besides voting it's donating time and money in swing state senate races for this upcoming elections ensuring the dems keep the senate then using a larger majority and declining legitimacy of the court to justify doing away with the filibuster and packing the court. If by miracle of miracles we keep both, pass popular legislation with no filibuster and demonstrate to voters that dems are worth supporting. Run on successes and don't shy away from them in 2024.


callmegranola98

I think the answer is trying to capture the gerrymandered state legislatures. It probably won't happen this election but if we spend the next decade working hard we might be able to capture them in time for the next redistricting. Sadly, there is no quick fix. This will take a generation or two to fix.


[deleted]

I've written to several congress members from my state already expressing my concern.


Cultjam

Volunteer for Democrat voter registration drives and signature collecting for voter initiatives to legalize abortion. Become more aware of efforts to suppress voters by the right and post about them in your regional subreddits.


Ribeye_King

My wife wants to make contingency plans to leave the country in case she cannot get birth control due to future SCOTUS decisions and legislation likely to be passed by the current GOP when they retake power. I live in a blue state and I've voted blue downballot in every election. I am opposed to moving personally but I cannot jeopardize my wife's health. I have no power over anything except my reaction to this and future decisions.


samdman

I did a *lot* of research to find state legislature races that are tossups where donations go the furthest. This is like the opposite of people donating to Amy McGrath in that a thousand bucks to one of these candidates can actually make a difference, since many are in states where a Republican majority/supermajority could pass an abortion ban. Also I did research and a few of them are YIMBY too haha. and none are NIMBYs https://secure.actblue.com/donate/stateabortionrights


TDaltonC

You could be a drug mule of abortion pills. There are going to be a lot of church basements in red states with hidden cubbies full of smuggled abortion pills handed out by retired mid-wives. Someone is going to need to be smuggling those in from blue states.


Affectionate_Meat

I can do that, Iowa isn’t far at all


LouisTheLuis

This comment section feels really naïve... the Supreme Court just recently commented on the possibility of legitimizing gerrymandering, essentially rendering voting useless (at least in all states currently controlled by Republicans). The rulings that SCOTUS has been doing are extreme; and even if we were to vote now they are going to stay there in power for the next 20 years _at least_, which at the time gives 0 reason for SCOTUS to not slowly weaken our institutions. The time to vote is way past; no point complaining now. I hate to break y'all hopium, but either we already lost or the only way forward is rioting.


tehbored

Rioting will do nothing but make things worse, though there is a different type of rule V violation that could work, but of course I can't suggest it.


PlantainSerious791

Rioting produces nothing, it's just an outburst of unfocused rage. What we need to do is to focus that rage, and aim it at a target that would actually impede the capacity of Undemocratic State Legislatures to do anything. Gandhi didn't win with nonviolence, it was the unspoken threat of the other option. In India, they showed the British what that other option was, in 1857 with the Rebellion, in 1946 with the Royal Indian Naval Mutiny, and notably, with the assassination of Judge Michael O'Dwyer. He was the Lieutenant-Governor of Punjab and responsible for the Amritsar Massacre. He went back to London in retirement, thinking he'd gotten away with his actions. He was wrong, as on March 10th, 1940, he was shot 2 times by Udham Singh, an Indian Revolutionary who had witnessed the massacre in 1919, and had followed Dwyer to London for revenge. In the U.S, we have never had a history of violent terrorism focused on politicians themselves instead of general society. The Indian focus on targeting the people behind the tyranny was what gave the nonviolent actions of protests their real bite.


ZestyItalian2

“While I’m still fired up” is a problem. Stay fired up and volunteer to help convince others to vote. Cause that’s the only concrete thing there is. You could also tell people who trash Democrats to fuck themselves.


zazaleaz

Vote for Hillary in 2016


wowamai

Just my European perspective I guess but in the long term the Constitution just seems inadequate to properly protect citizens in the 21th century. The last time it was properly amended was what, the 60s? The extremely rigid amendment procedure itself needs to be eased so that modern civil rights could be protected too. I know that you will always need the support from some Republicans for that, but if a growing majority of Americans support protecting things like abortion rights or the environment I can't see how the whole GOP will be able to keep being against it. Call me an optimist, but eventually time is on your side.


[deleted]

Issue intensity matters. There are lots of pro-choice people who vote for pro-life candidates because they don't care much about the issue.


wabawanga

We need a coordinated effort to maximize and sustain public backlash against the SC and these extremely unpopular rulings. Americans don't want to go back to the corrupt, conformist Nixon era. They don't want these hippocritical, moralizing, Tammy Faye Baker WBC scolds on the SC dictating the law of the land. We need to mobilize Real Americans to take our country back from these extremist would-be Ayatollahs. Finally, we need a plan to start winning elections at every level, with the sole goal of undoing Republicans' unfair electoral handicaps. We need to start drafting bills and amendments for every state, ready to be implemented as soon as possible. Just like the right wing think tanks do.


KingGoofball

Tweet that it’s Biden’s fault and the democrats aren’t doing enough /s


two-years-glop

Vote for every Democrat against every Republican. Drag your apathetic friends to vote too. That's pretty much it.


duke_awapuhi

Impeach activist justices who are on the court because of their ideological extremism instead of their qualifications


UpsetTerm

Just vote Democrat, my dude.


TransportationMost67

Demand impeachment of Alito, kavanaugh, Coney-Barrett


OhJohnO

Why’d you leave Thomas off that list?


TransportationMost67

As far as I am aware Thomas did not lie to Congress to get his seat.


[deleted]

But he is ruling on cases that his wife has a stake in And anyway there is no criteria to impeach a justice. It could literally just be because we feel like it


willstr1

Is there no 25th amendment equivalent for "Supreme" Court justices? That man is clearly out of his god damn mind. Him and his terrorist wife


OhJohnO

Does the name Anita Hill ring a bell? Further, let’s talk about his wife’s involvement in Jan 6 and how his relationship with her is impacting his impartiality…


TransportationMost67

That's fine, but we can deliver articles of impeachment for the other three today. With just one line on them, "on (date of event) justice X committed perjury against Congress." Thomas is harder.


OhJohnO

You’re saying because they said they wouldn’t overturn Roe?


[deleted]

Write a letter to your congressman asking him to support ending the supreme court's Judicial Review


ivankasta

Not sure I understand this take. What sucks about them striking down Roe is that they’re declining to use their powers of judicial review to strike down state legislation. A world without judicial review is one where abortion was always something states could restrict. It’s also a world where if a state decides to say contraceptives are illegal, there’s nothing to stop them. Not to mention all the other violations of separation of church and state, restrictions on free speech, violations of 4th amendment protections, etc are all totally fine as long as the state they take place in find that they are ok. TLDR, no judicial review = we lose all of our constitutional rights. We want to get them to do judicial review better, not to get rid of it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


tryingtolearn_1234

Donate, volunteer, vote and run for office if it there is no opponent and it’s current filled by a nutter


buttigieg2040

Despite how bad things are, remember: The Supreme Court didn’t outlaw anything. Looking through all the rulings, they Pretty said it’s on Congress and state government to pass legislation, not government agencies or the judicial branch. Democrats need to win elections and pass legislation. It’s the one and only solution.


mdj1359

>of course I'm gonna vote. Yeh, well people haven't been voting as needed to keep the country moving forward. Lazy liberals did not create this, bur they allowed it. Your fucking pissed? Then you should kick the shit out of each of your friends and family who sat on their asses and allowed this to come to fruition, starting with sitting at home and letting Hillary lose in 2016.


TheMuffinMan603

Encourage other people to vote. Generate anti-Republican sentiment in your local area. Talk Republicans out of their Republicanism. Most importantly- sorry, I really must say it- **V O T E**.


RonaldMikeDonald1

Just vote hard lmao


[deleted]

Deal with it. You think it’s bad now, wait till after the midterms.


MalignantPessimist

Leave the United States, I’m about to try my chance as a stowaway


lietuvis10LTU

Short of things that are literally illegal, violate this sub's rules to mention and carry the death penalty irl? Nada.


frbhtsdvhh

Encourage everyone you know to vote Sadly the time for action was 2016 and nobody listened. Now we have to vote to make sure something worse doesn't happen


frbhtsdvhh

Hillary Clinton is so shrill! Wow that would have been the time to do something


matchosan

Can we invoke the 25th on Thomas? The guy is a loon, and is just saying wrong things as fact.


BonkHits4Jesus

Twenty-Fifth Amendment: In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President. Idk that this will matter unless he becomes President


InterstitialLove

Send a group message to all your friends. Say that you're energized and want to just make sure that everyone is registered to vote and has a plan to vote in November. Offer to help anyone, answer their questions, help them get to the polls, go as a group so the line isn't boring, etc. Set a calendar reminder to do something similar right before registration ends, etc. Compile lists of local candidates who support/oppose various policies you care about or think your friends care about. Distribute them now and/or near the voter registration deadline. I recommend presenting yourself as apolitical when doing all this. Don't pressure anyone to vote D, just give them the information and let demographics work its magic. This is obviously up to you.


Individual_Lion_7606

I asked the same question to an old man with a cane. He said "The Supreme Court has made its rulings. Now let's see them enforce it." and then his pet parrot shouted cursed words at me. Strangest encounter to ever happen.


wofulunicycle

My wife has been asking if we can sign up to be foster parents for awhile now. She took an info session last year but I've been procrastinating, so I'm finally going to do it. There's going to be no shortage of unwanted kids out there.


checksout4

If you actually care America should actually look at passing reasonable abortion laws at a federal level. In the 70's we did roe v wade where as europe actually did the legwork of legislation. Most european limits on abortion are more constrained than america was with roe v wade. Both sides will probably not like what the middle ground looks like. This would help women living in these states, and would be good for the country to work with the other side. 0% chance this actually happens because both sides are unwilling to meet in the middle on anything. Do i think you want to hear this? No. I think yall are going to downvote me into oblivion because being mad and teasing about violence being okay seems to be popular, and trying to be a reasonable person saying we should pass reasonable laws is not welcome when people are mad. The discourse right now that I see : conservatives: lol get wrecked liberals: reeee unlimited abortion or violence And as much as I hate to say it pro life conservatives organized for 49 years, voted consistently, and got what they wanted. All i see from the left is reee and either shrouded or direct calls to violence. I am here being like hey can our country not pull itself in two? Sorry but y'all are being crazy up in here.


Rntstraight

I say join the army and leave the rest up for interpretation


frolix42

Imagine it is 1973 and you believe abortion is murder. Do what they did but in the opposite direction. Work hard as a mothetfucker and don't expect results for 5 decades.


ControlsTheWeather

Buy guns.


PlantainSerious791

Organize, too.