By all means, vote to shut down the Electoral College. Shame that was not on the ballot.

Hahahahahah... Oh, that's rich!

Downvote me if you must, but just go see Minority Leader Jeffries's comments downplaying the agenda most of us think should be priority... Like finally holding government officials to account for pedophilia, corruption, and treason. Apparently that's too "revengey" for their billionaire handlers.

Maybe you should do this instead of another dog-and-pony impeachment show for the next two years that at most would lead to pardons from President Vance?

(he would take office if you kick Trump out with an impeachment and conviction)

Finally, some good news

I am personally wondering, if they're going to implement the STOCK act or if it'll be water under the bridge again, or better yet, they do it during Trump in office for brownie points then never again and act like the Republicans stopped them. - https://www.npr.org/2025/09/03/nx-s1-5485340/congress-stock-trading-bill

I have no faith in them, but it was to stop the bleeding, we need to move past two parties and I do agree with that even if I think all the people typing the whataboutisms and how they've seen this before are cowards. You want to complain, give me ideas to fix our shithole instead.

Hakeem Jeffries needs to go first. Let's look back at his awful speech on election night, just to get started.

Standing in front of a crowd of well-wishers and hopefuls, he delivered a speech. A speech that will go down in history as a big ole nothing burger. A speech that is now, less than 12 hours later, largely forgotten in the political and collective memory of an otherwise monumental moment. I surmise this is because he lacks the commanding presence and leadership qualities necessary to serve as Speaker of the House.

His charisma, if it can even be called that, is more akin to that of a Home Depot bag of paver sand. You search through the poorly stacked pile selecting the one with the least holes. Yet, despite that effort, it still spills it’s contents all over the cart on the way to the register. Not a good look.

If that does not speak for itself, then consider this. As a potential Speaker, Mr. Jeffries would face the immense challenge of uniting a fractured party that has not managed to maintain a large and diverse tent of voters since Debbie Wasserman Schultz declared Bernie a non-starter. Mr. Jeffries is simply not capable of standing firm in the face of political opposition. Don’t take my word for it. Perhaps, instead, the ever present consumer advocate Ralph Nader may sway you:

More introspection may lead you to ask yourself whether you are up to leading the House Democrats in their immense and immediate tasks of policy and program restorations and adopting our Constitution’s mandated Congressional independence from the Presidency for the protection and advancement of the livelihoods, peace and freedoms of the American people. There is no indication that you are so willing and prepared. Unfortunately.

His record in Congress has not demonstrated the kind of bold, decisive leadership that the position of Speaker demands. Instead, he has often been seen as a cautious, moderate voice. Dare I say, a voice coming from a very real human (I swear) with a spine made of NeeDoh.

Let’s be frank. In times of crisis or when tough decisions must be made, the leader of the Democratic Party and Speaker of the House is not merely about personality. I understand that. Such positions require a deep understanding of the legislative process, the ability to negotiate, and the resilience to withstand the political pressures that come with the position. Jeffries has not consistently shown these traits in his career. For any informed observers, this must raise serious questions about his suitability for such a high-stakes role.

Finally, to convey my firm belief that Mr. Jeffries is not the right person for the leadership role come January, I paraphrase the amazing Forest Whitaker in his role as PFC Edward Garlick in “Good Morning Vietnam”

Hakeem Jeffries sucks the sweat off a dead man’s balls. I have no idea what that means, sir, but it seems very negative to me.

do it. stop the idiotic gerrymandering bullshit

It's great to see this, but still, basically 40% of the US voted red.

Maybe. I'm not entirely sure on that.

If you just look at the number of red and blue, sure.

Then discount the blue that are overred areas who are mainly there for -war -gas -foodcost. How many of them are going to be honest and vote for their people, those people who would definately NOT vote to dump Electoral college because it has served them well for ages.

Then discount DINO sleepers sitting in Congress who look and talk blue then flip when they are needed?

Then in the same venn circle in many cases, take the remaining blueish moderates who can be bought by your friendly neighborhood oligarch.

We're blue on paper using binary counting; politics is not a binary sport.

Fighting Republican lunatics is step one.

Step two is fighting all the centrist MAGA Lite Democrats.

The only slim chance this and other positive changes might happen is if the US population thanks a page from France and protest non stop. Demand the progressive changes until it happens. Show the corporate Democrats that they are done.

They had votes before but Nevada DNC liked all of political spending over it being a swing state.

Texas could join now, instead of looking at old 2020 coalition.

1. DNC is an Israel first outcome, and fundraising driven, instead of having a winning mission. Ken Martin is better than past, but still.
2. Political class has more power at 50.1% voting differences, and at regional level, more than half the candidates are overrepresented vs underrepresented to their population ratios.
3. Another proposal that would satisfy some of these "power" concerns is doubling the size of house. It doubles political opportunities for incumbents.

We cannot have UBI, because UBI distributes power away from politicians who are left with less discretionary budgets and power to "steal" cash away from citizens through boondoggles. Similar power balance calculus happens with proposals like this.

The dems arent into fixing scams. They wont end it.

But they won't because their leadership wants it. Chuck and Hakeem are corporate dems who like keeping the will of the people in chains.

Sure.

They're going to fuck up like they always do and we'll be back to a Republican majority in no time