sufficient time has passed for takes on this subject to actually be informed by more than snap judgements, ideological impulses, and ill-advised guesstimates. also, virtually all votes have now been counted. if you'd like to post about your theories of what went wrong and why, you should now have the data to argue it without things just being a total clusterfuck. thank you for your compliance

[Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20250125102944/https://www.rawstory.com/trump-deportation-plan-2670991902/) [...] Mexico refused a U.S. military plane access to its airspace when flying migrants to Guatemala. And as American Immigration Council senior fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick noted, another Central American country appears to have also not allowed the United States to fly over its airspace, given the flight's unusually circuitous route. "This deportation flight had to go all the way around the Yucatan first, and then it went through Costa Rica, suggesting Honduras may also have denied permission," Reichlin-Melnick posted to Bluesky. He observed that countries declining to accommodate the U.S. by granting it access to its airspace could be a result of them perceiving his use of military C-130 planes "as an insult." As Virginia Commonwealth University associate political science professor Michael Paarlberg wrote [...], carrying out deportations requires both the country deporting migrants and the country accepting them to coordinate. [...] "It should be obvious, but doesn’t seem widely understood that the US can’t unilaterally deport people," Paarlberg explained. "This gives those countries a degree of leverage over the US if they simply refuse, as Mexico just did." [...]

TikTok earmuffs and MAGA hats adorned partygoers at Sunday's inauguration celebration for the incoming President Donald Trump and the video-sharing platform he once tried to ban. Called the Power 30 Awards, the party occurred hours after TikTok began restoring services, and honored social media influencers who had helped most with Trump's re-election. At the party, TikTok influencers recorded moments on small cameras and mingled over an open bar at Sax Restaurant and Lounge in downtown Washington. Free swag flowed: TikTok beanies, shot glasses and Trump merchandise. The party was hosted by Raquel Debono, known for organizing "Make America Hot Again" conservative dating events, and CJ Pearson, co-chair of the Republican National Committee Youth Advisory Council. "2024 was the first influencer election," Pearson told Reuters at the party. "When we look at the mandate that President Trump was given, it was because of young voters, and young voters were reached uniquely because of TikTok." [...]

We've all seen the clip of the last few grafs of Budde's speech, but this is the full text, and it's outstanding. This is the sort of rational, reasoned discourse so crucial to an enlightened society. I am not religious but stand in awe of the quality of her persuasive prose. She would have made quite the columnist had she decided not to help others even more broadly.

President Donald Trump on Friday said he plans to take executive action to overhaul — or possibly end — the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, slamming the agency for its response to historic floods in North Carolina.

[Archived](http://web.archive.org/web/20250122003820/https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/washington-national-cathedral-bishop-trump-1235242803/) Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde delivered a sermon calling for mercy on people who are scared. The new president was in the audience. Here’s what she said: >“Let me make one final plea, Mr. President. Millions have put their trust in you, and as you told the nation yesterday, you have felt the providential hand of a loving God. In the name of our God, I ask you to have mercy upon the people in our country who are scared now. There are gay, lesbian, and transgender children in Democratic, Republican, and independent families — some who fear for their lives. The people who pick our crops and clean our office buildings, who labor in poultry farms and meatpacking plants, who wash the dishes after we eat in restaurants and work the night shifts in hospitals — they may not be citizens or have the proper documentation, but the vast majority of immigrants are not criminals. They pay taxes and are good neighbors. They are faithful members of our churches and mosques, synagogues, gurdwara, and temples. >I ask you to have mercy, Mr. President, on those in our communities whose children fear their parents will be taken away, and that you help those who are fleeing war zones and persecution in their own lands to find compassion and welcome here. Our God teaches us that we are to be merciful to the stranger, for we were all once strangers in this land. May God grant us the strength and courage to honor the dignity of every human being, to speak the truth to one another in love, and walk humbly with each other and our God, for the good of all people — the good of all people in this nation and the world. Amen.”

> In my recently published book, Dignity Not Debt, I argue that when it comes to debt, policymakers should turn away from the free-market framework and toward the principle of human dignity. The free market approach, which is grounded in an ideal of efficiency, has been effective in large part because it purports to offer a clear and universal north star to guide debt policy. Therefore, if we are to replace it, we must choose a new guiding principle that is equally clear and universally understood. The principle of human dignity is the best candidate because it captures our shared understanding that everyone possesses an inherent dignity which others must respect. At its core, the principle of human dignity recognizes the intrinsic worth of every person. A foundational concept in human rights law, the principle is already deployed around the globe and codified in dozens of human rights instruments. It carries substantive human rights obligations, including rights to privacy and due process, rights to be free from discrimination, and rights to housing, education, and water, among others. > > What would America’s household debt landscape look like with human dignity as our north star? How would we decide what credit to encourage and what to discourage or abolish? I offer three tenets, based on the overarching principle of human dignity, that are applicable to debt policy. These tenets serve as a foundation for a new taxonomy that reflects the reality of household debt and provides policymakers with tools for crafting just and sensible debt policy. First, respect for human dignity requires that each person be able to meet their needs and enjoy life without degradation and fear. Second, respect for human dignity requires that no person be treated as a means to another’s end. Third, respect for human dignity requires true equality—not just equal treatment, but a redistribution of power, wealth, and resources to ensure equal dignity for all.

No notes.

I feel like this is probably pretty effective. I feel like it should be a thing. E: see also https://beehaw.org/post/16953380 E2: https://19thnews.org/2024/11/4b-movement-south-korea-social-media-trump-presidency/

Once again, Aileen Cannon demonstrates her fealty to Trump.

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/53215812

> So what would a fragmented America look like? > > Likely similar to America’s early days that repeated itself during the pandemic where the most powerful states were functionally regional authorities. California is the fifth-largest economy in the world. Texas is ninth, bigger than Canada, while New York is eleventh, just ahead of Russia. Florida is the sixteenth largest economy in the world, just behind Mexico, while Illinois is twentieth, just behind Saudi Arabia. Like with the Virginian slave economy of old, smaller states around them would be pulled in by the gravitational force of this power, forming regional governing coalitions along natural economic and social interests. > > This splintering doesn’t need a decisive moment where the United States of America all of a sudden is not–it can just be the accelerating result of the degradation of our system we have been watching unfold in real time, as state governments step in to fill the growing void left by the federal government, and one day we all wake up and realize that California is functionally the Western states’ federal government. > > But it could be driven by a decisive moment where the American system irrevocably breaks in some way. Imagine a future where California tries to do something really ambitious to try to fight an exceedingly destructive climate crisis, and the Supreme Court tells them they cannot do it. Say California invokes James Madison’s belief, supported by all Supreme Courts before the Roberts Court, that states can defy the Court, and they decide that it’s more important to stop the flames from enveloping their state than to adhere to the partisan whims of a corrupt institution which awarded itself God-like power in the 19th century to functionally declare slavery legal and spark a Civil War. What happens if the fifth-largest economy in the world just goes ahead and does it anyway? Does the Supreme Court send in the army? How does this work?

Dear god, no. This is an abjectly terrible idea. Dems aren't going to win until they stop being the other party of billionaires who are centre-right at best yet claiming to be for the working man. Come on, *learn* something from this election. We want a Sanders or AOC, not this milquetoast rejection of the full scope of the Overton window. This is going to be a crazy four years, and to suggest we come out on the other side wanting a return to the same bullshit that held wages and lifestyles back for, by then, 50 years, is a failure to read the room. No one wants what the Democratic party currently offers, and I don't see her suddenly becoming progressive. We don't need another president on the cusp of getting Social Security when elected. We want that for ourselves after paying into the system for so long, but that's not going to happen. Find a new standard-bearer or die. Learn. Adapt. Run on real change, not the incremental shit that was resoundingly rejected and so generously provided us with the shitshow we're about to endure. Voters stay home when you do that, and here we are. I mean, how many CEOs need to be killed before anyone gets the message that what they're offering has the current panache of liver and onions? Doesn't matter how well it's prepared; the world has moved on, and whoever gets the nomination in '28 needs to as well. Harris is not that candidate.

>Adm. Linda Fagan is the first top military officer to be terminated under the new administration.

[Archived version](http://web.archive.org/web/20241123121118/https://futurism.com/the-byte/elon-musk-bullying-federal-worker) [[Original version](https://www.wsj.com/tech/musk-unleashes-online-army-on-federal-workers-a-tough-way-to-find-out-shes-losing-her-job-f57a2e94) is behind a paywall.] Elon Musk [who promised to fire government employees en masse through DOGE, the new Department of Government Efficiency to be created by U.S. President-elect Donald Trump] has taken his animus to another level by cruelly singling out an individual federal employee named Ashley Thomas, who works a relatively obscure job at the US International Development Finance Corporation, to be harassed online. [...] Things kicked off when a popular right wing account ridiculed Thomas in a tweet, writing, "I don't think the US Taxpayer should pay for the employment of a 'Director of Climate Diversification (she/her).'" Musk quoted the post with a dunk of his own, effectively inviting his hundreds of millions of followers to join in on harassing this random government worker. "So many fake jobs," Musk wrote in the tweet, which now has over 200,000 likes. Seemingly, the billionaire culture warrior saw the word "diversification" and thought "diversity," "DEI," or some other form of "wokeness" — his favorite punching bags — as did his many followers. "You aren't getting rid of all the good jobs are you?" replied one of his courtiers. "I just applied for Chief Climate Gender Diversification Administrator." [...] Aside from the harassment and the abhorrent massacring of comedy on display here, this is a truly bizarre job to single out. The work of climate diversification, a subset of economic diversification, does not involve sitting around at the office and inventing pronouns or whatever Musk is imagining, but to develop strategies to reduce the impact of climate change on various sectors of the economy, especially agriculture. If certain food crops end up failing, for example, diversifying what we grow ensures that we don't all literally starve. But Musk and his cronies clearly heard the job and thought it sounded like out-of-control wokeness. [...] At any rate, Musk clearly knows what he's doing here by making that tweet. And if he doesn't, he's an idiot. In the past, Musk disparaged Twitter's former head of trust and safety Yoel Roth by more or less implying that he was pedophile, which his followers capitalized on by sending him death threats. So intense was the onslaught of hate that followed that Yoel felt forced to flee his home. That, and this latest episode, are a testament to the power of even just one tossed-off post by Musk — who now tweets as if it's his job.

Sounds like reeducation to me. Apologies if this is a repost. I feel like people need to see this. https://futurism.com/neoscope/rfk-jr-adderall-labor-camps https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/rfk-jr-kennedy-addicts-wellness-farms-b2585835.html

[Archived version](http://web.archive.org/web/20241108203857/https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/readers-opinion/guest-commentary/article295205969.html) The presidential election this week marks a first in the history of the United States when Donald Trump defeated Vice President Kamala Harris while awaiting sentencing on 34 criminal charges. The president-elect has faced criminal indictments in three other cases as well. Justice Juan Merchan is scheduled to sentence Trump on those 34 charges on Nov. 26. In an op-ed published by the Kansas City Star on Friday, journalist Bill Dalton argued that Judge Merchan can honor "the rule of law." Dalton writes, "The American people did the unthinkable — they elected a convicted felon president. Judge Juan Merchan should now do what was once unthinkable — force a president-elect to take the oath of office in a jail cell." [...] Dalton continues, "That message needs to be sent because, after Inauguration Day, the rule of law will cease to exist for sitting presidents thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court's immunity ruling. Trump proved Tuesday, aided and abetted by 72 million voters, that crime does indeed pay. He thumbed his nose at America's once respected system of justice. He made a laughingstock of prosecutors and the judicial process. He turned what used to be a political liability for candidates into a political asset for fundraising." Dalton argued that Merchan "should sentence and jail Trump while he is still a private citizen, no better nor more privileged than any of the millions of people who voted for or against him." "Merchan should show the same courage that Vice President Mike Pence showed on January 6 when he stood for the rule of law, risking his life and destroying his political career in the process," writes Dalton. [...]

[Archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20250119141700/https://newrepublic.com/post/190402/bill-gates-trump-meeting) Another billionaire chooses Trump. This time, it’s the historically liberal Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates. Gates told The Wall Street Journal that he was “impressed” by the president-elect. “I had a chance to go have a long, and actually quite intriguing dinner with him,” Gates said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. He noted that he talked to Trump for three hours, along with Trump aide Susie Wiles and Gates’s aide Larry Cohen. [...] It’s a stunning remark from Gates, one of the richest people in the world, who previously said he donated more than $50 million to Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign. The news of the meeting comes after Trump claimed last month that the billionaire was begging to have a meeting with him. [...]

I started following Shives because of his takes on Trek. But this seriously has one of the best lines I've heard delivered in an offhand, sardonic manner past college. I'm not going to ruin it for anyone, but as we start the hell that is tomorrow, I hoped I could share a laugh. Be well, be safe, stay warm.

> The rule will affect more than 15 million Americans, raising their credit scores by an estimated average of 20 points. No Americans will have medical debt listed on their credit report — down from approximately 46 million Americans who had this kind of debt on their credit report in 2020. > > The vice president also announced that states and localities have already utilized American Rescue Plan (ARP) funds to support the elimination of over $1 billion in medical debt for more than 700,000 Americans and that jurisdictions are on track to eliminate approximately $15 billion in medical debt for up to almost 6 million Americans. > > “No one should be denied economic opportunity because they got sick or experienced a medical emergency,” Harris said in a statement Tuesday. “This will be lifechanging for millions of families, making it easier for them to be approved for a car loan, a home loan, or a small-business loan. As someone who has spent my entire career fighting to protect consumers and lower medical bills, I know that our historic rule will help more Americans save money, build wealth, and thrive.”

As [@spit_evil_olive_tips@beehaw.org](https://beehaw.org/u/spit_evil_olive_tips) predicted not too many hours ago, it has begun.

this was proposed by [@t3rmit3@beehaw.org](https://beehaw.org/u/t3rmit3) and after some discussion we agree. in t3rmit3's simple terms: > State-level stuff, ballot measures, etc, no problem, but IMO there’s not going to be any productive discussion of the presidential race right now; there’s still too little information, too many emotions, etc. the discussions already started about the presidential election will remain open, but in our view sufficient time has been given for venting frustration and expressing emotion about the result. additional discussion is likely to just be nasty and vitriolic as the blame game starts up between Democrats, between progressives and centrists, between identity groups, and so on. we don't want that and it's not interesting discussion. it will also be ill-informed discussion until much more in-depth studies are undertaken on the result. and in any case, a far better question than "what went wrong?" (which is beyond the ability of any person on Beehaw to influence) is "*what can we do now*?" (which people on Beehaw can influence, even in small ways). there are three months before Trump's second inauguration, and that is vital time for organizing, networking, and workshopping. we would strongly encourage you to make posts, and off-Beehaw make connections, on those subjects. but at the very least: please don't post further US presidential stuff--we'll be removing it.

[Archived version](https://web.archive.org/web/20241226131107/https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/5055171-constitution-insurrection-trump-disqualification/) *This is an opinionated article by legal experts: Evan Davis was editor-in-chief of the Columbia Law Review and David Schulte was editor-in-chief of the Yale Law Journal. Both clerked for Justice Potter Stewart. Davis is a New York lawyer who served as president of the New York City Bar and Schulte is a Chicago investment banker.*-- The Constitution provides that an oath-breaking insurrectionist is ineligible to be president. This is the plain wording of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. “No person shall … hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” This disability can be removed by a two-thirds vote in each House. Disqualification is based on insurrection against the Constitution and not the government. The evidence of Donald Trump’s engaging in such insurrection is overwhelming. The matter has been decided in three separate forums, two of which were fully contested with the active participation of Trump’s counsel. [...] The unlikelihood of congressional Republicans doing anything that might elect Harris as president is obvious. But Democrats need to take a stand against Electoral College votes for a person disqualified by the Constitution from holding office unless and until this disability is removed. No less is required by their oath to support and defend the Constitution. [...] [Edit typo.]