Hopefully they will be voting for Harris to protect their lives and the lives of their daughters. The only future for women with the Republicans is servitude.
My sister married into a Republican asshole family. I’ve met these assholes and actually they are not bad people. Only one of them is actually a total cunt. So should we like wrestle each other harshly or like really go for the jugular with a broken beer bottle?
Does this senator have some recommendations for gout? A couple of them have gout. I want to make sure they have a fair chance.
It will probably go something like this… sister in law, so this one senator said we should have civil war because of Trump. Yeah that retard rapist felon, that one. You do? And is it that really good pie? Okay, well let’s have some pie and talk about it? And how are my sisters kid’s doing?..
Yeah total war over here. I think maybe I’ll organize my family to kick that senator asshole out?
Because every Republican is exactly like your sister. There are plenty of fascists that would excitedly shoot you and your sister for not being devout enough. Get your head out your ass.
The point here is that Republicans are people like you and I. “Crazy Republicans” those are few and far between. I would otherwise believe it when I see them over a hill guns blazing.
One very important aspect of this situation is that they got Trump in office last time because they rigged the electoral college on their favor. However if you compared their population size to the Democratic population size, there are a good ten fold more Democrats than Republicans. So if you wanted a civil war in the style of Hulk vs Superman, the republicans would be represented by a crying baby 🍼.
US is more than okay with environmental laws, voting, education, driving laws, auto/medical insurances, work pay/rights, cannabis reform, etcetera to be a state’s rights issue
what makes something a state’s rights issue versus a federal one?
It is very clear legally speaking. There is a clause specifically to address this issue in the constitution called the supremacy clause. The way that it works is that if there is a federal law that specifies something then it takes priority over state laws. Some of the things that you mentioned would fall into both federal and state categories like education where states have some control but must also abide by federal regulations.
The only exception to this rule is cannabis and the only reason that it has worked this way is because cannabis reform is so widely popular across the US that if the federal government were to withhold funding or otherwise punish states for making and enforcing laws that go against the supremacy clause it would not go over well for the politicians that make that decision. They know that federal cannabis regulations truly are outdated and not in touch with our modern society. That being said, supremacy clause is still in effect and the federal cannabis laws are still absolutely enforceable even in states where cannabis is “legal”. The federal government simply chooses not to enforce those laws there most of the time.
Child labor laws absolutely do not fall into that same category as the vast majority of people don’t believe that child labor laws are outdated. The waters are not muddy on this issue at all.
Tldr if it’s in the constitution that the feds can do it, feds get to do it. If not states rights.
There also a few clauses like the interstate commerce clause which got reinterpreted when FDR had appointed most of the justices to have expansive definitions giving the feds more authority.
edit: The comment above shouldn’t be downvoted. Yes, many of the items they list are not under control of the state or are only under partial control. But, they asked a good question. To me the question is worth a hundred misunderstandings of fact. This person will certainly clean up their facts if they understand how the system was designed to work and why it’s broken. I upvoted them. You should, too.
what makes something a state’s rights issue versus a federal one?
The supremecy clause in the federal constitution prevents a state from passing a law contrary to federal law. There’s three situations:
1.) The federal law can explicitly allow a behavior. A state cannot pass a law to prevent it.
2.) The federal law can explicitly prevent a behavior. A state cannot pass a law that allows it.
3.) There’s no federal law. States can pass laws as they see fit.
Similarly, states have consitutional supremecy clauses to limit their city and county laws. When a state passes a law then what was once for cities and counties to decide is now under control of the state. When the federal passes a law what was once a state decision is now federal. States and federal will almost never repeal a law to allow the smaller subordinate to again decide. Thus, over time, power is consolidated to the state and federal.
Note that while the deconsolidation of power is very much a leftist issue, the semantic “states’ rights” has been adopted by the radical right. It was a slogan of the Confederacy. The argument they made was IMO wise and sound. But, they were leveraging reason for the immoral goal of continuation of slavery. You’ve not been misunderstood. But, it could easily happen if your audience has slightly less reading comprehension than is usually found on Lemmy.
Good. The more racist they get, the more likely they will lose. There are a lot of racist Americans, make no mistake, but even a lot of them get a bad taste in their mouth when the racism gets overt from politicians. They want laws that benefit them as white people, they don’t want to hear about how Biden is a friend to the N-s.
They are actually questioning Biden’s inherently racist decision to only consider black women for certain roles. The Republican position is that race should not be a factor in hiring decisions, and they’re using Biden’s VP and Supreme Court nominations to setup the counterpoint that he is the racist one - racist against whites.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.