NSFW THE TRUMPOCALYPSE

[MadamSarcastra]

The Military Is Officially Ignoring Trump’s Transgender Order

Boy Scouts Chief Apologizes For 'Political Rhetoric' In Trump's Speech

Lindsey Graham rebels over Trump's treatment of Sessions | Daily Mail Online


Wow, it's been a real banner week for Heir Frumpenstein! LOL The military is ignoring him, the Boy Scouts had to apologize for him, and Republicans are disgusted with him.... love it.

 

[Amy SF]

Mayor Invites Trans People Banned From Military To Join Police Department | HuffPost

 

[Amy SF]

Texas May Make It Illegal To Talk Politics At Home If You Get A Mail-In Ballot | HuffPost

Spoiler

F*** Texas.

 

[Calliegirl]

Those of you moaning about the Democrats you'd still vote for them in an election tomorrow, right? Better to vote for the lesser of two evils. Democrats not voting is one of the reasons that Trump got in.

I always vote, usually for a Democrat. I'm just not sure I want to identify as one anymore (or with any other party) since they've been pretty useless lately. The only times it's useful to identify with a party is during the primaries anyway.

 

[MadamSarcastra]

I always vote, usually for a Democrat. I'm just not sure I want to identify as one anymore (or with any other party) since they've been pretty useless lately. The only times it's useful to identify with a party is during the primaries anyway.

I think I'm way too liberal to call myself a Democrat.... LOL

 

[MadamSarcastra]

The Past 5 GOP Presidents Have Used Fraud and Treason to Steer Themselves to Electoral Victory

 

[Spang]

Those of you moaning about the Democrats you'd still vote for them in an election tomorrow, right? Better to vote for the lesser of two evils. Democrats not voting is one of the reasons that Trump got in.

Voting for the lesser evil every four years got us to where we are today. Whenever there's a friendlier face in the White House, we take to the streets less aggressively, or not at all. We allow a Democratic president to get away with atrocities that a Republican president could only dream of doing. When a Republican inevitably moves in and continues those same atrocities, then, and only then, do we seem to give a ****.

 

[Amy SF]

I think I'm way too liberal to call myself a Democrat.... LOL

Democratic Socialists of America

Not a political party, actually, but a very well-respected (by some) organization that has been around a while and is now attracting a lot of new members and new energy, especially among millennials frustrated by the Democratic Party's seeming inability to effect real progressive change and to prevent the ascendancy of Trump and the Republicans now in charge of the country.

 

[MadamSarcastra]

Democratic Socialists of America

Not a political party, actually, but a very well-respected (by some) organization that has been around a while and is now attracting a lot of new members and new energy, especially among millennials frustrated by the Democratic Party's seeming inability to effect real progressive change and to prevent the ascendancy of Trump and the Republicans now in charge of the country.

I'm too politically exhausted to even think about that, frankly.... LOL

 

[MadamSarcastra]

A Manhattan Skyline Sketch by Trump Sells at Auction for $29,000

Yeah, it definitely looks like the work of a three-year-old....

 

[FortyTwo]

Voting for the lesser evil every four years got us to where we are today. Whenever there's a friendlier face in the White House, we take to the streets less aggressively, or not at all. We allow a Democratic president to get away with atrocities that a Republican president could only dream of doing. When a Republican inevitably moves in and continues those same atrocities, then, and only then, do we seem to give a ****.

Spang, I hear you, for sure. But the answer to this isn't to not vote for the lesser of the two evils we're presented with - it's to vote for the Democrat and actually do the things you're describing. That's currently our only true, realistic solution.

If you want to overthrow the government or something be my guest, but I don't see that happening, and that's the only thing that would actually solve this issue in the way you and I want it solved. The Democrats aren't going away and neither are the Republicans.

The other best option we can hope for is that this breaks the Republicans up, the Democrats become the new right-wing party (sliding into the position we already know they're in), and we end up with a new, better left-wing party. Which is an extremely unlikely scenario, but. In that event I'll be right there with you.

Until then, the only thing to do is pressure Democrats to take real leftist action, and to make sure that people understand a Democrat in the White House still needs to be protested, aggressively.

ETA: Actually I want to hear what your ideal scenario is, thinking realistically. I agree the Democrats aren't viable, but I think they're the only realistic option. What do you say to convince me that there's a better way and that it has any chance of succeeding rather than backfiring? If you can convince me I want you to, because that would be great, but as it is I genuinely cannot imagine any better scenario that we have a shot in hell of obtaining.

 

[Amy SF]

Back when I thought Hillary Clinton was going to win, I was telling people, go ahead and vote for her and we'll keep her feet to the fire and make sure she has a real progressive agenda that helps people. I was confident that she would do so and she would enjoy broad support and be willing to take constructive criticism.

A lot of voters said no. She wasn't "pure" enough for them.

So we got Donald Trump instead, and instead of a president continuing Obama's legacy, we have one so jealous of and obsessed with Barack Obama that he's bound and determined to destroy Obama's legacy (and the American government as well) and wipe him and everything he did from the history books. And the people who refused to vote for Hillary went out and protested, and instead of having a president willing to listen to their concerns, they have a president who talks about them the way Hitler talked about the Jews. All because they didn't vote for the Democratic candidate.

 

[Amy SF]

Amy— We're suing Donald Trump over his illegal maneuvers to sell American water systems, bridges and roads to the highest bidder.

We won’t let Trump use his Presidency to help his friends on Wall St. make even more money while real people suffer the consequences.

The best part: this lawsuit is winnable — but we need your support! Pitch in to help fund the legal battle against Trump.

​

Amy,

We're suing Donald Trump.1,2

In January, Trump formed an illegal "Infrastructure Council" — a.k.a. a massive corporate giveaway and attempt to sell American water systems, bridges and roads to the highest bidder.

And *surprise* the Council's co-chairs (and real estate developers) Richard LeFrak and Steve Roth both stand to profit significantly off the deals they’re crafting. It's not only wrong — it's illegal.

We won't let Trump and his Wall Street friends sell off our public infrastructure for profit. Are you with us?

Donate to take on Trump in court!

Our nation desperately needs federal investments in infrastructure.

The lack of investment in our public water systems over the decades has led to unaffordable water service rates, and in some places, to water that’s unsafe to drink or bathe with. I've seen too many families over the years worry about whether the water coming out of their tap is safe to give to their child. People deserve better than this.

Yet Trump wants to take advantage of this need to spin deals for his buddies on Wall Street.

It's disgusting.

For years, Food & Water Watch has partnered with communities to lift up the voices of those impacted by our crumbling infrastructure and demand real solutions.Communities deserve a right to have a say in how their infrastructure is maintained – and to know if Trump is making his friends even richer by building it.

We believe that President Trump’s "Infrastructure Council" has operated in violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act ever since he created it in January 2017. We're suing Trump to void all actions taken by his “Infrastructure Council” and to compel the Administration to disclose the role its financially conflicted co-chairs have played in shaping the President’s infrastructure policy.

Donate to Fight Trump in Court!

Food & Water Watch is proud to stand with communities across the country who are being impacted by decisions made in back-room deals.

Food & Water Watch is powered by supporters like YOU. We don't take any corporate or government funding in order to stay uncompromised — a position that allows us to hold elected officials like Donald Trump accountable. It also means we rely on the support of individuals to fund this work (and pay lawyers!).

We think we can win this lawsuit and shut down Trump's outrageous back-room deal — but we need your support.

Will you pitch in to support the legal battle against Trump?

The answer to our problems is NOT to sell off our roads, bridges and water systems to the highest bidder.

Done the right way, we can rebuild our crumbling infrastructure while spurring economic growth in rural areas, creating good-paying jobs in major cities, and ensuring that every American has access to paved roads, safe schools and clean water.

Together, we can build a better future and hold Trump accountable to the laws of the land!

Onward together,

Wenonah Hauter
Executive Director
Food & Water Watch
wenonah(at)fwwatch(dot)org

1. Lawsuit: Food & Water Watch v. Donald Trump, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Commerce, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, filed July 25, 2017.
2. Lawsuit Challenges Secrecy of White House Advisers on Infrastructure, New York Times, July 25, 2017.


We'll never take money from the corporations that got us into this mess. Not one cent.
Food & Water Watch is powered by people like YOU.
Donate

Food & Water Watch
1616 P St. NW, Suite 300 • Washington DC 20036
202-683-2500

This email that was just sent to me is the first time I'm reading about this. It somehow didn't get much, if any, coverage in the media, which prefer to spend more time obsessing over Trump's nonstop tweets accusing HIS OWN PEOPLE of disloyalty and general skankiness. I'm dismayed but not surprised.

 

[MadamSarcastra]

What a gem.... Anthony Scaramucci congratulated his estranged wife on the birth of their child by text message

 

[Mischief]

What a gem.... Anthony Scaramucci congratulated his estranged wife on the birth of their child by text message

And the child was born on Monday and he didn't go see him until Friday. (The baby is in the neonatal ICU.)

Great dad.

ETA: Ooh, I see from the article that Scaramucci's mother hasn't visited her grandchild and says "there's a reason" for that.

I predict that it's going to be an ugly divorce.

 

[MadamSarcastra]

And the child was born on Monday and he didn't go see him until Friday. (The baby is in the neonatal ICU.)

Great dad.

Agreeing wholeheartedly with the sarcasm, that is. Cripes, that guy is such a friggin' tool....

 

[Spang]

ETA: Actually I want to hear what your ideal scenario is, thinking realistically. I agree the Democrats aren't viable, but I think they're the only realistic option. What do you say to convince me that there's a better way and that it has any chance of succeeding rather than backfiring? If you can convince me I want you to, because that would be great, but as it is I genuinely cannot imagine any better scenario that we have a shot in hell of obtaining.

Ideally, someone who has spent his or her entire career fighting for working-class people; someone who is able to convince working-class white people that they have more in common with working-class people of color than wealthy white people; someone who believes in collectivism over individualism; someone who realizes that capitalism is the root cause, etc. Someone like that would be president, and the people would remind him or her regularly who they work for.

But it's the responsibility of the candidate to earn the support of the people. Bernie Sanders failed to do that in the primaries, and Hillary Clinton failed to do that in general.

 

[Mischief]

Agreeing wholeheartedly with the sarcasm, that is. Cripes, that guy is such a friggin' tool....

Yup. He did have time to go on multiple rants about his public financial disclosure being "leaked." I think he needs to brush up what the words "public financial disclosure" mean.

 

[Mischief]

someone who is able to convince working-class white people that they have more in common with working-class people of color than wealthy white people;

Has such a person ever existed in the U.S.?

 

[Jamie in Chile]

I think hypothetically you could hate the democrats with a passion and spend most of your energies campaigning for major reform of the whole system and still vote democrat, nothing wrong with that.

For those of you who don't follow politics in the UK, it has been interesting to see in the 2015 general election Labour, the left wing party, went further to the left and did badly. Then in 2017 they went ever further to the left and were being written off as ignoring the centre ground and just obviously going to suffer a heavy defeat...then unexpectedly did quite well.

This mantra that the centre ground brings home the win, which did work for the labour party in the late 90s and early 00s, is now seriously questioned in the UK. By going to the left Labour won more votes from people that didn't normally vote. They actually took vote share off the green party. Trump also has rejected the seeking out of the supposedly decisive moderate independent voter as a key strategy, and instead roused a new type of supporter that might previously have felt alienated.

I wonder if the Democrats could risk going to the left in the same way as Labour. Unlike Hilary Clinton who just stood still on the centre ground.