Lawmakers point to shutting of USAid and accessing federal payment system as markings of ‘constitutional crisis’
Summary
Progressive Democrats accused Donald Trump and Elon Musk of orchestrating a “constitutional crisis” after Musk moved to shut down USAID and gained access to a federal payment system.
Lawmakers, blocked from entering USAID’s headquarters, condemned Trump for granting Musk unchecked power over government functions.
Senator Elizabeth Warren warned that Musk’s involvement could trigger financial instability, while Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called it a “plutocratic coup.”
Why the fuck is it only 'the progressives' that are saying it? This makes it seem like it's a political issue and not a hostile takeover. Fucking ridiculous.
I dumped that into ChatGPT to figure out what that would mean:
"Gold-progressing": If "oro-" means gold, then "orogressive" could describe something advancing toward wealth, golden standards, or prosperity.
"Mountain-moving" or "Mountain-progressing": If we go with the geological meaning, "orogressive" could mean progressing through or overcoming mountains—maybe symbolizing overcoming big challenges.
"Speech-advancing": If "oro-" is tied to oral communication, "orogressive" might mean someone who is progressive in speech, rhetoric, or persuasion.
Honestly, all of those are ironically far more aspirational than "progressive". I give it 4/5 stars for your newly-minted neologism.
It's not exploitation. The system is designed this way. A handful of billionaires own the media, a billionaire bought the presidency and has been handed keys to the White House. This is the pinnacle of what their goals have been all along.
Yeah, but that won’t last forever. Give progressive dems a chance to campaign in earnest for their platform, without the chains of establishment pro-corporate policies around their necks, and you might be surprised how quickly the 90-million non-voters come around.
I strongly recommend looking at what the Polish did. We can have multiple movements all trying to influence outcomes. They don't even need their own candidates, they just have to endorse ones that party elsewhere or have a chance of being picked up by a major coalition (e.g. Sanders, AOC). Over time, that movement gains traction and notoriety, further influencing elections.
Say there's a region that's 60% left-leaning and 40% right-leaning. If the far left splits off from the moderate left, you get 30% far left, 30% moderate left, and 40% right-leaning. The winner in a FPTP election is the party with the most votes. Even though 60% of the voters are still left-leaning, the election will go to the right-leaning party with 40% of the votes. Their 40% beats either of the parties with 30% of the vote.
Canada experienced this phenomenon in the 1993 federal election. The conservatives previously had a majority, but there was a split, and the Reform Party split from the Progressive Conservative party. There were almost as many right-leaning voters as before, but the Liberals won a huge victory. Because of the vote split, a lot of conservative ridings ended up electing a Liberal MP.
Basically, if you care about progressive politics, get rid of First Past The Post. Only once it's gone should you consider splitting the party. Splitting the party while FPTP is in place is just handing victory to the GOP.
Or just run as Republicans to do a hostile takeover. Democrats already are the conservative good government party, and then progressives can create a progressive good government party for balance.
what the hell is wrong with this comment section. The problem here is not the democrats. Fixing he democrats is not going to improve republican shenanigans. Shouting for the minority democrats to do something is like shouting for the green party to do something. The problem is in this idea to blame the good for not being perfect and ignoring that people are fine letting in the bad. My prediction is every one of the the super leftists looking for things to get bad enough for "the revolution" to happen will be seig heiling like their is no tomorrow when the boots hit the neck.
The democrats are refusing to employ any of the government-breaking strategies the republicans just proved, over years as a minority party, can bring the government to crawl. Worse than that, they are enabling everything the republicans are doing. They aren't even putting up a fight. They'd rather be "civil" and "the adults in the room" than actually stop fascism. They are controlled opposition.
I get the first picture but the second? We know democrats do not vote lockstep and we have pretty traitorous members like fettermen are among them. I see 37 voting correctly. This is one thing about when they are in power. People expect them to vote in lockstep like the republicans but that has never been the case.
This "Democrats are the reason we have nazis now" thing is giving "Daddy drinks because you cry." The apathy it generates only helps the worst side keep winning.
Because it's nuts. People scolding the remaining leftists online and debating which sort of voting system they'd appreciate the democrats advocating for next time, meanwhile their Treasury Department now answers to completely unqualified culty broccoli-headed 20 year olds, there's birth quotas for roads funding and nazis are snatching kids from classrooms, the Pres talking about putting immigrants in Guantanamo.
The only way Both Sides nonsense is productive is if the goal is to keep people arguing online. O shi
I know someone in a federal government department. They are actually getting pestered to resign now. Emails several times a day trying to get them to take the buyout scam.
That's not idiots. That's people that don't make much money, hate their job, and saw an opportunity to leave with some change in their pocket while dumpster fire is just smouldering and not a full blown blaze yet.
Quick someone change the Wikipedia of plutocratic to sound really cool and then they both will say they did their research and look like complete morons.