• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

Regular Marines in LA with so many National Guard along side that the state can't address wildfires is, perhaps, not a sign supporting that conclusion.

www.ctvnews.ca

Military requesting to pull 200 troops back from California protest duty

The top military commander in charge of troops deployed to Los Angeles to respond to protests against immigration raids has asked Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth if 200 of those forces could be returned to wildfire fighting duty, two U.S. officials told The Associated Press on Monday.
www.ctvnews.ca www.ctvnews.ca
 
brihard said:
Not precisely. Courts will be more limited in the breadth of their orders’ application. It just means a lot of parallel litigation at lower levels.
Click to expand...
Its a de facto gutting, because the people who will need it most in the coming years, namely the undocumented and the asylum seeker, will most likely not be able to afford the exorbitant fees a class action will cost.
 
PrairieFella said:
Its a de facto gutting, because the people who will need it most in the coming years, namely the undocumented and the asylum seeker, will most likely not be able to afford the exorbitant fees a class action will cost.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of lawyers and advocacy groups motivated to fight these, and an injunction in a single case can still apply broadly within a given court’s own territorial jurisdiction. Remember also that these orders aren’t rulings on the merits; they’re interlocutory in nature. The actual merits based arguments will be proceeding in the meantime, will in all likelihood move urgently given the seriousness and irreparable harms in play, and will definitely see consolidation of cases as they climb the appellate ladder.
 
1751383391450.png

Bill Nye Eating GIF by PeacockTV
 
HavokFour said:
View attachment 94360

Bill Nye Eating GIF by PeacockTV
Click to expand...
Back story: Musk is slamming Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’, and threatening to fund primary attacks on fiscally conservative Republicans who support it. He takes issue with how much more debt it will add. The bill has passed the Senate and is going back to the House for a vote. It’ll be close due to the seat distribution in the House.

Musk spent over a quarter billion on the 2024 election. Members of the House have to win a primary and get re-elected every two years. The threat to primary Trump supporters is a potent one that Musk can easily deliver on.
 
brihard said:
Back story: Musk is slamming Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’, and threatening to fund primary attacks on fiscally conservative Republicans who support it. He takes issue with how much more debt it will add. The bill has passed the Senate and is going back to the House for a vote. It’ll be close due to the seat distribution in the House.

Musk spent over a quarter billion on the 2024 election. Members of the House have to win a primary and get re-elected every two years. The threat to primary Trump supporters is a potent one that Musk can easily deliver on.
Click to expand...
Except he spent a bajillion dollars on the Wisconsin Supreme Court election (literally offering money to people to vote) and the liberal judge walked away with it.

His presence in some races may be a deciding factor. Or it may not. Depends on individual circumstances and dynamics at the district/state level.

Mind you, the average GOP congressman has shown that they have the backbone of a jellyfish, so it may work…until Trump threatens to primary them with a MAGA sycophant.

In which case, you have a primary between an incumbent jellyfish, a Trump cultist, and a Musk/Thiel anarcho-capitalist ideologue. Could be interesting! 🍿
 
RangerRay said:
Except he spent a bajillion dollars on the Wisconsin Supreme Court election (literally offering money to people to vote) and the liberal judge walked away with it.

His presence in some races may be a deciding factor. Or it may not. Depends on individual circumstances and dynamics at the district/state level.

Mind you, the average GOP congressman has shown that they have the backbone of a jellyfish, so it may work…until Trump threatens to primary them with a MAGA sycophant.

In which case, you have a primary between an incumbent jellyfish, a Trump cultist, and a Musk/Thiel anarcho-capitalist ideologue. Could be interesting! 🍿
Click to expand...
Not his presence- his money. I doubt any will be keen to have Musk’s name or face on their campaign, but they’ll be thrilled to have him splurge on advertising for their primary campaigns.
 
Unwanted successful primary challenges going back to the "TEA Party" suggest it doesn't take a lot of money. The fate of two Democratic senators - Manchin and Sinema - suggests sentiment can be potent enough to unseat (or deter from running) more than just a few low-profile House members, with or without a lot of backing money.

Both parties have been gradually vacating the nominal centre.
 
Brad Sallows said:
Unwanted successful primary challenges going back to the "TEA Party" suggest it doesn't take a lot of money. The fate of two Democratic senators - Manchin and Sinema - suggests sentiment can be potent enough to unseat (or deter from running) more than just a few low-profile House members, with or without a lot of backing money.

Both parties have been gradually vacating the nominal centre.
Click to expand...
Right, which suggests just how much of a problem Musk’s essentially limitless finances could pose for current Republicans who may not have fully secure seats and who provoke his ire by supporting Trump’s bill.

If Musk sticks to his guns on this - and I’m not convinced he will - and if the bill fails in the house, the resulting drama could be something else.
 
brihard said:
Right, which suggests just how much of a problem Musk’s essentially limitless finances could pose for current Republicans who may not have fully secure seats and who provoke his ire by supporting Trump’s bill.

If Musk sticks to his guns on this - and I’m not convinced he will - and if the bill fails in the house, the resulting drama could be something else.
Click to expand...
I have boundless confidence in the short horizons of politicians. Worrying about what Musk might do a year from now is unimaginably far in their future.
 
Brad Sallows said:
I have boundless confidence in the short horizons of politicians. Worrying about what Musk might do a year from now is unimaginably far in their future.
Click to expand...
That’s easy for you and I to say… For Republican representatives walking into the House to vote, it’s a very, very imaginable future. Though the consequences may not be realized for a year, they need to make decisions now.
 
Funding non-MAGA GOP aside. There's also the real possibility (of which Musk has clearly been mulling) of breaking off entirely and starting a new party.
 
brihard said:
That’s easy for you and I to say… For Republican representatives walking into the House to vote, it’s a very, very imaginable future. Though the consequences may not be realized for a year, they need to make decisions now.
Click to expand...
I'm dipping into my $0.02 worth of US political knowledge. Republicans need to get something across the finish line. Voters expect less legislative activity when Republicans control Congress, but won't accept nothing-of-consequence indefinitely.
 
Brad Sallows said:
I'm dipping into my $0.02 worth of US political knowledge. Republicans need to get something across the finish line. Voters expect less legislative activity when Republicans control Congress, but won't accept nothing-of-consequence indefinitely.
Click to expand...
Yup. They’re in a bind, both as a party, and as individual legislators. Those bunds do not fully overlap and in some cases conflict. Being a first term Republican congresscritter caught in a feud between the most powerful man in the world and the richest man in the world is probably not a super comfortable position to be in.
 
McG said:
ICE has deported a US soldier's son and made the man stateless. I am sure Trump, already alluding to Musk going back to South Africa, has someone exploring the options to do Musk's removal forcibly.

Click to expand...

Sending a great signal there. Don't enlist in the US Military if you intend on starting a family, and if you do you better hope your kids are born on US soil.
 
I think Canada had the same problem in the 80s where kids were not automatically given citizenship if born in Europe because a Canadian parent was posted to CFE. I think both Canada and US have since closed that omission, but apparently the US has not retroactively fixed it for impacted people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top