I agree that “megachurch pastor” is a flashing, bright-red flag, but his platform seems okay. Granted, they’re just words, not actions.

https://archive.ph/epMG3

Not every special election is for a US seat, some are for state seats.

Also, the GOP’s majority has been shrinking.

I was just writing up a comment with some details. You can find them by following one of the links in the article, which I have linked in my comment.

It did seem odd that the information wasn’t readily available for context in the article.

For anyone curious, the journalist is Kristen Holmes and she asked him about this remark from Senator Jon Ossoff:

“While the sailors on the Lincoln fight his war, while he fruitlessly drains our munitions and oil reserves, the president sleeps through his meetings. He golfs and trades stocks. So he doesn’t want to do the job, he wants to build his ballroom and travel with Natalie on their apparently defenseless flying palace gifted by the emir of Qatar.”

“Natalie” refers to Natalie Harp.

The article I’ve linked has this to say about Ms. Harp:

In a 2024 profile, The New York Times said Harp writes “devotional” letters to Trump, including messages like "You are all that matters to me” and “I want to bring you joy,” as well as one calling him her “Guardian and Protector in this Life.”

That same article claimed that others in Trump’s orbit described her as the “human printer” because she would travel with a portable printer to print things for him, and that she types his social media messages and posts them for him.

Over the summer, her brother, Preston Harp, said his sister’s relationship with the president was “very unhealthy".

“She’s just like his fan club,” he told the Daily Mail.

The GOP has a majority in the House and the Senate, as well as the Presidency and an obviously biased Supreme Court.

This midterm its basically assumed that the dems will take the House, and it’s plausible they will take the Senate. Unfortunately, it’s impossible that Dems gain enough for a veto-proof majority, so not much can actually be done from passing legislation.

I’d add some caveats that there is a political benefit to passing popular legislation and letting a Republican president shoot it down, and it’s possible (though unlikely, imo) that Trump gets so incredibly unpopular that members of the GOP cross party lines to give some legislation a veto-proof majority. I consider it unlikely because if they haven’t done it yet, it seems unlikely they ever will.

Trump will still be President after midterms. I could see some symbolic vote on it (which isn’t nothing) but temper that optimism regarding ICE actually being abolished before 2029.

you’ll get a letter

A letter to tell you that you have a letter. Kind of funny.

or an SMS

You register your phone number with the government? That’s not something we do in the US.

When you get I, you’ll have to ID and sign it, then it’s considered delivered to you.

Hypothetically speaking, what happens if you ignore the pre-letter or the SMS and never pick up the important mail? What happens if you refuse to sign for it?

Not one? Not even “unknowingly threw it away with some junk mail” or “unknowingly dropped between the counter and the refrigerator”?

The system in the US ensures someone has knowledge about a court order and the German system (as you have described it) assumes they do.

Both have pros and cons, but I think I’d prefer the US system. Considering the consequences can be life altering, I think ensuring the person knows, instead of assuming they do, is worth the extra hassle.

There are legal consequences to receiving a legal order and ignoring it; essentially the other side just gets whatever they’re asking for without your input.

Now imagine all the perfectly valid ways that a letter can be delivered but the person never sees it.

Now imagine all the sketchy ways someone could prevent that letter from actually reaching the person, so that they get a default judgement.

I think it’s better this way, even though it allows nonsense like what the Trump spawn are doing, because assumptions about whether they actually knew are removed. Not to mention, at best it’s just a delaying tactic; eventually the judge will accept a good faith attempt to serve them and issue a default judgement.

When? Where? Show me.

He released two separate pictures. Google will help you find them.

Accountability for public officials is not an abuse of power. Holy shit.

The senator of a state is not accountable to the governor of that state. Stop talking past me and think. You want the KY governor to do something he has no power to do.

I feel like you think that I’m defending McConnell and his actions (or lack thereof) but nothing is farther from the truth; I’m just stating facts. Internet conspiracies about McConnell being dead are just that; they’re not actually actionable.

All the governor can do is make demands, but he has no power to force those demands to be met. He’s done all he can, short of abusing his own power. If you agree that he shouldn’t abuse his power, then he is out of options.

Our system of government clearly has very many loopholes that unscrupulous people acting in bad faith can exploit, and we need to make a real effort to patch them up when Dems have the power to do so, but until then there’s not much anyone can do about it.

McConnell did give proof of life, you just didn’t like it.

I get the frustration, but the KY governor is (and should be) bound by the law.

I’d think people would be sick of politicians abusing their power. Seems like many of you are okay with it as long as you agree with the reasons for abusing power.

I think abusing power is wrong, regardless of the reasons.

So now what? He has no direct influence over a senator. Abuse executive power?

This is why I was asking what crime he would use to justify taking further steps.

He has already demanded this and was ignored.

Huh. TIL. I stand corrected. Thanks for taking the time to set me straight.

The governor can’t “do something” without there being a crime. Unless you’re advocating for abuses of executive power. Hence why I asked what crimes would exist to justify it.

And I didn’t assume he’s dead. The issue here is about his apparent refusal to provide proof of life. It seems you’re the one assuming he’s not dead.

Some time earlier:

For one thing, collecting paid medical leave after a person is deceased is fraud, and when it’s coming from the taxpayers there are likely more types of fraud at play too.

The “laws” you made up require him to be dead the to violate them. That is to say, you are assuming he is dead.

It seems disengenuous to make claims about the law and then hide behind “I’m not a lawyer, bro” when confronted about it. Maybe, if you don’t know anything about the law, you shouldn’t discuss the law.

“Clearly” an example of fraud but you can’t point to a law, and you need to assume he’s dead.

I will grant you that it feels wrong that he can just soft quit his job without consequences. That doesn’t make it illegal.

To be clear, I’m suggesting it’s unwise to complain that a representative (the governor) isn’t abusing their power.

I’m not sure about the last few sentences but generally, yes, this is how it works. The only real leverage against a representative is not getting reelected.

I’m not happy about it.

Side note that there is a difference between “Democratic Socialist” and “Socialist”. As far as I am aware, the DSA isn’t advocating to end capitalism and implement socialism. I’m not clear how you even got to that topic, as a socialist economy could still have the same issues with how the government works (or doesn’t).