This is still too far-fetched, IMO, but it’s no longer completely unthinkable. It was a reader comment from today’s EJ Dionne editorial in the Washington Post:
- And Putin has his ultimate victory.
Mitt! Hatred of Mitt, not Mitch. :smack:
I’d say it’s about as far-fetched now as it was when people were telling us Obama, Bush Jr., Clinton, Bush Sr., and Reagan were about to “cancel the election”.
(Did anyone ever accuse Carter of planning to become a dictator?)
Actually I find the notion of Trump *wanting *to do that more ludicrous. I think he can’t wait to get out of the shit pond he’s up to his nose in. Preferably, I’m sure after eight years, but I’m sure he’ll be just as happy to lose in 2020, make a big media stink about the system being rigged, and then go back to Fifth Avenue for more blow jobs and Big Macs.
If Carter was missed, he may be the only president who was not so accused. That tradition began with George Washington.
No, the threat of a canceled, postponed, or otherwise manipulated election is actually more real now. I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all if it gets some discussion in the right wing media. Talking about postponing an election, taking steps to actually do it, and then actually pulling it off - those are different things, but the country’s government is now controlled at the federal and state level by a party that is increasingly of an authoritarian bent, with with reasons that are rational if you are looking at it from their vantage point. They know their policies favor the extremely rich over everyone else, so when you are the party of oligarchs, democracy is your enemy. It’s naive to believe that the United States cannot succumb to these antidemocratic forces.
The legal system is his enemy, and it will be for the rest of his life. He is all too aware of that now, which is why he will try to destroy the rule of law as we know it. He will not rest until he is confident that he can put his thumb on the scales of justice. Moreover, he will get help from his Republican friends because they and their donor class are increasingly seeing democracy and the will of the people as their enemy. There are shared interests. Authoritarians never moderate; they only get worse until they are stopped. They’re concerned with survival and nothing else. Accountability is their enemy. Rules are their enemy. From their point of view, principles, rights, laws, and the institutions that support them impartially are to be destroyed.
On a happier note, fuck your waitress – fuck her hard,
Which means, according to most versions of this story that I have seen, that a restaurant owner takes all the tip money and then decides what to do with it. But, being all good-hearted business people, we just know they will do the right thing. Right?
Ah, music to my ears!
One could ask Ivanka Kushner.
Mitch is quite hateable too. No problem.
Gonna have to start carrying around a bankroll, so as to give my tips in cash instead of adding them to my debit card, if this becomes reality.
Curious to know if restaurateurs who exploit this newly-granted power will extrapolate it into the right to designate some of their current minimum-wage earners as tipped employees. The idea being that it could reduce the effective size of the paychecks they are obligated to cut to dishwashers and bus-persons.
I realize that labor law isn’t something that most people follow as a hobby, so this prolly seems out of the blue to many, but this is partly (IMO) an outgrowth from the fight begun in Cesarz v. Wynn Las Vegas. The Wynn case is familiar to me not just because it involves union labor issues but because it began where I live.
In 2016, after multiple victories for Wynn, the 9th Circuit reversed the District Court’s ruling and said the practice of “tip pooling” (taking the tips from all tipped employees, pooling them, and then management distributing them at will) was in violation of properly written and enacted labor rules. By the time it ended up at the 9th Circuit, another case (Oregon Restaurant and Lodging Association v. the Department of Labor) was also being heard and it seems the two were conflated at the 9th Circuit, but I know less about that case.
Sounds like trickle down.
I thought that was going to be this: https://i.imgur.com/Gr4QlTz.jpg
No restaurant owner with half a brain would do so - they’d be out of employees so fast their head would spin. No one will put up with the bullshit servers and bartenders do every day for minimum wage.
The country as we know it may well shatter, but with the size and diversity of opinion in this country, I absolutely cannot see the entire country continue to be united under a dictatorial president. The concept that the entire military and power structure will be enough behind anyone, least of all Trump, to take over the entire fifty states and hold them is, to me, ludicrous. The country will break apart, cease to exist as we know it, long before anything like that happens.
The core in name only United States and a bunch of independent states (or maybe one independent state) to the west, sure. The US as it exists now, except with a dictator? Not a chance.
I’m gonna be a really kooky way-out-pie-in-the-sky optimist type and call it right here: the ballthat’ll really start to get shit rolling against преЦАРдент Trump.
With all his teflon, with all his hardcore 27%, (and their attendant “feminazi” backlash, from this, on Breitbart, etc.), with all the locked-in GOP congress and senate, with all the ever-increasing preponderance of (often far-) right media…with all this revolting fucking shit, I’m gonna stubbornly see the slight give in the stranglehold here, and it’s one that ain’t gonna cinch up again.
Obviously there’ll be more women to come forward than just these initial three (Holvey, Crooks, Leeds). The more who come out, the more I can’t see how even President Sadguts’s most hardcore women voters won’t start to realise ok, enough is enough - this shit is just getting crazy-town.
Imma the Little Train That Could on this one.
Id!, I wish I could agree with you. But I think allegations of sexual assault are just another crime thrown on the huge pile. In the absence of a Human Resources department investigation, this will just be he-said-she-said. And it’s not like voters didn’t know about these before the election. It’ll go nowhere.
(I think Al Franken was sacrificed to the larger cause of Democratic consistency on the issue: Democrats hold themselves accountable and have zero tolerance; Republicans make excuses for Trump and Moore.)