The other thing that makes Republicans bad is that increasingly they don't *win* elections, they just damage the mechanism of election until the election no longer reflects the will of the people ... which is the quality of elections that makes the permission they bestow valid.
When Democrats are in power, increasingly it means an *overwhelming* victory, so much that it overcomes the anti-democracy mechanisms Republicans have put into place.
When Republicans achieve power, increasingly they do so despite, not because of, the will of the people.
Republicans so object to the idea of permission deriving from the will of the people, they now oppose the validity of their opponents even following an overwhelming victory.
Not content with sabotaging democracy, they now work to destroy it entirely.
The America Fascist Party.
Democrats had better start governing like they have the mandate they actually have, and they'd better start treating Republicans like the energized and active enemies of democracy they've again and again proved themselves to be. There really isn't much time left.
I understand that people don't want a single party system. If that's your concern, you'd better hope the Republican Party is utterly destroyed.
If the Republican Party still exists in 10 years, we will have a single party system, and they'll be it. That's how fascism works.
In many states and municipalities we're already there. There is already a single-party system. The Republican Party in Wisconsin has sabotaged democracy to such an extent that a non-Republican legislature is effectively impossible. And Wisconsin is far from alone in this.
It's not the same as a "safe Democratic" state. "Safe Democratic" states are that way because Democrats get the most votes.
One-party Republican states stay Republican *whether or not* Republicans get the most votes.
They intend to do that nationally, and they're almost there.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"What Trump voters think" should be reported, but it shouldn't matter.
Their beliefs and opinions should be covered like those of the members of any suicide cult. We should be told what the beliefs are. They shouldn't be lent credence or framed as valid drivers of policy.
The New York Times is making me tap pretty hard on the sign this weekend.
And: it's no longer necessary to report on what Trump voters think. We KNOW what they think. We know we know we know we know, we never stop getting told what these people think.
When exactly do we insist they engage with what everybody else thinks?
Don’t scale it back to placate. Double it to show them you mean business and ram it the fuck through, and then send through another one that’s THREE times bigger to teach them not to fuck with you. People want a real solution, nobody cares that Lisa Murkowski didn’t vote for it.
Name the bill the “Republicans are insurrectionist traitors act” and then make unblinking eye contact with them as you vote for it.
To be clear: a rapist of young girls is a selling point for mainstream Republicanism this point. That’s not hyperbole. That’s simply a clearly observable pattern. It’s an Abuse Party.
White conservative Christians have weaponized the concept of “forgiveness” to mean “a transactional status restoration between unrepentant abusers on one hand, and on the other unharmed third parties who have without consent appointed themselves proxies for victims.”
Like Andrew Sullivan, I don't want to see some voices elevated while I do want to see other voices elevated.
Unlike Andrew Sullivan, the voices I want elevated are diverse, vital, and challenging to existing hegemony, while the voices I don't want elevated are toxic and bigoted.
Also unlike Andrew Sullivan and the rest of these "anti-woke" "cancel culture" substack social injustice warriors, I'm honest about my position.