Odds of societal collapse in US...

[JoeyLabasForPresident]

Oh, and re: actions against specific schools (and law firms, some of those big law EOs were, in a word, wild) I'm very interested to see how that all plays out in court. Columbia's non-support of Jewish students? Hell, near tacet support of their harassment? Probably a space that justifies some federal intervention. But many other receivers of Trump's ire sure feel like ridiculous dick measuring contests that I expect our judicial system to take care of.

 

[Westernhawk]

Oh no, no argument there. Trump very obviously favored loyalism, especially as compared to his first term. I think some of that shift was justified, but some of his picks were absolutely an overcorrection. I'd point to his complete dullard of a SecDef as the posterchild of this. Robert F. Kennedy as well. I wish Republicans in the Senate would have been willing to push back on these, and a few others. I'm not surprised at all that they didn't, but I do wish they would've remembered how horrible Trump's endorsees performed in special elections and as primary candidates over the past nine years.

Speaking as a person who thinks it's very important to punt Trump and his cronies at the earliest possible time, I'm hoping that his obvious terrible choices (overcorrection is the most euphemistic term I've heard about this) for HHS and DOD Secretaries will make Trump's obvious poor leadership even more obvious. These guys are completely unqualified and unhinged. But I digress...

In addition to his already sinking approval in the polls, I'm hoping that mainstream America, faced with zero improvements in the economy, ongoing wars, and terrible foreign policy, that the midterms will be a bloodbath for Trumpers. I could be wrong, as I have grossly overestimated the intelligence of my fellow Americans in the past.

On a related note, it does seem like the Judiciary is moving towards a stronger stance on some of his actions. I certainly hope so.

I'm no constitutional expert (and you may be), but the power of the purse does not rest with the Administrative Branch. Congress has failed, but the Administrative branch needs to be careful about destroying federal programs, and punishing universities by removing funding. Lots of people (not just laymen) feel that this pushes the bounds of what is legal and constitutional. I'm heartened that there is starting to be some push back, and I hope that this predicts good things about, you know, not having a societal collapse!

Cheers.

 

[Westernhawk]

Oh, and re: actions against specific schools (and law firms, some of those big law EOs were, in a word, wild) I'm very interested to see how that all plays out in court. Columbia's non-support of Jewish students? Hell, near tacet support of their harassment? Probably a space that justifies some federal intervention. But many other receivers of Trump's ire sure feel like ridiculous dick measuring contests that I expect our judicial system to take care of.

Good points, all of them. I do feel like a specific school that poorly managed protests and antisemitism should be dealt with appropriately. We agree on that. I work at a university that attempted (maybe not so well) to straddle the very tough line between cracking down on some of these things, and allowing free speech and academic freedom. It's not as simple as it looks from the outside...

Cratering all research (that may save lives) is a bridge too far, IMHO.

 

[Grady]

Not sure this counts as a 'societal collapse' issue, but perhaps...
On vacation in CA and reading a few books. One I highly recommend is "Nuclear War: A Scenario". (Yeah, yeah, I know, kind of crazy book to read on vacation.) The author, Annie Jacobsen, interviewed about 50 people who are most knowledgable about the US's nuclear war plans and responses, including military & Administration insiders, down to the finest detail. Even tho I've been around this issue a bit for 40 years, the response process is far more complicated than I imagined. The author lays out a very credible, minute by minute scenario of one scenario which is possible. It's sobering, partly because of how little the person who makes the final decisions (the US President) is aware of the details of the process, and the virtually zero time frame in which to make potentially 'end of the world' decisions. It's a page-turner, and very educational. I'm halfway through the book, and at this point, the person tentatively in the line of succession to make those final decisions is the Sec. of Defense. Think about who that would be today.