Why is that all of these posts saying to "take a stand" fail to explain the political process? I'll just quote myself here. If you want to help stop trump the most effective ways are to:
1. Call
- Local congresspeople (http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/)
- Senators (https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/)
- Local officials (https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials)
2. Participate
- Get involved in local elections (this is a decent start - to become informed locally http://www.npr.org/stations/)
- Protest
- Attend town hall and city council meetings (see npr)
I think Mr. Altman is largely addressing tech CEOs here and urging them to make public statements. The actions you list are great for you and me, but he's mostly not really talking to us.
Supporting quotations from the post (because evidence):
"The tech community is powerful. Large tech companies in particular have enormous power and are held in high regard. We need to hear from the CEOs clearly and unequivocally"
"At a minimum, companies should take a public stance."
Run for office. Since it's hard to get up the gumption to run yourself (everyone here knows what imposter syndrome feels like), convince friends to run.
Don't limit yourself to Congressional races. Those are incredibly hard to win, especially for political outsiders. Run for parks commission, for library board, for school board, for town trusteeships, and for county offices. Run for water reclamation. You don't need to be a subject matter expert --- that's not expected of you. You just have to be willing to do a little extra work every month.
Any elected office gives you a greater voice in all of the rest of our politics. You use local offices to put pressure on your congresspeople and your state reps, and to build an organization to win more offices later.
This is what the Republicans have been doing since the 1980s, and as a result the GOP controls most US states.
Because people are already deluged with reminders on how to participate in the political process, and also because it's apparent that the political process is in fact badly broken and corrupted, and is not so inherently self-correcting that it inhibits bad actors.
Allow me to suggest that you read and internalize this essay, because it is one of the few accurate summaries of out political reality that I've encountered in the past year.
I am nt arguing that politics is over and there's nothing that can be done any more, in fact I'm going to a city budgeting meeting in a couple of hours to find out/debate what to do about the imminent disappearance of federal funding. But your points about basic civics are redundant, I seriously doubt there's anyone reading or posting here who doesn't already know that.
How effective is calling local congress members if you live in an area with a strong progressive majority such as the Bay Area. Not that we shouldn't voice our option to our represented officials but I suspect in some ways it's redundant whereas things like raising money for national organizations may be more impactful.
Interesting how calling politicians is a "thing" in the US. It seems very inefficient, archaic and unscalable. If I was a politician, I would hate those random (often organized) calls, such a waste of time. The politicians are usually not learning any new information, they know about most issues, including the approximate percentage of the people who are affected.
You know who really needs to take a fucking stand?
The low-level workers at these airports who are enforcing this bullshit ban. They need to grow some spines and start ignoring bad orders, no matter who they come from.
"I was just following orders" was never an acceptable excuse to do the wrong thing.
While I appreciate the sentiment for a call to action, it seems pretty clear that the people who are pushing this agenda don't care about what other people think. The people who are pushing this agenda lost the popular vote but that has not stopped them. Many of these reps supporting these actions are in districts that are gerrymandered to insulate themselves from anyone that disagrees with them on this kind of action.
For an emergency thing like this, direct pressure from affected tech companies is going to be the most effective thing. Letters to Congressmen from tech CEOs and the like.
For people who are not tech CEOs, financially supporting legal challenges is probably the highest value near-term approach, though the other stuff is important long term.
> In doing so, we should not demonize Trump voters—most of them voted for him for reasons other than the promise of a Muslim ban. We need their eventual support in resisting actions like these, and we will not get it if we further isolate them.
This is very important people - calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist homophobe, a moron, and not deserving of the franchise is not going to help anything. I didn't vote for Trump, but I do identify with some of the beliefs of those who did, and I can tell you that the rhetoric I'm hearing from many of the most vocal left is pushing the middle away.
This is the same kind of bullshit that's lost Hillary the election and got us here in the first place. It might have worked in the '90s to get a gold medal for Rosa Parks. It will not work in 2017 to make Trump back off his core message.
The problem here is not that your side isn't loud enough and can't get political attention for an issue. The problem is that the opposing side is too organized and too strong and already has a decided stance about your issue.
Being more strident won't help. Ostracizing people who have links to the opposing side will positively hurt.
Instead of doing all this "yell out louder" crap, any serious opposition should rather do some serious soul searching to figure out how to win back key constituencies. The only people who need to be ostracized are the idiots who got us here in the first place.
"You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue."
For many Americans Sam Altman and Madonna are unrelatable so the messaging falls on deaf ears (or is potentially even counter productive). Nobody believes Google or YC is hiring refugees, or that Sam Altman and others are sending their kids to public schools attended by refugees, or living in low to middle income neighborhoods housing refugees and having to manage the increased violence that ensues. All well and good to bang your hands on a table from the Ivory tower that is San Francisco when millions of people in middle America believe that you are not the one bearing the cost of this "open door" policy. To be effective, I think the message needs to come from people middle America can relate to not millionaire celebs and billionaire tech CEOs.
Yes. Instead of another round of finger wagging, maybe the left should figure out what they can concretely offer the local population left out from the globalization boom.
very unhelpful. i think any way to signal that trump and his policies are unpopular is helpful. if everyone knows that a vast majority of people are going to vote against him next time, congress people do not have to bend to his will, and world leaders do not feel as pressured to work with him. it seems like maintaining an illusion of popularity is paramount for history's bad political regimes, i think this is why. even in places that aren't democracies, when everyone knows you aren't popular, you seem to lose power. i think things like marches and calling congress people help because of this. certainly more than soul searching.
I don't understand your point. Who said anything about ostracizing people with links to the opposing side? In fact, Sama said the exact opposite. Winning back key constituencies is all great, and should definitely be done, but it isn't going to do anything until the next elections 2 years away. If you're suggesting we just sit tight and let Trump do whatever he wants till then, that is simply ridiculous.
It's not easy, but protests work. Calling your local congressmen and putting pressure on them works. Remember the debacle from back when Republicans tried to "reform" medicare? People spoke up overwhelmingly. They put tremendous pressure on their congressmen, who in turn put pressure on the party leadership, who then backed down. The same mechanic played itself out during every single government shutdown, where public pressure eventually cowed stubborn politicians into submission.
It's not going to be easy, but some things are worth fighting for. Defeatism is seductive, but isn't going to get you anywhere.
Voting and participating lost Hillary the election?
The fuck are you even talking about? That makes no sense.
Furthermore, millions of people voted for Clinton over Trump. Trump has the lowest approval ratings of a new president ever. It's very clear that the majority of the country is against him and his policies.
>Instead of doing all this "yell out louder" crap, any serious opposition should rather do some serious soul searching to figure out how to win back key constituencies
How do you do that without calling, participating, and sharing? These are all key on-the-ground actions for building a political base.
I've worked in politics and organizing for 20 years. You don't know what you're talking about in the slightest. Please stop spreading bullshit.
> Ostracizing people who have links to the opposing side will positively hurt.
Yes. It will positively hurt them. Consider it a price signal, a message. This idea that we somehow have to be nice about this is wrong. This idea that I somehow have to do some soul searching is also wrong.
The opposing side is people who support the arbitary and harmful ban on a huge number of people based primarily on their religion.
No, the opposing side needs to learn some bipartisanship. The idea that a narrow election victory gives the right to steamroller a programme like this through is extremely dangerous.
In case anyone is still skeptical that this is really a Muslim ban and not just a blanket ban on refugees and immigrants, note that Trump has said he will give priority to Christian refugees: http://www1.cbn.com/thebrodyfile/archive/2017/01/27/brody-fi...
The ACLU is both challenging the order and rounding up attorneys to help legal residents and Visa holders that have been prevented from entering the country. Now would be a good time to donate. https://www.aclu.org.
I think that the only way to fix this long-term is by winning the hearts and minds of those who think this ban is a good idea, or who are ambivalent about it. Unfortunately, those of us who have been shrilly opposing every move Trump has ever made are perhaps the most poorly positioned to do that. Trump has successfully demonized the voice of the mainstream media and costal cultural elites, and if you're perceived as being in that group, your objections are likely to fall on deaf ears.
We need to find a way to rebuild bridges between different tribes in America, so that we can have a reasonable dialog. I don't pretend to know how to do this, but I'd love to have a discussion about how to get it done. I think that is the only way to keep Trump or someone else like him from capturing the voice of the people long term.
I know it's an extremely antisocial position but I can't help but feel like most of Trump's immigration policies and outrageous tweets are just bait to keep our attention away from big money legislation that the 1% wants to get through.
For example, the Keystone XL and Dakota access pipelines were heavily debated, protested, and ultimately rejected under Obama but Trump just signed orders to have them built and Sam's post doesn't even mention it. Seeing Sam write about the accusations of voter fraud instead brings this quote to mind:
> The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....
I am affected personally by this. I have extended family members from Indonesia and Malaysia in the US who are still on Green Card. Although those countries aren't affected by the ban, who knows when Trump will decide to change his mind at his whim.
But the time for talk has passed. I don't think very much is going to happen because Trump is empowered by his election victory, and he won't listen to anyone. Has he ever listened to anyone, even during his celebrity-only days? To think that you can actively engage him in a conversation is not the way to do this.
What is needed is to prepare for the 2018 and 2020 elections RIGHT NOW. We need an organized social media structure where all of the positive, democracy-pro candidates in every electoral district gets publicized and supported. EDUCATE YOUNG PEOPLE WITH GREAT POLITICAL CANDIDATES AND MOTIVATE THEM TO VOTE. I'm not talking about just voting for the Democrats. Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans. We need a new voice that actually cares about progressive, democratic values, and actually believes in what they say. Not the same, tired politicians that play us for fools and leave us with the best of two evils.
Organize now, smash the two-party oligarchy and elect REAL POLITICIANS, hopefully young people that care about the US, not people who want to enrich themselves from the teat of government funding. You could argue that Trump was that candidate for half of Americans, as well as Sanders for the other (nearly) half. We need fresh blood, and we need to start now.
The only way to stop Trump is to silence him by breaking up the Republican Congress majority, and it's only in 2 years.
- Demand to see the detailed plan for TrumpCare. What's it going to cost us? What will it do to our employees? Where are the details? That's what lobbyists are paid to find out. Employers have a big stake in this.
- Demand to see the tariff plan. So far, it's all talk, but soon it will be legislation. This has huge impacts for many businesses. Business planning and investment will stall until the details are settled. Already, you don't want to build a factory in China or Mexico. On the other side, will there be efforts to make it easier to sell into China?
- About that infrastructure thing. What kinds of projects will be supported? Roads? Internet access? Pothole repair?
- How serious is the administration about not employing illegal aliens? Will employer sanctions be increased or more stringently enforced? Will employers be going to jail? On the other side, will the enforcement be effective enough to force growers to use robotic picking? Is it time to get behind ag startups like Abundant Robotics? Get into robotic floor cleaning for commercial buildings?
- Will there be tax incentives for investing in communities in rural America? If so, how much, and when will they become available?
- Will Glass-Stegall come back? That was a Trump campaign promise, and it's in the Republican platform.
Every one of those is a real business issue, and business needs to know what's going to happen.
A majority of his voters did vote for Trump because they support his views on immigration. It's why they voted for him. To deny that is to simply deny reality just like Trump does on a daily basis.
Honest question - What will statements by tech CEOs do? Trump has a mandate given to him by the people of your country against the very elites this post is appealing to. The politicians are with him because they want to keep their power.
And am I misremembering all these powerful tech CEOs went grovelling to meet Trump and hoping to have a foot in the door with the new administration with Thiel?
He clearly stated he would make strong policies regarding immigration. The American people voted for him knowing this and he's following through on it.
I'd say “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States” is a fitting name given everything he has said up to this point.
Whether or not you agree, this looks like the democratic process to me. Taking action against his policies after election is obviously fine, but if you cared so deeply then why didn't you do this rallying call before he got elected? He is doing exactly what he said he would do and what the people voted him in for.
* PS: I'm not endorsing Donald Trump's decisions at all.
Shouldn't we have been taking a stand against Obama who destabilized the region, was dropping bombs there and arming the "rebels" who had a revolving door relationship with ISIS and other such groups there.
Refugees didn't come from a vacuum and it wasn't some natural disaster. They started streaming in because the West including US has been meddling and destabilizing that part of the world.
Unfortunately it seems profiling to prevent terrorism has worked ok for Israel recently. It is not something pleasant and nice, but so far it seems there have been deadlier and more frequent terror act committed by radical Muslims in Europe than in Israel. People see the news from Europe and they don't want that here. A closer vetting of refugees from that region seems reasonable and letting them in unchecked seem irresponsible.
Green card holders (legal permanent residents of the United States) are being turned back from the US as soon as they get to the airport. They are being forced to file waivers which can be denied.
How can legal permanent residents be denied entry? I mean this has to be breaking So many laws, how can this be ok?
It's probably not a great tactic to perpetuate the American habit for making sweeping comments about the rest of the world which aren't really grounded in truth. Might be best to be scrupulously fact-based on these matters.
I think it's shameful to have an open Trump supporter as part of the upper echelons of YCombinator (Thiel).
Everyone is entitled to their opinions. But when you openly support a candidate who likes to "grab [women] by the pussy", and now is making headway into some sort of Muslim ban which was a campaign headline, how will female and muslim applicants feel if they know part of their process might be controlled by someone who finds this acceptable? Might it discourage them?
Lots of hypocrisy here today. There are 11 million refuges from Syria all over the world currently. The US gave shelter to about 0.1%. Fucking ridiculous 0.1%. There wasn't any uproar to hear about that shaming fact in the US until now. But when Trump makes it harder to recruit some IT workers from the middle East the HN bubble starts screaming.
I think the more shocking news event has been keeping out US permanent residents (i.e. Green Card holders) -- people we've legally lived here for years, own homes, have children in schools, contributed to social security, paid income taxes, etc.
Billionaire Silicon Valley tech CEOs are NOT sympathetic characters with the general public. (Or pretty much anyone outside the VC echo chamber.) Might as well ask the CEOs of Goldman Sachs and JPM to "take a stand." The only option SV has is to continue introducing bias and propaganda into their already heavily biased products.
I live in Central Europe. It is really hard from my perspective to understand all that mass hysteria in US, especially in California. Maybe overdosing leftist propaganda causes that hysteria.
Many products of Silicon Valley and Hollywood companies are simply blocked in China. Mainly to protect Chinese young companies. As far I known Google is completely blocked in China. Hollywood movies are also not freely distributed in China. And for some reason it is Trump accused of acting against free trade. What should be the right reaction for Chinese protectionism? More know-how transfer to the land of democracy?
And if you really care about Muslim countries then explain to me: why the PhD brain drain is so good for these countries?
The establishment left in the US has been a supporter of Corporate Globalization for many years. And the left in general has replaced class policy with race and gender ideology.
So you have a situation now in the US where liberal millionaires and billionaires protest against the middle and working class and call them racist, etc for voting for populist policy that protect there economic interests by reforming free trade treaties like TPP and NAFTA, immigration limits, lower taxes, repairing infrastructure and so on, (ie much of Trumps campaign platform).
The outrage is from those who have been consumed by this identity politics and the corporate globalism that sustains it. They have forgotten what economic solidarity is and there policy has little or no recognition of class. Identity and Race are placed above all else.
[+] [-] _m8fo|9 years ago|reply
1. Call
2. Participate 3. Share 4. Vote (https://www.usa.gov/register-to-vote)5. Volunteer
6. Stop reading and start doing one of the other things.
[+] [-] methehack|9 years ago|reply
Supporting quotations from the post (because evidence): "The tech community is powerful. Large tech companies in particular have enormous power and are held in high regard. We need to hear from the CEOs clearly and unequivocally"
"At a minimum, companies should take a public stance."
[+] [-] tptacek|9 years ago|reply
Don't limit yourself to Congressional races. Those are incredibly hard to win, especially for political outsiders. Run for parks commission, for library board, for school board, for town trusteeships, and for county offices. Run for water reclamation. You don't need to be a subject matter expert --- that's not expected of you. You just have to be willing to do a little extra work every month.
Any elected office gives you a greater voice in all of the rest of our politics. You use local offices to put pressure on your congresspeople and your state reps, and to build an organization to win more offices later.
This is what the Republicans have been doing since the 1980s, and as a result the GOP controls most US states.
Another fantastic place to start:
https://www.indivisibleguide.com/
[+] [-] anigbrowl|9 years ago|reply
Allow me to suggest that you read and internalize this essay, because it is one of the few accurate summaries of out political reality that I've encountered in the past year.
https://medium.com/deep-code/situational-assessment-2017-tru...
I am nt arguing that politics is over and there's nothing that can be done any more, in fact I'm going to a city budgeting meeting in a couple of hours to find out/debate what to do about the imminent disappearance of federal funding. But your points about basic civics are redundant, I seriously doubt there's anyone reading or posting here who doesn't already know that.
[+] [-] myblake|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] molecule|9 years ago|reply
https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/aclu-and-other-groups...
[+] [-] RivieraKid|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Frondo|9 years ago|reply
The low-level workers at these airports who are enforcing this bullshit ban. They need to grow some spines and start ignoring bad orders, no matter who they come from.
"I was just following orders" was never an acceptable excuse to do the wrong thing.
[+] [-] padseeker|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rayiner|9 years ago|reply
For people who are not tech CEOs, financially supporting legal challenges is probably the highest value near-term approach, though the other stuff is important long term.
[+] [-] idlewords|9 years ago|reply
Consider starting here:
ACLU (state offices especially) Council on American-Islamic Relations (state offices especially) National Immigration Law Center
[+] [-] djrogers|9 years ago|reply
This is very important people - calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist homophobe, a moron, and not deserving of the franchise is not going to help anything. I didn't vote for Trump, but I do identify with some of the beliefs of those who did, and I can tell you that the rhetoric I'm hearing from many of the most vocal left is pushing the middle away.
[+] [-] zeteo|9 years ago|reply
This is the same kind of bullshit that's lost Hillary the election and got us here in the first place. It might have worked in the '90s to get a gold medal for Rosa Parks. It will not work in 2017 to make Trump back off his core message.
The problem here is not that your side isn't loud enough and can't get political attention for an issue. The problem is that the opposing side is too organized and too strong and already has a decided stance about your issue.
Being more strident won't help. Ostracizing people who have links to the opposing side will positively hurt.
Instead of doing all this "yell out louder" crap, any serious opposition should rather do some serious soul searching to figure out how to win back key constituencies. The only people who need to be ostracized are the idiots who got us here in the first place.
[+] [-] RA_Fisher|9 years ago|reply
"You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue."
- [1] http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.h...
[+] [-] lefstathiou|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tlarkworthy|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] the_cat_kittles|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] the8472|9 years ago|reply
Wasn't low democrat turnout part of the problem?
[+] [-] whack|9 years ago|reply
It's not easy, but protests work. Calling your local congressmen and putting pressure on them works. Remember the debacle from back when Republicans tried to "reform" medicare? People spoke up overwhelmingly. They put tremendous pressure on their congressmen, who in turn put pressure on the party leadership, who then backed down. The same mechanic played itself out during every single government shutdown, where public pressure eventually cowed stubborn politicians into submission.
It's not going to be easy, but some things are worth fighting for. Defeatism is seductive, but isn't going to get you anywhere.
[+] [-] stephancoral|9 years ago|reply
The fuck are you even talking about? That makes no sense.
Furthermore, millions of people voted for Clinton over Trump. Trump has the lowest approval ratings of a new president ever. It's very clear that the majority of the country is against him and his policies.
>Instead of doing all this "yell out louder" crap, any serious opposition should rather do some serious soul searching to figure out how to win back key constituencies
How do you do that without calling, participating, and sharing? These are all key on-the-ground actions for building a political base.
I've worked in politics and organizing for 20 years. You don't know what you're talking about in the slightest. Please stop spreading bullshit.
[+] [-] CalChris|9 years ago|reply
Yes. It will positively hurt them. Consider it a price signal, a message. This idea that we somehow have to be nice about this is wrong. This idea that I somehow have to do some soul searching is also wrong.
[+] [-] dang|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pjc50|9 years ago|reply
The opposing side is people who support the arbitary and harmful ban on a huge number of people based primarily on their religion.
No, the opposing side needs to learn some bipartisanship. The idea that a narrow election victory gives the right to steamroller a programme like this through is extremely dangerous.
[trolling deleted]
[+] [-] burkaman|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rayiner|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kcorbitt|9 years ago|reply
We need to find a way to rebuild bridges between different tribes in America, so that we can have a reasonable dialog. I don't pretend to know how to do this, but I'd love to have a discussion about how to get it done. I think that is the only way to keep Trump or someone else like him from capturing the voice of the people long term.
"How to Culture Jam a Populist in Four Easy Steps" https://www.caracaschronicles.com/2017/01/20/culturejam/
[+] [-] rfrank|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] disantlor|9 years ago|reply
there are enough people who hate the ban and the ideas that lead to it to win elections. they need to be activated, consistently.
[+] [-] rcpt|9 years ago|reply
For example, the Keystone XL and Dakota access pipelines were heavily debated, protested, and ultimately rejected under Obama but Trump just signed orders to have them built and Sam's post doesn't even mention it. Seeing Sam write about the accusations of voter fraud instead brings this quote to mind:
> The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....
- Noam Chomsky, The Common Good
[+] [-] pfarnsworth|9 years ago|reply
But the time for talk has passed. I don't think very much is going to happen because Trump is empowered by his election victory, and he won't listen to anyone. Has he ever listened to anyone, even during his celebrity-only days? To think that you can actively engage him in a conversation is not the way to do this.
What is needed is to prepare for the 2018 and 2020 elections RIGHT NOW. We need an organized social media structure where all of the positive, democracy-pro candidates in every electoral district gets publicized and supported. EDUCATE YOUNG PEOPLE WITH GREAT POLITICAL CANDIDATES AND MOTIVATE THEM TO VOTE. I'm not talking about just voting for the Democrats. Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans. We need a new voice that actually cares about progressive, democratic values, and actually believes in what they say. Not the same, tired politicians that play us for fools and leave us with the best of two evils.
Organize now, smash the two-party oligarchy and elect REAL POLITICIANS, hopefully young people that care about the US, not people who want to enrich themselves from the teat of government funding. You could argue that Trump was that candidate for half of Americans, as well as Sanders for the other (nearly) half. We need fresh blood, and we need to start now.
The only way to stop Trump is to silence him by breaking up the Republican Congress majority, and it's only in 2 years.
[+] [-] leesalminen|9 years ago|reply
> Although those countries aren't affected by the ban...
So, you have not yet been personally affected? That's like saying German citizens have been personally affected by this action.
[+] [-] wcummings|9 years ago|reply
This false equivalence convinced people to vote for Trump. No way Hillary would have implemented this ban.
[+] [-] jacquesm|9 years ago|reply
There is a real chance that you'll get more fresh blood than you are bargaining for.
When you start running roughshod over peoples lives violence is just around the corner and should be expected.
Action -> reaction, it's as old as physics.
Of course that plays right into Trumps hands.
[+] [-] mschuster91|9 years ago|reply
In the Senate, this will get tough, because the majority of positions in the senate available for reelection is mostly Democrat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_elections,_2018).
And even if Congress Republican majority is broken down, Trump and Pence will still be able to rule with Presidential orders, much like Obama did.
[+] [-] akjainaj|9 years ago|reply
The ban on muslims is not something he decided "at his whim", but something he promised he'd do if he won the presidency.
Turns out he did win, and he's delivering on his promises.
[+] [-] Animats|9 years ago|reply
- Demand to see the detailed plan for TrumpCare. What's it going to cost us? What will it do to our employees? Where are the details? That's what lobbyists are paid to find out. Employers have a big stake in this.
- Demand to see the tariff plan. So far, it's all talk, but soon it will be legislation. This has huge impacts for many businesses. Business planning and investment will stall until the details are settled. Already, you don't want to build a factory in China or Mexico. On the other side, will there be efforts to make it easier to sell into China?
- About that infrastructure thing. What kinds of projects will be supported? Roads? Internet access? Pothole repair?
- How serious is the administration about not employing illegal aliens? Will employer sanctions be increased or more stringently enforced? Will employers be going to jail? On the other side, will the enforcement be effective enough to force growers to use robotic picking? Is it time to get behind ag startups like Abundant Robotics? Get into robotic floor cleaning for commercial buildings?
- Will there be tax incentives for investing in communities in rural America? If so, how much, and when will they become available?
- Will Glass-Stegall come back? That was a Trump campaign promise, and it's in the Republican platform.
Every one of those is a real business issue, and business needs to know what's going to happen.
[+] [-] manish_gill|9 years ago|reply
Honest question - What will statements by tech CEOs do? Trump has a mandate given to him by the people of your country against the very elites this post is appealing to. The politicians are with him because they want to keep their power.
And am I misremembering all these powerful tech CEOs went grovelling to meet Trump and hoping to have a foot in the door with the new administration with Thiel?
These are turbulent times.
[+] [-] jbhatab|9 years ago|reply
I'd say “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States” is a fitting name given everything he has said up to this point.
Whether or not you agree, this looks like the democratic process to me. Taking action against his policies after election is obviously fine, but if you cared so deeply then why didn't you do this rallying call before he got elected? He is doing exactly what he said he would do and what the people voted him in for.
* PS: I'm not endorsing Donald Trump's decisions at all.
[+] [-] rdtsc|9 years ago|reply
Refugees didn't come from a vacuum and it wasn't some natural disaster. They started streaming in because the West including US has been meddling and destabilizing that part of the world.
Unfortunately it seems profiling to prevent terrorism has worked ok for Israel recently. It is not something pleasant and nice, but so far it seems there have been deadlier and more frequent terror act committed by radical Muslims in Europe than in Israel. People see the news from Europe and they don't want that here. A closer vetting of refugees from that region seems reasonable and letting them in unchecked seem irresponsible.
[+] [-] mjmsmith|9 years ago|reply
How about Peter Thiel? What did he say when you spoke to him?
[+] [-] fowlerpower|9 years ago|reply
Green card holders (legal permanent residents of the United States) are being turned back from the US as soon as they get to the airport. They are being forced to file waivers which can be denied.
How can legal permanent residents be denied entry? I mean this has to be breaking So many laws, how can this be ok?
[+] [-] mcenedella|9 years ago|reply
Islam by country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country
1. Indonesia
2. Pakistan
3. India
4. Bangladesh
5. Nigeria
6. Iran
7. Turkey
8. Egypt
9. Algeria
10. Sudan
It's probably not a great tactic to perpetuate the American habit for making sweeping comments about the rest of the world which aren't really grounded in truth. Might be best to be scrupulously fact-based on these matters.
[+] [-] Scirra_Tom|9 years ago|reply
Everyone is entitled to their opinions. But when you openly support a candidate who likes to "grab [women] by the pussy", and now is making headway into some sort of Muslim ban which was a campaign headline, how will female and muslim applicants feel if they know part of their process might be controlled by someone who finds this acceptable? Might it discourage them?
[+] [-] tobltobs|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TuringNYC|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rajacombinator|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dgregd|9 years ago|reply
Many products of Silicon Valley and Hollywood companies are simply blocked in China. Mainly to protect Chinese young companies. As far I known Google is completely blocked in China. Hollywood movies are also not freely distributed in China. And for some reason it is Trump accused of acting against free trade. What should be the right reaction for Chinese protectionism? More know-how transfer to the land of democracy?
And if you really care about Muslim countries then explain to me: why the PhD brain drain is so good for these countries?
[+] [-] generic_user|9 years ago|reply
The establishment left in the US has been a supporter of Corporate Globalization for many years. And the left in general has replaced class policy with race and gender ideology.
So you have a situation now in the US where liberal millionaires and billionaires protest against the middle and working class and call them racist, etc for voting for populist policy that protect there economic interests by reforming free trade treaties like TPP and NAFTA, immigration limits, lower taxes, repairing infrastructure and so on, (ie much of Trumps campaign platform).
The outrage is from those who have been consumed by this identity politics and the corporate globalism that sustains it. They have forgotten what economic solidarity is and there policy has little or no recognition of class. Identity and Race are placed above all else.
[+] [-] t_20170128|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] jacquesm|9 years ago|reply
Trump is hell bent on destroying America from within and his followers (who we are not supposed to criticize) are A-Ok with that.
Soon to be seen in a theater near you in Europe as well.