MAGA vs. Public Opinion: MAGA wins

Just for the halibut, this is regarding MAGA's Transfer of Wealth and Power to Elites bill that Senate MAGA Repubs are ramming through. Pxy:

Q: Summarize this and related reporting https://www.thedailybeast.com/cnn-data-guru-harry-enten-reveals-unprecedented-hatred-for-president-donald-trumps-big-beautiful-bill/. Fact check your sources if possible.

A: Multiple independent polls and analyses indicate that President Donald Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" faces historically unprecedented public opposition. The legislation, which proposes significant tax cuts for high-income households alongside reductions in Medicaid and healthcare funding, has consistently recorded net approval ratings between -19% and -29% across five major polls 1 2. This level of disapproval is described by CNN data analyst Harry Enten as evidence that the American public "hates, hates, HATES" the bill, with no comparable legislative disapproval found in historical records 1 2.

Key Polling Evidence
Cross-partisan opposition:
Fox News: 59% oppose vs. 38% support 5 6
Quinnipiac University: 53% oppose vs. 27% support 5
KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation): 64% unfavorable vs. 35% favorable 7 8

Demographic consistency: Opposition spans age, income, and partisan groups, including:
73% of independents (Fox) 5
66% of non-MAGA Republicans (KFF) 8
55% of Republicans anticipating family harm (Newsweek)

Policy Critiques Driving Opposition
Healthcare impacts:
Projected to increase uninsured population by 10–15 million 4 7
Cuts $700–$800 billion from Medicaid 7 8
Reduces funding for rural hospitals 4 7

Tax equity concerns:
Prioritizes "$270,000 tax breaks for wealthiest families" (Sen. Chris Murphy) 4
Viewed as "largest wealth transfer from poor/middle-class to affluent" in U.S. history 4

Fact-Checking Key Claims
"Unprecedented hatred" (Enten): Supported by polling consistency across June 2025, with no rebound despite extended debate 1 2 5.

"Same disapproval since early June" (Quinnipiac): Verified via identical -26% net rating in Quinnipiac's June 1–26 tracking12.

Opposition intensifies with details: KFF experiments show bill favorability drops to 21% after exposure to healthcare consequences 7 8.

Contextual Analysis
The bill's unpopularity persists despite Republican advocacy, with even GOP senators like Thom Tillis (NC) citing Medicaid concerns as a reason for opposition 4. Polls suggest the legislation could become a midterm liability, mirroring the political fallout from the Affordable Care Act debates 4 5.

Peanut 1: In the past, Mitch McConnell has literally used the words "ram through" to describe what Democrats were doing. What's really funny is I literally just tried to call his office in Washington, D.C., and there was no option for voicemail. Just said they were open and taking calls and then disconnected. 

Peanut 2: Fascists don't care what the public thinks. (ooh, that peanut is feisty!)

Peanut 3: Republicans are bad for people, bad for the economy, bad for international relationships, bad for stopping crime, bad for science, but good at propaganda. And they are very good for bad people.

The dying democracy chronicles

WBUR reports that our dictator-kleptocrat government plans to deport a person the FBI was going to use to testify against the MS-13 gang in the US: 

In November 2022, a man in El Salvador believed he had few options: be snatched off the street by police or testify against Massachusetts members of MS-13, the criminal organization responsible for countless murders and other violent crimes in the U.S. and Central America.

But both happened. After nine months in Salvadoran prisons, the man only known as John Doe in court documents came to the United States as a material witness for a racketeering case in exchange, as he understood it, for refuge in the U.S.

He's now locked up in a facility here. A material witness often has testimony crucial to a case, and can be detained to protect them or prevent them from fleeing.

In the midst of the MS-13 case, the U.S. government revealed his identity in evidence and has been attempting to deport him.

In January, Doe filed a habeas corpus petition in Massachusetts federal court in his ongoing fight with the U.S. government to remain here as an asylum seeker.

Exposed as a snitch, Doe stated in the petition that he faces a death sentence if he returns.

The profound moral rot in Trump and MAGA elites is stunning. Also, this is a lesson to anyone thinking about cooperating with the dictator-kleptocrat US government. Presumably Trump is now protecting MS-13 in the US because they bought enough $TRUMP meme coin. Trump and MAGA elites corruption is off the charts.

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Some projections about djt's proposed tax changes for 2026. The bottom line: Very rich people (top 5%) get rewarded, everyone else gets a kick in the groin.

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

A NYT article discusses the massive djt bill the Senate is now trying to get passed. 

As expected, rich and powerful people and businesses get a lot of wealth. The rest of us get a kick in the groin. Here are some of the groin kicks we get:

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Another NYT article comments on Senate Republicans killing off solar and wind power efforts in the US:

Senate Republicans have quietly inserted provisions in President Trump’s domestic policy bill that would not only end federal support for wind and solar energy but would impose an entirely new tax on future projects, a move that industry groups say could devastate the renewable power industry.

The tax provision, tucked inside the 940-page bill that the Senate made public just after midnight on Friday, stunned observers.

“This is how you kill an industry,” said Bob Keefe, executive director of E2, a nonpartisan group of business leaders and investors. “And at a time when electricity prices and demand are soaring.”

The bill would rapidly phase out existing federal tax subsidies for wind and solar power by 2027. Doing so, many companies say, could derail hundreds of projects under development and could jeopardize billions of dollars in manufacturing facilities that had been planned around the country with the subsidies in mind.

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

That is how democracy dies and what the wreckage looks like. Expect a heck of a lot more in coming months.

Here's a philosophical question...

[The more they know?]

Is it better to know, or not know?  Nebulous question, but let me get more specific.

Big Brother (sometimes insinuated as the government) already knows about many of the mundane things in your life; e.g., what kind of toilet paper you use, if you smoke or drink, if you go to the dentist regularly.  Which begs some questions: 

Should a government spy on its people?  If yes, how much spying should be allowed?  Where do you draw the line in FBI/CIA/governmental spying?  If you are innocent, why would the government spying on you be a problem?

Question:  Is it better to know about the nefarious elements of a society, at the cost of the innocent, than not to know?  Talk about that.

(by PrimalSoup)

The Supreme Court’s Shadow Docket: How Two Decisions Have Broken the Balance

As we are all taught in elementary school, America’s constitutional system is built on checks and balances—each branch of government is meant to restrain the others, safeguarding our freedoms. But recently, the Supreme Court has quietly chipped away at these protections through a series of “shadow docket” decisions. These are fast-tracked rulings, often made without full public explanation or argument, and justified by claims of emergency. Instead of resolving emergencies, these decisions have created a genuine constitutional crisis by removing the judiciary’s power to check the executive in the critical area of deportations. Last week, two such rulings dramatically eroded constitutional checks and balances in an area where Trump’s overreach has been glaring: summary deportations without due process.

1. Trump v. CASA

The Supreme Court ruled that lower federal courts can no longer block government policies for everyone (so-called “nationwide” or “universal” injunctions). Now, if a court finds a deportation policy illegal, it can only protect the handful of people who actually sued—not the thousands or millions who might be affected.

This means if you’re not part of a lawsuit, you’re out of luck—even if a judge agrees the policy is unconstitutional.

2. Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D.

The Court allowed the Trump administration to deport migrants to “third countries”—places they may never have been, and where they could face torture or death—without giving them notice or a chance to argue for their safety.

This decision was made on the “shadow docket”—an emergency process where the Court acts quickly, often without full arguments or written explanations. Only the three liberal justices dissented, warning of the dangers.

Why Is This a Constitutional Crisis?

The U.S. Constitution is built on checks and balances—each branch of government is supposed to keep the others in line. The courts are our last defense against government overreach. These two decisions have gutted that defense in the area of deportations:

• No More Broad Protections: Lower courts can’t stop illegal policies from hurting everyone. Only the Supreme Court can, and it rarely does.

• No Due Process: The government can now deport people without warning or a fair hearing—even to countries where they face grave danger.

• No Real Oversight: The Supreme Court made these decisions quickly, with little explanation, and strictly along partisan lines. That’s not how major constitutional questions are supposed to be settled.

What Does This Mean in Practice?

• If the government decides to deport you—even if you have a good legal case—you may have no time to fight back.

• If a judge says a deportation policy is illegal, it helps only the people who sued, not everyone affected.

• The President’s power to deport has become nearly unchecked. The only court that can stop him is the Supreme Court—and it has shown it’s unwilling to do so.

Is This Like What Happened in Hungary in the 2010s?

In Hungary (and also Poland) in the 2010s, ruling parties took control of the courts to cement their power and silence opposition. Hungary has since become a type of authoritarian regime that maintains only the appearance of democracy.

The U.S. isn’t there yet—our courts haven’t been packed or dissolved—but the speed and boldness of these Supreme Court decisions echo the early steps seen in those countries. The difference is mostly one of pace and method, not direction.

The Stakes

Checks and balances are not just legal technicalities—they are what keep us free. When the courts can’t check the President, the door opens to abuse, mistakes, and injustice.

Today it’s immigrants. Tomorrow, it could be anyone the government decides to target.

In Sum:
These two Supreme Court decisions, made in the shadows and along partisan lines, have left the President’s deportation powers almost totally unchecked. This is a constitutional crisis—one that threatens the very idea of an independent judiciary and the American promise of due process for all.

Sources

• Slate: “The Supreme Court Just Gave Trump Unchecked Power to Deport Immigrants to Torture and Death” (June 2025)

• The Nation: “The Supreme Court’s Shadow Docket Is Dismantling Due Process” (June 2025)

• NY Times: “Supreme Court Lets Trump Deport Migrants to Countries Other Than Their Own” (6/23/25)

• NY Times: “In Birthright Citizenship Case, Supreme Court Limits Power of Judges to Block Trump Policies” (6/27/25)

• Vox: “The Supreme Court’s Shadow Docket Is a Threat to Democracy” (June 2025)

• SCOTUSblog analysis of Trump v. CASA, Inc. and DHS v. D.V.D.

• Comparative studies of judicial erosion in Hungary and Poland, e.g., Kim Lane Scheppele, Princeton University; Human Rights Watch reports (2012–2018)

• U.S. District Court rulings and Supreme Court orders (2025)