- Joined
- Aug 18, 2023
- Messages
- 2,334
- Reaction score
- 1,286
- Location
- St. Louis, MO
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
It is not inevitable as long as good people speak up and vote.
It is not inevitable as long as good people speak up and vote.I wasn't going to post about this but I couldn't let it go. This was in "The Washington Post" today. It doesn't belong in the "Breaking News" forum since it is an opinion piece. It is also behind a paywall so many people would have trouble gaining access to it. But I didn't want to read it and fail to mention it on Debate Politics because I found it so chilling. I wanted to know if other members had also read it and what they thought about it.
"A Trump Dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending." by Robert Kagan
Good points, I agree with your analysis of Trump. Concern has arisen among pundits, however, that a new Trump administration will not contain personnel to restrain him as the first one did. Someone like Stephen Miller, for example may have a freer hand under a Trump II administration.I'm more disturbed by Trump's supporters than Trump, honestly. Trump has already been president and instead of doing what history's worst dictators have done (e.g. literally imprisoning and executing members of opposition groups, imprisoning and executing minorities, waging conquest type wars, etc.), he typically would just take to Twitter and rant like any other avid Fox News watcher in a La-Z-Boy. Trump is quintessentially an entertainer and provocateur. Compared to history's most notorious dictators, he's more of an attention-seeking clown than an ambitious autocrat. He'd rather get into a highly publicized social media insult battle than start wars, conquer anything or oppress or exterminate anyone.
His supporters, on the other hand, appear to me to have a sort of zeal and attraction to authoritarianism that, if it were someone more ambitious and serious in dictatorial aims, legitimately seems cause for concern that they would enable a dictatorship that could actually get that bad.
Plus, Russian votes really shouldn't count!It is not inevitable as long as good people speak up and vote.
Uh ... maybe. Or, more likely, I have a very real sense about what doing that would actually entail, and I understand that no law enforcement branch in the country would undertake the task of going door to door, literally searching over a hundred million homes for weapons in an effort to confiscate them.Then you have no real sense of what an authoritarian government powers would be.
That's cute that you don't think the military would be operating inside the borders of an authoritarian America.Uh ... maybe. Or, more likely, I have a very real sense about what doing that would actually entail, and I understand that no law enforcement branch in the country would undertake the task of going door to door, literally searching over a hundred million homes for weapons in an effort to confiscate them.
So ... there's that.
And I do not think that a) our own military would be willing to go door to door in over a billion homes to disarm Americans because b) too many who might attempt it will be shot in the face at the door by the "pry my gun from my cold dead hands" crowd that numbers in the millions - which will put a very fast stop to any attempts as simply not being worth the effort.That's cute that you don't think the military would be operating inside the borders of an authoritarian America.
And by not including that likelihood, you add support to my belief that Americans who think an authoritarian government would be okay, just are not thinking.
No .... the idea of an authoritarian America is very concerning to me. It would be a truly tragic and horrible way for our great experiment to end. But we can easily slip into that without taking guns from our population. In fact, the dissolution of the USA into separate armed states would probably be one result before we fall into a monolithic authoritarian state.I do not think that you support an authoritarian America. I do think that maybe you don't fear the idea enough.
All of what you say has been said before in some form by nations that didn't think it could happen to them.And I do not think that a) our own military would be willing to go door to door in over a billion homes to disarm Americans because b) too many who might attempt it will be shot in the face at the door by the "pry my gun from my cold dead hands" crowd that numbers in the millions - which will put a very fast stop to any attempts as simply not being worth the effort.
You'd have catastrophic dissension in the Army, a total collapse of morale, mass resignation of commissions, and military desertions galore, all leaving the country wide open to attack by foreign powers - because the ranks of our military are totally suffused with people who strongly believe in their constitutional right to bear arms.
No .... the idea of an authoritarian America is very concerning to me. It would be a truly tragic and horrible way for our great experiment to end. But we can easily slip into that without taking guns from our population. In fact, the dissolution of the USA into separate armed states would probably be one result before we fall into a monolithic authoritarian state.
Good luck with that.All of what you say has been said before in some form by nations that didn't think it could happen to them.
So again, but in my estimation true, 2024 will be the most important election I have ever participated in, and my vote counts about 1/3 as much as someone from WY.
Popular vote, ranked choice voting. Starting in 2028.
Are you a liberal?
If not, how do you know so much about their goals?
Um, where is it written that my goal as a liberal is to destroy the federal republic by shifting it to a “unitary state”? That ship sailed beginning with Teddy Roosevelt, or farther back, with the amendments that followed the Civil War. And I repeat that people have looked towards DC when local and state governments drop the ball, and/or are dominated by corporate interests to the detriment of the people. Had Mississippi respected black people’s rights, no need for the Voting Rights Act of 1965. And now that the Supremes declared the Act no longer needed, pretty obvious that the states that were covered are proving the Court wrong.How would that be any different than a Hiden Dictatorship?
Since the goal of Liberals is to destroy the federal republic by shifting it to a unitary-State --which would be necessary for dictatorship -- I'm not seeing any difference.
Seriously, two old guy hacks is the best the US can do for presidential candidates?
What?Are you an American? Do you not live in America?
Obviously, you don't.
You support their agenda. Enough said.Um, where is it written that my goal as a liberal is to destroy the federal republic by shifting it to a “unitary state”?
And I repeat that people have looked towards DC when local and state governments drop the ball, and/or are dominated by corporate interests to the detriment of the people.
Had Mississippi respected black people’s rights, no need for the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
And now that the Supremes declared the Act no longer needed, pretty obvious that the states that were covered are proving the Court wrong.
Whereas, I must admit that Trump has the personality and makings of a dictator, I don't think he would ever get there. The country would burn down first.I wasn't going to post about this but I couldn't let it go. This was in "The Washington Post" today. It doesn't belong in the "Breaking News" forum since it is an opinion piece. It is also behind a paywall so many people would have trouble gaining access to it. But I didn't want to read it and fail to mention it on Debate Politics because I found it so chilling. I wanted to know if other members had also read it and what they thought about it.
"A Trump Dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending." by Robert Kagan
And we number in the many tens of millions. Be afraid. Be very afraid.You support their agenda. Enough said.
Mississippi didn’t do anything about lynching. Dropped the ball. So the NAACP pushed the feds for an anti-lynching law. You approve of that or not?The States didn't drop the ball.
That’s a cause some counties refused to participate. I lived in one of those in California some decades ago. People had to line up for bulk commodities. You approve of what (Tulare, I believe) county did?The pseudo-federal government took over food stamp programs run by States and counties because it wanted more power.
Why?It took over subsidized housing programs from States counties and cities because it wanted more power.
Ot was wrong to make SS a national program?It took over the social security programs of the States because it wanted more power.
Fine with me.It took over the disability programs of the States because it wanted more power.
Really? Just search for the number of bills introduced in all the states covered by the Voting Rights Act - plus other republican ones - that restrict voting. Some of my faves are ones that took polling places out of campuses, prohibited people from givingThat was a legitimate action by the government but note it doesn't give the government more power.
The act is no longer needed and no one is denying anyone's right to vote.
As Hamish Howl said to you, "Why don't you just go post in Stormfront"? You have been posting as if you were a normal DP member and not the Nazi you proved yourself to be when you engaged in Holocaust denial. You lie constantly, either because you want to fool others or because others have completely pulled the wool over your eyes when you were made into a Nazi. For that reason all your arguments are suspect. No one should believe what you post as fact.The act is no longer needed and no one is denying anyone's right to vote.
We don't hate America, it's the nutjobs on the left we dislike.His cultist worshipers and suckers hate America and hate Democracy, so this is their wet dream.....make no mistake. When people show you who they are, pay attention.
Vote Democratic to Protect Our Rights and Democracy.
Most likely correct, but he will try to usurp the election again as he tried in 2020 if he doesn't win again.Some liberals are feigning fear of a dictatorship under the Honorable Donald John Trump.
He could not be a dictator if he tried.
The American system of government is full of safeguards that prevent that.
When President Trump asked for troops to patrol D.C., the Pentagon told him to go pound sand.
When it was feared that besieged President Nixon might use the troops to stay in power, his Secretary of Defense told all generals to ignore any orders from the President.
I have read that the Washington Post is in serious financial straits.
That's great news!
Besides, if there ever is a dictatorship (such as a president unilaterally forgiving college loans!), it will be under a "Democratic" president and Congress. Maybe in 2025.
Trump worshipers hate America and democracy, just like he does. They also are deceptive and will never admit the truth, they follow the path of their new Jesus, traitor trump the COUP inciting, Putin sucking failure/conman/grifter/scumbag/racist/liar/rapist/ignorant criminal.We don't hate America, it's the nutjobs on the left we dislike.
A supporter of dictatorships would cheer the demise of a newspaper that employs fact checkers. Kind of a giveaway.
It's hyperbole. The point is to scare you. But it's absurd. If Trump gets elected he'll serve his four years and be fine just like the last round.I wasn't going to post about this but I couldn't let it go. This was in "The Washington Post" today. It doesn't belong in the "Breaking News" forum since it is an opinion piece. It is also behind a paywall so many people would have trouble gaining access to it. But I didn't want to read it and fail to mention it on Debate Politics because I found it so chilling. I wanted to know if other members had also read it and what they thought about it.
"A Trump Dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending." by Robert Kagan
If the foo shits, wear itLooks like you have broken Godwin's Law.
Already comparing Trump to Adolf Hitler.
Such a clever comparison. Never saw that made before.
?? WHAT ?? He was never fine after losing the last round !! In fact, more than 3 years later, he's still not fine after the last round! It's far too early for this feeble revisionist history. Come back and try this again in 40 years, when most people might have forgotten.It's hyperbole. The point is to scare you. But it's absurd. If Trump gets elected he'll serve his four years and be fine just like the last round.
He very much does, which most people agree IS stupid!To think he wants to be a dictator is stupid.
you are lying he voluntarily left. He questioned the election but you're allowed to do that.?? WHAT ?? He was never fine after losing the last round !!
so he's been acting as a shadow government for the country?In fact, more than 3 years later, he's still not fine after the last round!
See what I mean? When the likes of you say it's not stupid you are affirming what I said thank you for agreement.It's far too early for this feeble revisionist history. Come back and try this again in 40 years, when most people might have forgotten.
He very much does, which most people agree IS stupid!
Why are you defending a man who tried to steal the US presidency?you are lying he voluntarily left. He questioned the election but you're allowed to do that.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?