What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[garbon]

Even if we beat Trump this time, we won't hold the White House indefinably.  Eventually some bastard is going to get in and the Supreme Court has said they can do whatever they want.

At least the court has established it can overturn its own rulings willy nilly. So if some day die or retire and composition changes, it can easily change its stance.

[crazy canuck]

Even if we beat Trump this time, we won't hold the White House indefinably.  Eventually some bastard is going to get in and the Supreme Court has said they can do whatever they want.

At least the court has established it can overturn its own rulings willy nilly. So if some day die or retire and composition changes, it can easily change its stance.

I don't think any newly appointed justices who actually understand the law would have any difficulty overturning many of the judgments the current court has made.

But the damage to what has been a pillar of liberal democratic institutions and the Rule of Law is incalculable.  And maybe that was the long term goal of the Right all along.

[The Minsky Moment]

At this point, I can't see what sort of scruples could hold off naming a bunch of additional Justices to the Supreme Court. Buy some Republicans if you must. They sell for cheap.

I think packing would be a disaster.  I've always opposed it.

But I'd support it now if the Democrats could muster the votes.  This majority is completely out of control and utterly corrupted.

[Oexmelin]

Packing can be opposed if you know your opponents will, even if reluctantly, play fair.

This hasn't been the case with the Republicans for some time.

Once again, (insert Bernie Sanders meme), I urge people to get involved. Make relentless phone calls, give some time. Money if you can, but this thing isn't going to be won just by overspending. Above all, don't overestimate America's capacity to resist authoritarianism ex post facto, based on some law of history. Read project 2025. Yes, it's moronic. Mein kampf was moronic too.

[Razgovory]

Even if we beat Trump this time, we won't hold the White House indefinably.  Eventually some bastard is going to get in and the Supreme Court has said they can do whatever they want.

At least the court has established it can overturn its own rulings willy nilly. So if some day die or retire and composition changes, it can easily change its stance.

So in 50 years this will straighten itself out.  Good to know.

[Caliga]

But I'd support it now if the Democrats could muster the votes.  This majority is completely out of control and utterly corrupted.

Hey, no worries.  Biden can now legally call in an air strike on Clarence Thomas's RV because... reasons, and then replace him with a more cooperative justice.

[Josephus]

Even if we beat Trump this time, we won't hold the White House indefinably.  Eventually some bastard is going to get in and the Supreme Court has said they can do whatever they want.

That's just it. Even if Trump doesn't go all Stalin, there's no reason to believe someone else won't. July 1, 2024 will live in infamy

[frunk]

At this point it's inevitable unless it is reversed or changed quickly.  More ruthless, vicious and uncompromising people than Trump will be seeking the throne.

[Razgovory]

Trump's sentencing has been postponed because of the immunity ruling.  His lawyers are arguing that he shouldn't have to pay money in the libel/rape case now because of the immunity thing.

[jimmy olsen]

Trump's sentencing has been postponed because of the immunity ruling.  His lawyers are arguing that he shouldn't have to pay money in the libel/rape case now because of the immunity thing.

I think the issue is a few small pieces of evidence were from when he was president. 

[Tamas]

Trump's sentencing has been postponed because of the immunity ruling.  His lawyers are arguing that he shouldn't have to pay money in the libel/rape case now because of the immunity thing.

I think the issue is a few small pieces of evidence were from when he was president. 

The likely issue is that the judge doesn't want to declare a sentence on the likely next president before the election, especially when it's Trump who will be having immunity from all kind of retributive actions.

[Sophie Scholl]

Hey, no worries.  Biden can now legally call in an air strike on Clarence Thomas's RV because... reasons, and then replace him with a more cooperative justice.

Maybe they'll give Alito and his wife the Mussolini and Petacci treatment. They seem to enjoy things hanging upside down. I feel like its what they'd want. 

[Sheilbh]

At this point, I can't see what sort of scruples could hold off naming a bunch of additional Justices to the Supreme Court. Buy some Republicans if you must. They sell for cheap.

Yeah. I mean the obvious reason is that it would be an escalation - which is not to deny the pre-existing crisis. But I'm not sure that holds because I don't see any reason to think that restraint would work.

I'm also not convinced that would either. Which is the problem I have.

Once again, (insert Bernie Sanders meme), I urge people to get involved. Make relentless phone calls, give some time. Money if you can, but this thing isn't going to be won just by overspending. Above all, don't overestimate America's capacity to resist authoritarianism ex post facto, based on some law of history. Read project 2025. Yes, it's moronic. Mein kampf was moronic too.

I feel like the "law of history" is going the other way.

I've said before the thing I find really unsettling about the US is that I can't think of any (and I'm sure there are some) examples of a state getting into this sort of situation and being able to course correct.

I find it grim that ancient and early modern writers all talk about the end of democracies or democratic republics, almost as if it's a law of nature and how much of what they describe and the examples they cite I recognise now.

The best I have on course correction maybe wasn't even that but was inoculation instead was perhaps FDR - and perhaps that is the best (only?) approach? Mass mobilisation on a universalist platform - but obviously even then it wasn't truly universal and does it work as cure not prevention? I don't know but that's the best I've got as an idea of how to course correct. I certainly doubt that, despite his admiration, Biden would be capable of leading that.

If you want to look at things from the glass half full perspective, America had almost a 250-year run as a functioning democracy, which is pretty good by historical standards. We'll always have those fond memories to look back on.

Although it depends on what you mean by a functioning democracy (which goes for other countries too) - I think there's a strong argument that it's 60 years - and obviously the racial side of US politics is the bit that makes me hesitate even about FDR's approach. The universalism, even then, fell short.

[Caliga]

Maybe they'll give Alito and his wife the Mussolini and Petacci treatment. They seem to enjoy things hanging upside down. I feel like its what they'd want. 

[Oexmelin]

I'm also not convinced that would either. Which is the problem I have.

At this point, people who hold on to democracy would do well to at least get, and produce, some powerful symbolic gesture indicating that the full measure of the threat is understood, that it requires extraordinary measures, and that people are indeed willing to undertake these measures. Whether or not it would work is an act of political faith, much like democracy is.

I don't think people get the threat. I mean, really get the threat. None of the norms that the Republicans, and Trumps, have consistently undermined have been met with the necessary sense of urgency. That Trump was allowed to play the clock, that the Supreme Court was allowed to fully develop how it did, was both predictable, and was met with unconscionable apathy.

Institutionalists still think the institutions will save them. Or the courts. Many middle class people think things somehow will return to normal after yet another Trumpian parenthesis - and that they'll be mostly okay, anyways. American exceptionalism is one hell of a drug. Whatever will happen will happen - but somehow will happen without much involvement.

I know it's unfair, but when I see my American colleagues (esp. tenured) who continue to relentlessly self-promote their books and articles concerning 18th century French painting, or the Federal Postal service in the 19th century, or the influence of East Indian migrants on Jamaican cuisine, I am like - really? I understand the feel for some semblance of normalcy, but at this point, if that's really your priority - from a position of incredible privilege - I am left speechless.

This is why I am paradoxically more optimistic about France. The far right is doing good numbers, but the left has a long history of mobilization and no fear of confrontation.

The best I have on course correction maybe wasn't even that but was inoculation instead was perhaps FDR - and perhaps that is the best (only?) approach? Mass mobilisation on a universalist platform - but obviously even then it wasn't truly universal and does it work as cure not prevention?

Indeed, the time was different. Mass mobilization was possible in part because many social spaces were "massified", like the factory, but also, because people knew - from the example and threat of the socialist movements - that masses of people could enact true political change in the US. The individualistic turn in American society (and elsewhere) meant that Founders became demi-gods, revolutions happen magically, vilains are mustache-twirling evil masterminds, and the forces of progress, as well as the arc of moral universe, bends without any human intervention. You just have to wait - things will get better. They will not.