What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Sheilbh]

GOP is definitely getting better. Throwing all the crazies out. Definitely.

Yeah - and despite it all they'll likely do well in 2022. I feel it's more likely than not Trump wins in 2024 and he'll be so much more brutal and ruthless and aggressive this time, it'll make his first term look like Jimmy Carter's

[Jacob]

Yeah - and despite it all they'll likely do well in 2022. I feel it's more likely than not Trump wins in 2024 and he'll be so much more brutal and ruthless and aggressive this time, it'll make his first term look like Jimmy Carter's

If Trump wins 2024 that's the end of democracy in the US. The GOP will not relinquish power in 2028. Or 2032 or whatever other point in the future.

[viper37]

Insurrection in support of slavery leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands wasn't a capital crime.

It wasn't an insurrection, it was a democratic process that led to secession.  If the North had vacated the forts it occupied in the Southern States, there would have been no war.  It's highly unlikely the South would have launched a prehemptive attack on the Northern States.

It is not that different from the process used by Texas to secede from Mexico, a process validated by the US Federal government when they recognized the independence, then proceeded to annex the Republic and wage war on Mexico to protect their interests.  But it is totally different from the situation in which these insurrectionists were on Jan 6th.  They wanted to topple the democratically elected government to replace the US President by the dude who lost, under false pretense.

[The Minsky Moment]

  If the North had vacated the forts it occupied in the Southern States, there would have been no war.

Not in itself, but if the United States collectively pulled down its pants, allowed the secessionist traitors to paddle their collective asses, and said "thank you sir, may I have another" - that might have done the trick. 

[Berkut]

Insurrection in support of slavery leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands wasn't a capital crime.

It wasn't an insurrection, it was a democratic process that led to secession.

Fuking A. You have said this before, been called out on it, and refused to address it.

So lets try again.

How is at a "democratic process" to vote on whether to secede in order to protect the ability to enslave part of your population when you don't let the part of the population in question get a vote????

There was nothing "democractic" about southern secession for slavery. 40% of the population, THE FUCKING SLAVES, did not get a vote.

Stop saying that. It is a lie. You know it is a lie.

[The Brain]

The more general point is that insurrection is very simple from a legal POV. If you win you were right, if you lose you were wrong.

[Eddie Teach]

On the subject of revenge:



Yours for only $27.99 on Don Jr.'s Website.

The sleeve ruins it. 

[Grey Fox]

Insurrection in support of slavery leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands wasn't a capital crime.

It wasn't an insurrection, it was a democratic process that led to secession.

Fuking A. You have said this before, been called out on it, and refused to address it.

So lets try again.

How is at a "democratic process" to vote on whether to secede in order to protect the ability to enslave part of your population when you don't let the part of the population in question get a vote????

There was nothing "democractic" about southern secession for slavery. 40% of the population, THE FUCKING SLAVES, did not get a vote.

Stop saying that. It is a lie. You know it is a lie.

Wait, are you telling us that democratic process qualifier can only be attached to universal democracy?

That doesn't seems wise.

[Berkut]

Insurrection in support of slavery leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands wasn't a capital crime.

It wasn't an insurrection, it was a democratic process that led to secession.

Fuking A. You have said this before, been called out on it, and refused to address it.

So lets try again.

How is at a "democratic process" to vote on whether to secede in order to protect the ability to enslave part of your population when you don't let the part of the population in question get a vote????

There was nothing "democractic" about southern secession for slavery. 40% of the population, THE FUCKING SLAVES, did not get a vote.

Stop saying that. It is a lie. You know it is a lie.

Wait, are you telling us that democratic process qualifier can only be attached to universal democracy?

That doesn't seems wise.

Of course not.

But if you want to call some particular process "democracy" it is rather obvious that it has no validity if the "democratic process" in question denies a vote to the very people that are going to be profoundly effected by that vote.

It's not like we are noting that women were not allowed to vote - there is no reason to believe that had they had the right to vote, that vote would have been different, and the nature of the vote was not specific to women.

But a vote to secede in order to protect the right of one group to enslave another group cannot possibly be called "democratic" when the group that is going to get to continue being slaves indefinitely do not get a say in the vote.

[grumbler]

The more general point is that insurrection is very simple from a legal POV. If you win you were right, if you lose you were wrong.

"He who wins is the king; he who loses is the rebel" - Confucius

[Sheilbh]

Wait, are you telling us that democratic process qualifier can only be attached to universal democracy?

That doesn't seems wise.

Don't see why not it's not wise? I think it's fair to say the US wasn't a meaningful democracy before the 60s, similarly with restrictions around the world on female suffrage. Partially democratic is maybe better?

[grumbler]

Wait, are you telling us that democratic process qualifier can only be attached to universal democracy?

That doesn't seems wise.

It seems more wise to acknowledge that the democratic process qualifier only exists when everyone capable of the vote and impacted by it are allowed to vote.

Democracy of the minority isn't real democracy, the ancient Greeks be damned.

That's "democracy is two lions and a lamb voting on what's for dinner."

[Berkut]

Wait, are you telling us that democratic process qualifier can only be attached to universal democracy?

That doesn't seems wise.

It seems more wise to acknowledge that the democratic process qualifier only exists when everyone capable of the vote and impacted by it are allowed to vote.

Democracy of the minority isn't real democracy, the ancient Greeks be damned.

That's "democracy is two lions and a lamb voting on what's for dinner."

Worse then that, it is 2 lions and 3 lambs voting on whats for dinner, and the lambs don't get a vote.

[grumbler]

Wait, are you telling us that democratic process qualifier can only be attached to universal democracy?

That doesn't seems wise.

It seems more wise to acknowledge that the democratic process qualifier only exists when everyone capable of the vote and impacted by it are allowed to vote.

Democracy of the minority isn't real democracy, the ancient Greeks be damned.

That's "democracy is two lions and a lamb voting on what's for dinner."

Worse then that, it is 2 lions and 3 lambs voting on whats for dinner, and the lambs don't get a vote.

Or, more accurately, 2 lions and 3 lambs voting on what's for dinner, and only one lamb gets to vote.

[Syt]

Yeah - and despite it all they'll likely do well in 2022. I feel it's more likely than not Trump wins in 2024 and he'll be so much more brutal and ruthless and aggressive this time, it'll make his first term look like Jimmy Carter's

If Trump wins 2024 that's the end of democracy in the US. The GOP will not relinquish power in 2028. Or 2032 or whatever other point in the future.

In recent federal elections the Republicans won their majorities from low population states. E.g. looking at how much population R senators represent vs D senators, it's quite lopsided. Trump lost the popular vote in 2016. And seats in the House of Representatives are being locked in by partisan gerrymandering (and R run states are in the process of securing more control of the electoral process).

But how long can they run an extremist course in government against the majority of the population? At what point are thing going to give?