Quo Vadis GOP?

[Eddie Teach]

I'm glad your experience is better than mine. 30 years ago I felt that it was possible to defend democracy without being called evil/Nazi. I don't feel that today. And I certainly won't defend democracy in public in Sweden ever again.

Well, I don't live in the silly shrill hysteric world of our royal capital.

My interaction with Swedes is mostly online.

That's going to make it seem like people are far more extreme and politically active.

[The Brain]

I'm glad your experience is better than mine. 30 years ago I felt that it was possible to defend democracy without being called evil/Nazi. I don't feel that today. And I certainly won't defend democracy in public in Sweden ever again.

Well, I don't live in the silly shrill hysteric world of our royal capital.

My interaction with Swedes is mostly online.

That's going to make it seem like people are far more extreme and politically active.

That is not my experience. I have yet to meet someone who is significantly different online and offline.

[alfred russel]

Yeah I think Trump is more dangerous because he doesn't accept the system applies to him at all. He would never accept losing an election - including the GOP primaries - and I think democracies on the loser's consent. It sort of relies on both sides saying if we lose that's fair and we accept the legitimacy of the victory by the other side.

Trump has significantly weakened that on one side of American democracy - and, if you genuinely think the other side has stolen the election, as many Republicans do, you can take almost any measures to stop that from happening again.

I think Nixon attacked the "free and fair" bit of elections. Trump attacked the legitimacy of the elections themselves.

I don't know the solution/way back from there. I suspect it's probably something like a set of catastrophic results for Republicans - like 64 - but that's not happened yet.

I see things as the opposite. What gets people to accept election results is the chance to win down the road. A catastrophe can have the opposite effect: in 64 it didn't because the GOP understood it was nominating a radical and that didn't mean that party lost its viability if it returned to its more traditional roots.

A catastrophic electoral result that seems to indicate the damnation of future opportunity can promote a total breakdown. The best example is the election of 1860. Go back to the last John C. Calhoun speeches (died years before the election): the North was obtaining a dominate electoral position through decades of underhanded methods: taxing the south to subsidize northern interests. 1860 elected Lincoln. The result wasn't the south saying, "you beat us fair and square under the constitution, good job guys, now we need to find a new platform to get majority support", it was the civil war.

[Threviel]

I don't think lots of intolerant people is a new thing. My experience is that the ideal has changed and is still changing in Sweden, away from an open democratic society.

Interesting. Will think about it.

[The Brain]

I don't think lots of intolerant people is a new thing. My experience is that the ideal has changed and is still changing in Sweden, away from an open democratic society.

Interesting. Will think about it.

Like I said, I may be wrong.

[Duque de Bragança]

Haven't used any of those. My experience is that it's not a matter of online/offline.

Ok. Try associating with better people.

Take that Languish!   

[Jacob]

Take that Languish!   

What if Languish is where you try to associate with better people

[Razgovory]

Two comments: I think Watergate was trivial compared to the January coup. And the fact that Trump still had support after the coup seems to me to indicate a significant weakening of the support for democracy in the US.

Nixon was legitimately evil, and legitimately smart and cunning.

Trump...

My opinion is that Watergate was more serious -- the state using its power to try to stack the deck in an election, and then cover up what they did. Versus Trump firing up the dumbest people on the planet to storm the capital and get arrested within an hour.

I do get the perspective on why people would feel otherwise though.

Watergate was extra-legal.  They broke into a office building and tried to steal documents.  It's not really a state thing.  Also... Trump's people didn't get "arrested in an hour".  Most simply walked out.  Those that were arrested were arrested week often months later.  Currently the biggest danger is that state legislatures voting themselves the power to simply overturn elections they don't like.  That is a state thing.

[Syt]

Turns out some GOP snowflakes are ok with cancel culture.

https://secondnexus.com/surry-county-republicans-ban-coke

NC Republicans Ban Coke Machines After Coca-Cola Criticized Georgia Voter Suppression Law

The conservative crusade against so-called "cancel culture" has become a pillar of the Republican party's platform. Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH) said that cancel culture was the "number one issue" facing the United States today. Earlier this year, he called for a congressional committee hearing to address the matter. At former President Donald Trump's second impeachment trial for inciting an insurrection, his defense team claimed the process was "constitutional cancel culture."

But all too often, the same conservatives who rail against cancel culture simultaneously perpetuate it themselves.

This most recently manifested in Surry County, North Carolina, where the Republican officials banned all Coca-Cola machines from government facilities, citing the Atlanta-based company's opposition to the recently passed voter suppression law in Georgia, nearly 400 miles away.

In a letter written to the company's CEO and reported by NBC News, Surry County Commissioner Ed Harris said:

"Our Board felt that was the best way to take a stand and express our disappointment in Coca-Cola's actions, which are not representative of most views of our citizens. Our Board hopes that other organizations across the country are taking similar stances against Coca-Cola and sincerely wishes that future marketing efforts and comments emanating from your company are more considerate of all your customers' viewpoints."

The letter was in response to comments from CEO James Quincey back in March, which called Georgia's new voting law "unacceptable" and "a step backwards."

Georgia saw backlash from a number of private companies after its Republican governor, Brian Kemp, signed into law the policy that limits ballot drop boxes, voter accessibility, and effectively bans giving food and water to voters in long lines.

[alfred russel]

Watergate was extra-legal.  They broke into a office building and tried to steal documents.  It's not really a state thing.  Also... Trump's people didn't get "arrested in an hour".  Most simply walked out.  Those that were arrested were arrested week often months later.  Currently the biggest danger is that state legislatures voting themselves the power to simply overturn elections they don't like.  That is a state thing.

Watergate was a state thing: executive branch officials were involved in a crime and the executive branch asserted it didn't need to comply with normal investigative procedures because of its constitutional position.

State legislatures have the constitutional authority to simply assign their electoral votes without an election. In fact, back when Berkut's source considered us to be a democracy (though we don't qualify now ), not all states let their citizens vote for president at all.

[Sheilbh]

I see things as the opposite. What gets people to accept election results is the chance to win down the road. A catastrophe can have the opposite effect: in 64 it didn't because the GOP understood it was nominating a radical and that didn't mean that party lost its viability if it returned to its more traditional roots.

A catastrophic electoral result that seems to indicate the damnation of future opportunity can promote a total breakdown. The best example is the election of 1860. Go back to the last John C. Calhoun speeches (died years before the election): the North was obtaining a dominate electoral position through decades of underhanded methods: taxing the south to subsidize northern interests. 1860 elected Lincoln. The result wasn't the south saying, "you beat us fair and square under the constitution, good job guys, now we need to find a new platform to get majority support", it was the civil war.

Yeah I may be under-rating the possibility of civil war because my assumption is that won't happen.

And my view is you can have the best constitution in the world but it doesn't mean anything if the parties don't accept its legitimacy. I basically think this is a political problem which means it needs a political solution and the best I can think of is comprehensive defeat leading to change within a party just as the John Birchers were purged post-64.

I actually think Trump is bad but possibly the more significant and important issue is that the GOP have basically decided to lean into minoritarian politics, which are very strong under the US constitution. But I don't really know how politics or democracy works if one side stops trying to actually win a majority or 50%+1 because they don't need to to achieve their goals. And I think that is a crucial difference with Orban - his approach to politics is basically majoritarian: he wins a huge percent of the vote and has a super-majority so refuses limits on his side's policies. The GOP is the opposite.

My suspicion is that it just results in increasing dysfunction, increasing dissatisfaction with politics and increasing polarisation. But I don't know how it ends - that scenario in other Presidential republics has led to coups, typically of a sort of "restorationist" approach - the politicians have broke the system the generals take over to "restore" it and possibly set new limits. The more likely alternatives I think would be if Biden is very successful or if the rules were changed to weaken the minoritarian protections (no filibuster, extra judges or whatever else) - because either of those would probably force the GOP to try and expand their vote and re-engage with the system. As long as they can broadly achieve their aims at a national level with the Supreme Court, with 40+ votes in the Senate and with the occasional presidential victory there's no real reason to engage. But that is a guess.

[garbon]

No trump on fbook until at least 2023

[Syt]

https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1401978575054684175

Greg Abbott
@GregAbbott_TX

To keep Texas the best state in the nation, we can never forget WHY our state is so exceptional.

I signed a law establishing the 1836 project, which promotes patriotic education & ensures future generations understand TX values.

Together, we'll keep our rich history alive.

I assume the curriculum won't include:

[Oexmelin]

Yesterday, the Florida board of education, under the leadership of its distinguished Pat Robertson's university graduate, issued a directive  banning the use of critical race theory and the 1619 project in the classroom. Texas and Iowa are currently envisionning similar prohibition either through laws or similar directives.

In Florida, the teaching of history "may not define American history as something other than the creation of a new nation based largely on the universal principles states in the Declaration of Independance".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/texas-critical-race-theory-bill-teachers/2021/06/02/4a72afda-bee9-11eb-9bae-5a86187646fe_story.html

[Valmy]

Pretty sure we already have similar guidelines in Texas. But if there are going to be any laws passed about that they missed their chance, have to try again in 2023.

But my understanding is the 1619 thing is not the best history anyway.