390
submitted 4 months ago by mozz@mbin.grits.dev to c/politics@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 144 points 4 months ago

I really feel like his coup attempt should at the fucken least bar him from running. This race really shouldnt be happening right now and we all know it. I fucken hate this place. He should have had harsh consequences, not whatever the fuck we're looking at now.

[-] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 40 points 4 months ago

Whatever is tolerating his candidacy it's not the same constitutional republic anymore. Congress has a duty to call a 14a3 vote and Congress is all taking dark money not to do their salaried jobs.

[-] leadore@lemmy.world 27 points 4 months ago

In the past, the coup attempt would have barred him from running again because when he was impeached after it, the Senate would have unanimously convicted him which would have disqualified him. But since the entire republican party is complicit, they acquitted him instead, which allowed him to run again.

The entire republican party and 2/3 of the Supreme Court are completely on board with project 2025 establishing an authoritarian christian dominionist regime, which means the normal government checks and balances have already been corrupted and neutralized.

We the voters are the only remaining barrier that can stop it, the only way to do that is keep the Democratic party in power. We did it in 2020, partly in 2022 (we lost the House), we have to do it again now in 2024, and we'll have to keep doing it every election until they are finally destroyed as a viable party. We've been barely hanging on with the thinnest of margins.

They can keep trying again and again--we can only fail once (like we did in 2016). One more failure and they win for good because they'll implement Project 2025 and it's over.

[-] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 6 points 4 months ago

We the voters are the only remaining barrier that can stop it,

Trump himself thinks there is a second option for dealing with a problematic presidential candidate.

[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Yeah I'm not doing that. Fuck eternal vigilance. If the Republicans dont stop they should be dissolved as a party. If I have to spend every election like this, I will instead advocate for eliminating the domestic terrorists. We deserve real choices with real candidates that really care about the American people. This is not it in the slightest. I've only ever gotten to vote against this shit stain. I want real choices. And I'll fucken carve them out of my state, my country, if I have to and I won't be alone. In reality I'll probably be arrested after my first Molotov but I dont see the FBI acting which means they're compromised too.

[-] leadore@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

I understand the feeling, but the problem is, keeping a democracy is eternal vigilance and always has been. Things have gotten to this point because we stopped being vigilant around 1980. Yes Republicans should be dissolved as a party but who's going to do that? Yes under a trump regime you and every protestor will be arrested -- and you'll stay arrested. If trump gets in, it will come to what to say but you'll have zero power to do anything about it under a brutally repressive maga regime.
Better to take power the only viable way, which is to replace one of the two existing parties. Take over the democratic party just like the magas took over the republican party. It can be done but we have to keep the fascists from taking control first.

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."

We weren't vigilant.

[-] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Having voted for other president's, you're not missing out on much. The most meaningful vote I've ever considered was when I primaried for bernie.

[-] Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz 5 points 4 months ago

I think back to what a different timeline we would have is Howard Dean would not have done his scream. The guy was leading in so many polls and had alot of charisma, and all he did was do an enthusiastic “aasggghhhhh!”

The press destroyed him for it. It was absolutely ridiculous. And now we have a rapist draft dodger who sells classified information to our enemies.

[-] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Hell, what would have happened if Roger stone had been put underground after Reagan and was never around for Brooks Brothers Riot or all his fuckery with trump? That piece of shit has caused so much trouble.

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 5 points 4 months ago

If not that, it would have been something else. It’s just like picking on the debate and amplifying it times 25 and playing it every single day at the top of every hour. You’re gonna be able to find something and pretend it’s a big deal.

Gore invented the internet. Kerry was stiff and unlikeable. Bush, I could have a beer with. And then, just like anything else when you practice at it, they started to get really good at it. They could just make up any bullshit they wanted and boom! That was the end of someone’s campaign. The Dean Scream was probably the peak of its application. He was talking about taxing the rich? Fuck you, out you go. We’ll just wait for something we can amplify by 25. (And somehow, the Democrats get all the blame when one of these corporate trash candidates wins the nomination as a result. All those Dean people were Democrats, too.)

They got used to being king makers, and pretty much from 1992 to 2016, they were. If someone was corporate friendly like Clinton or Obama, they’d let them pass; and if anyone tried to buck the system, we’re gonna destroy your reputation like a bunch of mean high school girls, and there’s nothing you can do about it.

With Bernie, they learned they had lost their power, and so like any capable professionals they readjusted, and kept the renewed arsenal tucked away for future use.

[-] InternetUser2012@lemmy.today 15 points 4 months ago

He should literally HANG for it, along with everyone else that assisted in it.

[-] Delusional@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Yeah we used to straight up kill traitors to the nation instead of propping them up and trying to get them elected a second time like republicans are doing.

Add to that the fact that he is a child rapist and a conman fraudster who doesn't even have the intelligence of a fourth grader.

I always used to think republicans are dumb but Jesus fucking Christ they're really off the rails. All republicans now are either idiots that have been brainwashed by conservative propaganda or straight up evil villains. There isn't a single positive reason to support trump.

[-] Snowclone@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Well meeting people in private to swap dry ice bomb recipes isn't going to solve this problem... unless....

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 4 months ago

I can't believe he didn't even get charged or investigated immediately. Another win for garland

[-] Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz 6 points 4 months ago

Garland’s need to have the entire case in perfect alignment has screwed over this whole thing. It took him so long to deal with the OKC bombing case. He did a great job, but holy shit it took way too long.

[-] SocialMediaSettler@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

The Rosenbergs were executed for treason. A former President should be treated no differently considering all the shit Trump has done since Jan. 6.

The reason he is allowed to run is because the voting public is entrusted with the power to choose whether or not to elect an authoritarian dictator. Bizarrely, it turns out that was a huge mistake.

[-] GladiusB@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Life isn't fair. It's even less fair when you are poor or ugly.

[-] Snowclone@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

If people aren't willing to go to pitchforks and torches nothings going to happen.

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 71 points 4 months ago

He said he wanted to be a Dictator on Day 1. How many dictators have you ever heard of that gave up power? The American Experiment (executive leaders peacefully giving up power) was such a unique thing because it's so unheard of. Also fitting that Trump ended that tradition on Jan 06.

If Trump or any Republican gets elected again, expect the end of our democracy and the start of the fascist dictatorship. I wish I could convey how absolutely literal I'm being.

[-] Muehe@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

How many dictators have you ever heard of that gave up power?

I get what you are saying and agree, but it is kind of noteworthy that basically every dictator before Caesar did that. Famously there was some retired consul or something in the early republic who was granted the dictatorship, saved Rome from seemingly assured destruction in combat, and then immediately retired back to his farm. Always forget the name... But even people like Sulla, who used his dictatorship to wage a civil war and is to my knowledge the first Roman general to march troops into Rome, eventually resigned their dictatorship. It was originally never intended to be a permanent position, which is why Caesar claiming it for life was such a turn of an era.

I guess what I'm saying overall is Trump might, even if elected to a second term, still turn out to be the American Sulla instead of the American Caesar if you catch my drift.

Disclaimer: Non-American here. Dictatorship bad. All of this is bad.

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Cincinnatus. That was the hero one-battle dictator who went back to his farm after.

I don’t know the history well enough to know how common it was or how real the story is to the way things played out. But I always sort of suspected that the Cincinnatus story was played up so much that we still know it thousands of years later, because of later Roman dictators who really wanted to plant it in the public imagination that benevolent dictators were real, and a totally excellent idea

[-] Muehe@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

Cincinnatus.

Yes, thank you!

Yeah I guess it is quite possible, likely even, that his story was embellished in history, and it was certainly abused later as you say. But to my layperson's knowledge at least, every instance of historically recorded dictatorship before Caesar was relinquished willingly. I also think it quite possible that for a long time there was enough social pressure around such an office to keep it temporary, especially if it was indeed mainly directed against external threats like invasions.

My interpretation is that Sulla set a bad precedent for abuse of the office in domestic politics, Caesar used that precedent to try and kill the (senatorial) republic, and Augustus dealt the finishing blow.

But all of this is an etymological tangent in answer to a rhetorical question anyway. With the drift in meaning Trump basically said he wants to be king, and he might still get his second opportunity to be become Caesar.

load more comments (21 replies)
[-] Corvidae@lemmy.world 46 points 4 months ago

I disagree with Snyder. The crowing of the president as king via Extreme Court's immunity decision was the end. Biden is too good to take advantage, but others besides Trump will.

[-] FunderPants@lemmy.ca 13 points 4 months ago

We can say who the others are. Republicans.

[-] InternetUser2012@lemmy.today 2 points 4 months ago

Republikkklowns

[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

sum up the GOP's response to that: "We Know"

[-] takeda@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

I highly recommend Timothy Snyder's book: "On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons From the Twentieth Century"

It is quite short and everyone should read it. If you can't get the book, he reads it on his YouTube channel.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Big Gretch summed it up this morning as "America Fails". Pretty much the same thing.

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Better way to put it, because America wouldn't end. America as we know it would.

[-] GladiusB@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

All empires have shifts in power. It wouldn't surprise me. But historically it's not unheard of. I would prefer preventing that, but I am just one person.

[-] MummifiedClient5000@feddit.dk 7 points 4 months ago

But Biden is so ^slightly^ old^er^ ^than^ ^trump^.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
390 points (95.8% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2503 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS