|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On September 05 2023 15:58 Severedevil wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2023 10:24 GreenHorizons wrote:
If Trump wins the election, should Biden just peacefully transfer power over the US's nuclear arsenal and military to a fascist?
Yes. There's no sense cancelling democracy to protect democracy. It's one thing to disqualify him from office for treason. It's quite another to let him run but then cancel the election if you don't like the outcome.
Agreed. I don't think fighting fascism with fascism is the way to go.
|
Fascism is not a catch all term to describe 'not democracy'. It abides by quite specific rules, among which is authoritarianism.
|
Norway28783 Posts
Still, the reason why opposition to Trump is uniquely warranted (to the extent where I certainly think there are valid reasons to not allow him to run, while also acknowledging that there are problems with this) is his tenuous relationship with the concept of democracy, and using anti-democratic means as a method to oppose an anti-democratic attitude seems a bit problematic.
The least bad outcome is Trump running and getting soundly defeated. The worst outcome is Trump running and winning.
|
I think he shouldn't be allowed to run because he's quite obviously a treasonous asshole who wants to use the presidency as his own personal get-out-of-jail-free card. The constitution allowing him to run is highly problematic but a far far greater problem is the number of people willing to vote for him. Those are not going away if he wins the elections but is barred from office through autocratic means.
Furthermore, what the US needs is stronger institutions to stop assholes like Trump from breaking them. Barring said asshole from office after elections put him there is clearly just accelerating the destruction of democratic institutions, rather than reinforcing them.
I have some sympathy for people saying "democracy in the US has failed, and we need al-Sisi, ahem, Biden, to save us" but if the other 50% of the country is making the same argument in favor of Trump, you have a pretty huge problem. Democracy is supposed to ensure the transfer of power between disagreeing blocks goes smoothly. The minute it stops going smoothly is the minute violent means of transferring power starts up... and that's more likely than not to lead all the way to civil war. So best to trust that democracy is still alive.
|
United States43821 Posts
Democracy can’t fix bad voters. Too many Americans just really like Trump.
|
On September 05 2023 22:12 KwarK wrote:
Democracy can’t fix bad voters. Too many Americans just really like Trump.
Exactly. In a sane country, Trump being able to run wouldn't be a problem because no one would vote for a Trump. This should be true in 2016, but even more true in 2024 with a Trump either in jail or being accused in a dozen of very credible criminal courts.
But it doesn't seem to work that way in the US anymore.
|
The issue with "democracy" is that it is more so an idea/theory and not a framework for achieving things.
Democracy is the foundation from which a government can be made, but that government needs a ton of add-ons to achieve the goals of democracy. We need to make sure voters are well-informed, protected against manipulation, consistently participate in voting, and many other things. Without those supportive mechanisms, democracy makes a bad impression and does not achieve its objectives.
|
On September 05 2023 10:24 GreenHorizons wrote:+ Show Spoiler +If Trump is the usher for fascism in the US as Democrats insist (and they are basically right imo) it makes me wonder: If Trump wins the election, should Biden just peacefully transfer power over the US's nuclear arsenal and military to a fascist? It would seem to create a bit of a dilemma/paradox where the only way to protect the US from being ruled by a fascist would be to disregard its democracy. As such I'm curious where people here fall on that possibility. Poll: If Trump wins, should Biden peacefully transfer power to Trump?Yes (15) 79% No (2) 11% I don't know (2) 11% 19 total votes You must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ No
☐ Yes
☐ I don't know
Indications are this is going to be a perpetual question people opposing Republicans have to ask themselves with the names changing but not the core question about whether the US should/will empower a fascist if their democracy votes for it.
Very fascinating results. The primary rationales for "yes" seems to be:
1. Trump/Republicans aren't fascist so if they are lost to they will be removed democratically in a future election (kinda flies in the face of Democrat campaign messaging, the recent conversation on the choice being Biden or fascism, and constant efforts from Republicans to disenfranchise people that might vote for someone other than them).
2. A version of the tolerance paradox. Outside of free speech absolutists, this is a clear contradiction.
I'd probably still have to put myself in the "I don't know" camp, but I do find the inverse of stuff like this:
On September 05 2023 17:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2023 15:58 Severedevil wrote:On September 05 2023 10:24 GreenHorizons wrote:
If Trump wins the election, should Biden just peacefully transfer power over the US's nuclear arsenal and military to a fascist?
Yes. There's no sense cancelling democracy to protect democracy. It's one thing to disqualify him from office for treason. It's quite another to let him run but then cancel the election if you don't like the outcome. Agreed. I don't think fighting fascism with fascism is the way to go.
more intuitive. That being:
"I don't think voluntarily putting the most powerful military in the world under the command of a fascist insurrectionist is a wise strategy to stave off fascism."
|
|
|
Norway28783 Posts
What does 'no' even look like? Pray the military joins your side? Accept a civil war? Do a january 6th just with Kamala not being traitor Mike Pence?
I mean, Trump did already get the presidency and then lose it. I actually do believe that if Trump wins, he will have power for 4 years and no more than that. 4 more years of Trump is enough to be very damaging in very many ways, but I actually don't see how he'd hold power for longer than that. I agree with the guys saying the big problem is that there are enough americans willing to vote for Trump that it's a possibility that he'll become president - but I don't think your institutions are so weak that Trump at this point can become president for life. If he actually won the previous election and was way more popular, maybe it'd be something to worry about.
|
United States43821 Posts
Trump is undeniably fascist but he’s also old, unhealthy, and undeniably stupid. His fascist agenda isn’t gas chambers and lebensraum, it’s arresting people who are mean to him on social media and fucking with international trade.
Against that we must weigh the potential damage of overturning democracy and the sheer scale of the violence that would result from that. You can hate Trump without wishing to see martial law and pro-democracy protesters machine gunned down on the streets, seceding states conquered by force, US armies fighting each other. Though it likely wouldn’t come to that because even if Biden refused to concede his term would still end and the army wouldn’t back him which makes the entire question moot.
|
On September 06 2023 03:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:
What does 'no' even look like? Pray the military joins your side? Accept a civil war? Do a january 6th just with Kamala not being traitor Mike Pence? Hard to say, but those are all possibilities and I'm sure there are plenty more. Definitely have a better chance maintaining control of more of the military if you don't willingly hand a fascist control of it in some naïve high road attempt though.
I mean, Trump did already get the presidency and then lose it. Barely lost it (we're talking 10's of thousands of votes across a few states), after being impeached twice to no avail. Only to nearly overturn the election where were it not for what I'm to understand as a singular person in Pence not being just a bit more of a sycophant/coward/etc, Trump would be president right now after invoking the Insurrection Act, declaring martial law, and deputizing the proud boys and other groups. I actually do believe that if Trump wins, he will have power for 4 years and no more than that. 4 more years of Trump is enough to be very damaging in very many ways, but I actually don't see how he'd hold power for longer than that. I agree with the guys saying the big problem is that there are enough americans willing to vote for Trump that it's a possibility that he'll become president - but I don't think your institutions are so weak that Trump at this point can become president for life. If he actually won the previous election and was way more popular, maybe it'd be something to worry about.
While I personally think Trump is plenty dangerous on his own, I'm probably more concerned about the fascists around him at this point not having the same qualms Pence did and that being enough. Also them knowing Trump's got a limited clock so there's a lot of potential in being his heir apparent.
I obviously don't have the faith in US institutions that others here do, so I think it's much more important to not lose. In part, because Democrats as the last line of defense against fascists will literally invite them to sit down in the Oval Office and toss them the nuclear football on the way out.
This is in part why I've been stressing how much worse off Biden is polling this cycle compared to last and why Democrats have to do better regardless of their perception on the clarity of their contradictory framing of the choice between "Biden and fascism (but not really fascism, but also definitely fascism)".
They don't have to get my vote, but they do have to get enough, and they barely scraped by last time with way more favorable polling.
|
United States43821 Posts
The American people have to do better.
|
|
|
Norway28783 Posts
Genuinely curious here, for the americans with more legal knowledge: Would Pence supporting the coup have made any difference in the long run? My quick googling says it would've been a longer battle involving congress/courts and that Biden would become president anyway, but I don't really know enough about this. I guess it's unknown territory but like, really? Was it down to one person?
|
United States43821 Posts
On September 06 2023 04:35 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Genuinely curious here, for the americans with more legal knowledge: Would Pence supporting the coup have made any difference in the long run? My quick googling says it would've been a longer battle involving congress/courts and that Biden would become president anyway, but I don't really know enough about this. I guess it's unknown territory but like, really? Was it down to one person?
There’s no rulebook on this. The transfer of power is both procedural, as defined in the constitution, and real. A new monarch is appointed by God and crowned by archbishops. If the archbishops refuse to crown them do they not become the monarch?
Some things are because they are and some things are because we believe them to be the case. The crown sometimes makes the king and the king sometimes makes the crown.
Pence could have blocked the procedural transfer of balance had he not been talked out of it by Dan Quayle. There’s no way of knowing what that would have done. After all we’ve already had a US election overturned on the basis of procedure, Al Gore in 2000, and procedure won in that case.
|
On September 06 2023 04:35 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Genuinely curious here, for the americans with more legal knowledge: Would Pence supporting the coup have made any difference in the long run? My quick googling says it would've been a longer battle involving congress/courts and that Biden would become president anyway, but I don't really know enough about this. I guess it's unknown territory but like, really? Was it down to one person?
I'm no legal expert, but he wouldn't need the courts or congress to invoke the Insurrection Act, then he doesn't need the courts or congress to declare martial law and deputize groups like the proud boys. Once that's been done, what congress and the courts have to say about it is basically dependent on what the fascists allow them to.
|
On September 06 2023 04:44 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2023 04:35 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Genuinely curious here, for the americans with more legal knowledge: Would Pence supporting the coup have made any difference in the long run? My quick googling says it would've been a longer battle involving congress/courts and that Biden would become president anyway, but I don't really know enough about this. I guess it's unknown territory but like, really? Was it down to one person? I'm no legal expert, but he wouldn't need the courts or congress to invoke the Insurrection Act, then he doesn't need the courts or congress to declare martial law and deputize groups like the proud boys. Once that's been done, what congress and the courts have to say about it is basically dependent on what the fascists allow them to.
That seems like a rather simplistic way of looking at it. I mean, maybe the people roll over and take it. Or maybe that is the start of a civil war.
|
On September 06 2023 04:35 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Genuinely curious here, for the americans with more legal knowledge: Would Pence supporting the coup have made any difference in the long run? My quick googling says it would've been a longer battle involving congress/courts and that Biden would become president anyway, but I don't really know enough about this. I guess it's unknown territory but like, really? Was it down to one person?
Ask yourself this: Why did Pence not feel comfortable getting into that car? What you are saying is fundamentally incompatible with Pence's decision making.
|
On September 06 2023 08:14 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2023 04:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 06 2023 04:35 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Genuinely curious here, for the americans with more legal knowledge: Would Pence supporting the coup have made any difference in the long run? My quick googling says it would've been a longer battle involving congress/courts and that Biden would become president anyway, but I don't really know enough about this. I guess it's unknown territory but like, really? Was it down to one person? I'm no legal expert, but he wouldn't need the courts or congress to invoke the Insurrection Act, then he doesn't need the courts or congress to declare martial law and deputize groups like the proud boys. Once that's been done, what congress and the courts have to say about it is basically dependent on what the fascists allow them to. That seems like a rather simplistic way of looking at it. I mean, maybe the people roll over and take it. Or maybe that is the start of a civil war.
Well they are already willing to let a fascist insurrectionist back in White House and in charge of the military/nuclear arsenal under questionable democratic conditions (gerrymandering, voter ID, poll closures, last minute relocations, faulty equipment, horrendously long lines/waits, the electoral college and so on) at best, so rolling over is certainly a possibility (I'd say more so for those that are relatively comfortable under the status quo).
It's not much of a stretch to say they'd basically make sure they're relatively safe/comfortable under the new status quo and tell people that aren't to patiently wait until the next primary (regardless of whether it is coming, functional, or spectacle) and then "vote blue no matter who" like they always do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
