What does a "threat to democracy" actually look like?

a reply to: Xtrozero

You wont see me disagree with that i only disagree if you think the right is any better, maybe some are too young to remeber the bush area, that was a crap show applauded by the right...
US politics is like a sports match where your team is the best even if they suck... It's all hype, and tribalism, no sense of unity or critical self reflection.

What does a threat to democracy look like?
It looks like Chuck Schumer.
His Trump-Hate is so deep and thick, he's going to try to do a run-around the Supreme Court in an anti-Constitutional move.

Check Schumer Working on Bill to Strip Trump of Immunity Set Forth in US Supreme Court Ruling

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: network dude

Nah just for steping down to their level of ignorance and dance their tango...

so by asking the question, I am no better than them. I think I need you to explain that a bit more.

a reply to: network dude

Meh... I'm not going to play the kneejerk game with you.

If you have a specific question regarding my first post I'm happy to adress it.

So i guess you'd have to show me where I said anything about it being your fault.

I explained to you the nature of talking points. Also how talking about them is weak minded. There is nothing to understand because they are not factual points. Just like the "we are not a democracy" talking point... I see why that is hard to understand for somone so absorbed by them...

a reply to: Terpene

I mean it's just a talking point with little to no substance, democratic means you get to vote. The process used to elect US politicians is democratic, the way the teritorry is organized is a constitutional republic. Yes words have meaning beyond the talking points you repeat.

It's like some of you are just as ignorant about democracy and it's meaning as the lefties that repeat their talking point.
Democratic process can always be a danger to democracy because nothing stops the masses to elect a dictator. After all it was a left leaning germany that elected Hitler fair and square.

I can see how some are worried that Trump could have the potential to lead his lemmings towards a dictatorship. But I honestly think that's just the lefts projection of their own blind obedience. Though I wouldn't be surprised if that was in the play book all along. In the end it will be up to the right to proof them wrong...

as you were responding to the OP, it looks like it was directed at me, who wrote the OP. As if I am ignorant about democracy and am just repeating talking points.

I asked a question based on those talking points. If you don't know, then to answer would be ignorant. But you do you.

www.foxnews.com...

Liberals on social media seethed in reaction to Democratic lawmakers reportedly admitting behind the scenes that former President Trump isn't a "threat to democracy" as their party loudly claims.

New York Times columnist Ezra Klein appeared on The Bulwark Podcast Tuesday and revealed what "top Democrats" have told him off the record as they panic over whether they should support or abandon President Biden on their ticket.

"People are weighing this set of things. Like, ‘It would be quite unpleasant for me personally to come out against the president as an elected official in the Democratic Party,' and weighing what will happen if Donald Trump wins, and saying, in a revealed preference way, ‘I can live with Donald Trump winning,’" Klein said. "And I've heard people say that to me off the record, to be fair-"

a reply to: network dude

So you agree that the process by which your politicians are elected is indeed democratic?

Was it just to showcase the absurdity on both sides, you threw in your favorite talking points about democracy?

I hope that's the case, but the way you ask seems honest. So yeah, you won't understand someone elses talking points, if you fail to understand your own. It's a bitter pill, where ignorance often is bliss. Just be happy with it, don't try to understand things you aren't ready to actually understand.

A threat to democracy??? All of you throw your dollies out of your prams, Biden, Trump, insert any name you want, they're minor threats to certain sections of the people,IE. democrats hate republicans so they try to hurt them. The same with republicans against the democrats it's all political theatre.
If you really want to actually see a threat to democracy look no further than what's happening in Haiti, THAT'S a threat to democracy. That is what happens when the populace, or certain sections, realise they have the ultimate power if they want to use it.

originally posted by: network dude
It's the new talking point, and has been used in every argument made as of late. Trump is an existential threat to Democracy! It's why we need to vote for the potato. It's the most important election of all time. If the dems don't win, the world will end.

OK, maybe that's true. But should I just take the left's word for all that? Should I just gobble up that fear and not put any thought into it, like most on the left? I'd like to at the very least, know what horrible things are going to happen, so I can prepare. Which brings me to the question.

What threats are the most frightening with regards to a second Trump term? I think I know, and if I was a career politician, it would scare me too. But not being a leftie, and not consuming only MSNBC all day every day, I don't really know what the true threat is. So here is your chance. Here is the perfect spot to tell everyone what Trump will do this time that is a threat to our very democracy? (And yes, I know it's a Constitutional Republic)

OK, fair question.

To answer it, you first have to look at what he did the last time he was POTUS. In the Fall of 2019, when the Democrats still had a clown car full of wannabe candidates, Trump correctly identified that Biden was the only one who could beat him. By late Spring of 2020, Biden had been identified as the likely Dem candidate and the Covid Pandemic was making Trump even more unpopular than usual. According to unguarded comments by Steve Bannon and Rudy Guiliani, Trump had made the decision by that time that the only way to stay in office was to try to bypass the Electoral College process. Otherwise, he was going to lose the election to Biden.

So he set the stage by starting the lie that the election (which wouldn't happen for another 6 months or so) was "rigged". He couldn't explain exactly how it was going to be rigged. Maybe it would be mail in ballots? Maybe it would be vote harvesters? Maybe it would be Jewish Space Lasers? His cult following doesn't really require logical consistency from him, any lie will do. In fact, the more lies the better. So on the night of the election, before all the ballots were counted, he simply declared himself the winner and persisted in that lie from that point on. He had Giuliani and Sydney Powell bring bogus law suits everywhere they could that were so pathetically baseless that they ended up getting disbarred. He got his enablers in most of the swing states to make up forged documents claiming that they were the real slates of electors and send them in to the Electoral College. The Electoral College realized the documents were forgeries, ignored them, and declared Biden the winner.

That left only the counting of the votes on Jan. 6 by the Joint Session of Congress as his last opportunity to stay in office. The plan was to disrupt the counting of the votes for a sufficiently long time that he could get his cronies in Congress to throw the decision to the House of Representatives under the 20th amendment. Under the 20th Amendment, when the Joint Session can't come to a decision, the House of Reps gets to choose a President. Since the House is majority Republican, they would have chosen Trump. During all this time, he took zero actions to hand over the reins of power to the incoming administration or to make plans for vacating the White House. He didn't pack up those classified documents he took with him to Mar-a-Lago until a day or two before the movers showed up. His intent to stay in power regardless of what the voters had decided was clear.

If he gets elected again, he will probably try a variation of the same plan in 2028, assuming he is still alive. As a second term POTUS, he won't be allowed to have his name on the ballot in 2024, but that would not prevent the House from naming him President anyway, under the 20th if he has enough Reps like Jim Jordan and Marjorie Taylor Green in place. I have no doubt he would try that, unless his dementia has progressed to the point where he is entirely non-functional. I'm not convinced it would succeed, since a number of safeguards have been put in place since the last time. But I'm not convinced it wouldn't succeed, either.

In any case, his intent is clear. As Steve Bannon put it, he wants to stay in power, but "doesn't want to ever have to face the electorate again."

That's where the anti-democratic part comes in.

originally posted by: Terpene

You wont see me disagree with that i only disagree if you think the right is any better, maybe some are too young to remeber the bush area, that was a crap show applauded by the right...
US politics is like a sports match where your team is the best even if they suck... It's all hype, and tribalism, no sense of unity or critical self reflection.

Outside of the wars, Bush was great. He did more for veterans than any other President in history, but then he got us into wars, so judging the good and bad parts is hard. Obama was OK first 4 years, but in 2012 the # hit the fan in terms of wokeness, virtual signaling, gaslighting, reinventing history, etc. etc. The left swung hard left never to recover and Obama led the way.

My view is typically am I better off or worse as one of my key measuring points. Carter I was worse, Reagan I was much better, Bush Sr about the same, Clinton I was worse, Bush much better, Obama better first 4/same second 4, Trump better, Biden much worse.

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: ADVISOR

Enlighten me... by which process is your government elected? Is it called a republic process? I'll give you a hint...
If you get to vote it is a democratic process... If that triggers your republican talking points is not changing anything.

Didn’t Russia and Iran just recently have elections?

a reply to: network dude

" What does a "threat to democracy" actually look like? "


Ah ,

a reply to: network dude

The threat to democracy would be holding the politician's feet to the fire when it comes to abiding by the Constitution. The constitution "IS" the biggest threat to democracy.

What does a threat to democracy look like?



Democrats counting and processing the ballots behind closed doors (and windows).

a reply to: NorthOS

Case in point, unlike the US their electoral process doesn't meet the standards to be considered democratic...

So yeah we circle back to the US having a legit democratic electoral process, and the brain dead talking points on both sides...

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: network dude

I mean it's just a talking point with little to no substance, democratic means you get to vote. The process used to elect US politicians is democratic, the way the teritorry is organized is a constitutional republic. Yes words have meaning beyond the talking points you repeat.

It's like some of you are just as ignorant about democracy and it's meaning as the lefties that repeat their talking point.

Democratic process can always be a danger to democracy because nothing stops the masses to elect a dictator. After all it was a left leaning germany that elected Hitler fair and square.

I can see how some are worried that Trump could have the potential to lead his lemmings towards a dictatorship. But I honestly think that's just the lefts projection of their own blind obedience. Though I wouldn't be surprised if that was in the play book all along. In the end it will be up to the right to proof them wrong...

Germany in the early 1930s was not predominantly left-leaning. The political landscape was highly fragmented with significant representation across the spectrum, including strong conservative and nationalist elements.

Adolf Hitler was not elected through a straightforward democratic process. While the Nazi Party (NSDAP) gained substantial support in the Reichstag (German parliament) elections, Hitler was appointed Chancellor by President Paul von Hindenburg on January 30, 1933, as part of a political deal. The Nazis never won an outright majority in a free and fair election.

The Nazi Party became the largest party in the Reichstag by July 1932, but it did not secure a majority. In the March 1933 elections, held after Hitler had already become Chancellor, the Nazis used significant intimidation and suppression of political opponents to secure a plurality.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: ADVISOR

even if we all took up arms and marched to DC, what then? We have already learned that to march to the Capitol is Insurrection and you can be jailed for life, so who's going to go against that? Who's going to risk it all? It would take for everyone to be on the same page, and everyone to agree there is a problem so great, that the threat of violence was the only way forward. I don't see that solidifying at all.

Many of us want to see it come to fruition peacefully. Many of us also understand that's not likely, but we still hope. A few of us would join a movement to fix things, but wouldn't do so without a clear path, and a clear leader. Until people have to do without, they won't be coming to that way of thinking. I think we have given them too much power, and we won't be getting it back.

I am sure we have apparently given them too much and they got drunk on it, started peeing on our legs and calling it rain even. They have been rubbing our noses in it. I hope this white hat, Q, Navy Seals, or somebody who can do something about it, starts arresting those on the Epstein flight logs with corroborating witnesses/victims aid. I am hoping anyway for those who can do it they finally DO SOMETHING about one wrong we can all see being ignored on the Pedo's. We would rally to that beginning in mass.

I see a new threat today. Quack doctor "specialists", say they need to give Biden a cognitive test, but even more so they need to give Trump a cognitive test now. They say its because Trump messes up in his speeches a whole lot. Sounds like they feel that Trump has dementia, and it is far more important to focus on him than Joe

originally posted by: JAY1980
What's destroying democracy?

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge."
Hosea 4.6

That's what...

Orwell said "the truth is dangerous in a time when lies rule the day".

Well, we're not a Democracy but we do have a Democratic form of government. I see the real threat as being a threat to the Constitution and the freedoms it describes.

The risks are great right now and people should be very concerned. Our pool of politicians who are so incompetent and so corrupt that we don't even have good choices for our President is a huge threat. Biden and Trump are both horrible choices, but we are left with nothing else. Both in their own way pose a threat to the Constitution and our Rights.

Look at how both men abused the power of the Presidential Orders to circumvent Congress. How both criticize the media and want to control them. Both want a single-party state which should terrify us all.

All of the above is nothing new. Our country has been walking a tightrope coming close to falling over and over again. Do we fall to the Left into an abyss of self-gratification and depravity or to the Right into a hell of an authoritarian iron fist ruling us by fear?

The conversation this country is having now is critical to our future but to make it all even worse, many of us are so easily manipulated and lied to it could finally tip the scales as we become our own enemy.