An anocracy is a mixture of authoritarian and democratic way of government. This is also my vote when we consider how the US decreased on various democracy indices during his first term in office. But I expect him to be worse than in his first term. Way worse.
yellowjester
Experienced
- Jun 2, 2024
- 211
He's already gotten green light from the supreme court. There is no reason why he would not do it, he has nothing to lose. He wouldn't outright abloish elections of course, that would be foolish, but he'll make it impossible for Republicans to lose another election, similar to how it is in Russia.
WithTheFlow
Everything excellent is as difficult as it is rare
- Sep 2, 2024
- 52
Either way, I think the status quo will remain. Trump and Harris both support American bureaucracy and cronyism. Regardless, the executive branch will remain a "revolving door" branch of government that is ran largely by unelected bureaucrats unknown to the vast majority of the American citizenry.
When it comes to American faith in the system, I think Trump losing would be detrimental toward right-wing America's trust in American political institutions. Trump will inevitably either imply or explicitly state that he lost in another stolen election, and his core supporters would just feel disillusioned with the whole system; still, there will not be a civil war and Trump will not do a Mussolini march on D.C. There will probably be riots and protests that won't have any impact on anything, except the people directly affected (and the weaponisation by political opponents). A lot of people think the American system is corrupt and that elections are rigged, yet they don't take up arms to overthrow the system because they largely don't care and have many things in daily life to worry about that are much more important to them than the federal government. Americans, by and large, have easy access to the necessities of survival; these are not prime conditions for revolution despite all the fear-mongers saying they are.
If he wins, then things will return to the status quo as I said above; the system won't be uprooted by a now-moderate, establishmentarian 2024 Trump. A lot of the American far-right abandoned Trump. Trump, the egoist, will be content with being only the second president in history to have two non-consecutive terms (he will probably say or imply that he won three consecutive elections). His supporters would turn their attention toward future Republican candidates for president. There is no reason, in my opinion, that this older, less-enthusiastic (just watch one of his boring rallies) Trump will become God Emperor of the United States.
It. Is. Hysterical. Nonsense.
When it comes to American faith in the system, I think Trump losing would be detrimental toward right-wing America's trust in American political institutions. Trump will inevitably either imply or explicitly state that he lost in another stolen election, and his core supporters would just feel disillusioned with the whole system; still, there will not be a civil war and Trump will not do a Mussolini march on D.C. There will probably be riots and protests that won't have any impact on anything, except the people directly affected (and the weaponisation by political opponents). A lot of people think the American system is corrupt and that elections are rigged, yet they don't take up arms to overthrow the system because they largely don't care and have many things in daily life to worry about that are much more important to them than the federal government. Americans, by and large, have easy access to the necessities of survival; these are not prime conditions for revolution despite all the fear-mongers saying they are.
If he wins, then things will return to the status quo as I said above; the system won't be uprooted by a now-moderate, establishmentarian 2024 Trump. A lot of the American far-right abandoned Trump. Trump, the egoist, will be content with being only the second president in history to have two non-consecutive terms (he will probably say or imply that he won three consecutive elections). His supporters would turn their attention toward future Republican candidates for president. There is no reason, in my opinion, that this older, less-enthusiastic (just watch one of his boring rallies) Trump will become God Emperor of the United States.
It. Is. Hysterical. Nonsense.
Last edited:
derpyderpins
Normie Life Mogs
- Sep 19, 2023
- 1,693
The big question I have is how would people have answered in 2016 before he was president. I remember hearing a bunch of the same stuff.
And what is "ending democracy"? Do you mean no more votes? America is a constitutional Republic, a type of democracy but very distinct for important reasons.
And what is "ending democracy"? Do you mean no more votes? America is a constitutional Republic, a type of democracy but very distinct for important reasons.
Pluto
Meowing to go out
- Dec 27, 2020
- 3,837
Well there are different definitions of democracy. The fact he did not acknowledge he lost the last election 2020 is a hint Donald has some issues with the concept of elections (if he does not win them). And this time Vance is his VP and not MIke Pence with 1% integrity. Trump would have stolen that election if it was possible for him to that time point. Nowadays, with the Supreme court ruling he could get away with it.
derpyderpins
Normie Life Mogs
- Sep 19, 2023
- 1,693
Yeah, and my question is what is "destroying" the American Constitutional Republic. At what point is it destroyed? Because it's already changed drastically from the founding, for better or worse.
He thought he won and still stepped down . . . People have contested election results forever. I'm old enough to remember Bush/Gore. People have never stopped saying Gore "won." No one accuses them of having an issue with the "concept" of elections for thinking the results were inaccurate. Hell, as far as I know Hilary still claims 2016 was rigged.
Also Mike Pence is the devil lol it's funny hearing people against Trump now act like Dick Cheney and co. are good guys.
What Supreme Court ruling, exactly? It's the same number of conservative justices as before.
Last edited:
yellowjester
Experienced
- Jun 2, 2024
- 211
No, she doesn't and never did - she admitted defeat on the night of the elections and called trump to congratulate him.
Trump got full immunity from them. If he wins, he can do whatever he likes and be immune from all prosecution (that includes assasinating a political oppenent - they explicitly wrote that in the document)
Not voluntarily. He was forced to step down because the military wasn't on his side.
Are you American? You seem pretty ignorant to the events taking place in your country. Maybe it's true that people who are closest to danger are often the most oblivious to it.
derpyderpins
Normie Life Mogs
- Sep 19, 2023
- 1,693
First link I got. She says he was an illegitimate president and "stole" the election.
I guess I still don't see what changed. Is the idea that before he was thinking "boy I'd love to assassinate all these people and stop elections from happening but damn I don't know if I have legal immunity or not"? I don't see him as the type to weigh consequences in that way.
I personally am not aware of him trying to stay in office but having the military refuse to support him. That's an interesting notion.
Jesus, this is why I avoid politics on this forum like the plague and I regret it again here. I'm an attorney, well-versed in the history of US government, and very much so up to date on current events.
I am not even saying anything pro Trump, nor will I. I ask a couple Socratic method questions to get what the thread is about and suddenly I'm "ignorant." No need to be a dick and jump into an exchange you're not a part of with an insult because you suspect I don't 100% agree with you.
yellowjester
Experienced
- Jun 2, 2024
- 211
That's obviously not the same as trying to overturn a democraric election. You're making it sound like trump was just salty that he lost.
Is saying someone is ignorant to smth. an insult? If I knew you were an attorney, I would have used a different phrasing. Apologies for causing offense.
I didn't accuse you of being pro-trump. It's just that this 'both sides' stuff has really been getting on my nerves lately and I couln't let it stand.
Last edited:
derpyderpins
Normie Life Mogs
- Sep 19, 2023
- 1,693
Hilary is not "salty she lost", she's saying she didn't lose. It was illegitimate and stolen. Her words. And I think that's fine! Question away!
Trump pushed for review and recount and audit and kept pushing for that, but when the time came he left, unless you have some info I've never seen on him trying to take control but being rejected by the military.
I'd say before you've had more than one back and forth to even try to understand where they're coming from, yeah it is. If someone is studying a subject and you call them ignorant of that subject you're insulting their ability to learn the subject.
Well, I accept your apology but that really shouldn't be what gets you to apologize. I promise there are a lot of attorneys who don't know what they're talking about.
Is it both sides to ask what it means for democracy to end? I still haven't gotten an answer. I'd like to know so if he somehow gets in office I can judge in 4 years whether the concerns were legitimate.
EternalShore
Hardworking Lass who Dreams of Love~ 💕✨
- Jun 9, 2023
- 901
I mean, he didn't the first time he was in office~ I do wonder whether he'll launch investigations into the 2020 elections, but I seriously doubt he's going to do anything radical like setting the stage to rig elections in the future
yellowjester
Experienced
- Jun 2, 2024
- 211
That's obviously not the same thing. There were never any actions behind those words. Democrats never tried to steal the election or hold on to power - they did what they could to make the transition of power go as smoothly as possible.
Here's his own former VP admitting that he wanted to have the results overturned - does that suffice?
You know, part of me is hoping for a trump victory just to get peiple like you to finally aknowledge the reality of the situation.
I'd say abolishing, or greatly compromising the democratic process would count as 'ending democracy', which is exactly what trump is planning to do. And his supporters are all for it. I'm not saying he'll succeed in doing that, but the fact that he'll try should be enough to alarm everyone.
Last edited:
I voted for anocracy I did not pretend it would be destroying the American Constitutional Republic. But well the democracy gets severely damaged if the losers of election don't acknowledge it and instead try to make a fake electors plot.
It is very well documented in detail what Trump tried.
Trump fake electors plot - Wikipedia
And well Trump knew he lost. The January 6th hearings and investigations made that clear.
Jarring new video, evidence Trump knew he lost: Key takeaways from the latest Jan. 6 hearing
Video of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other congressional leaders calling for help during the riot was among the highlights of the Jan. 6 committee's final hearing before the election.
www.nbcnews.com
Trump said to Pence he was too honest.
Here it is described in detail for all of his potential voters.
Trump privately knew he had lost
Publicly, Trump insisted he was being robbed of an election he had won. Privately, he was conceding that he had lost, people close to him told the committee.After the Supreme Court turned down his election case, Trump was "livid," according to a Secret Service email obtained by the committee, an observation former Trump aides echoed in testimony.
Alyssa Farah Griffin, then the head of White House strategic communications, told the Jan. 6 committee that she popped into the Oval Office "maybe a week after the election was called" to check on Trump.
"He was looking at the TV, and he said, 'Can you believe I lost to this effing guy?'" Farah Griffin said.
Another former White House aide, Cassidy Hutchinson, gave a similar account. The president told chief of staff Mark Meadows "something to the effect of 'I don't want people to know we lost, Mark. This is embarrassing. Figure it out,'" Hutchinson recalled. "'I don't want people to know that we lost.'"
Hutchinson further remembered Meadows telling her: "No, Cass, he knows it's over. He knows he lost. But we're going to keep trying. There are some good options out there still."
The testimony was presented to bolster a case the committee has sought to make: that Trump was acting in bad faith to keep power and deliberately deceiving his followers with false claims about the election to stir them up into what became the violent mob at the Capitol on Jan. 6.
"Claims that President Trump actually thought the election was stolen are not supported by fact and not a defense," said Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., the panel's vice chair. "There is no defense that Donald Trump was duped or irrational."
I think Bush stole the election. But the procedure was different how it went. In the case of Trump's defeat the loser was more clear and there was violence involved. Trump from the beginning planned this. This is why he falsely pretended there was absentee vote fraud on a large scale. Trump only acknowledges the results of an election if he wins and if this gets normalized this is a huge issue for democracies. Vance said in contrast to Pence he would have certified the results. Which proves they would steal the election if they could.
Last edited:
EG1141
Member
- Aug 12, 2024
- 71
derpyderpins
Normie Life Mogs
- Sep 19, 2023
- 1,693
What I said originally: "Hell, as far as I know Hilary still claims 2016 was rigged."
You responded: "No, she doesn't and never did." Those are your words exactly. She does still claim it was rigged (at least as of 2019). I was right about that. My statement that you said was wrong and called me ignorant over was accurate. Just take the L rather than moving the goalposts; I'm not getting into the weeds on this separate issue with you.
As proof that he attempted to have the military take it by force and they denied him? No, it doesn't suffice. I already admit he thought the outcome was wrong and pursued methods of "correcting" it (in his view.)
He did. This all happened before. I remember people crying in my law school classes the day after the election thinking the country was done. Grown, educated adults having fits of panic attacks because he did in fact win, and they were convinced he would "end democracy." Then we had another election, he lost, and the other guy took over. The process easily survived all his bs challenges. Cry wolf too many times and you can't be taken seriously.
But what does that mean? What is the "democratic process" to you, and how will it be "compromised" or "abolished"? You have a hypothesis, there needs to be a way to measure it. Are you saying votes won't be cast in 2028? Are you saying the votes won't matter by some type of executive action that says he remains president regardless of the outcome? What is the tangible, articulable consequence that is feared? Not some concept. Because in 4 years I'll be happy (well, sad) to say, "wow, you were right, he got in again but the second time he made it so we can't vote anymore. I should have listened."
None of this is an answer to my question: what do you mean in your poll when you say he will destroy democracy? If I am to select that option in your poll, what must I believe will happen? When you say anocracy what do you actually mean? Not a textbook definition of anocracy, I mean what is the change to the American legal/electoral system that you hypothesize will occur.I voted for anocracy I did not pretend it would be destroying the American Constitutional Republic. But well the democracy gets severely damaged if the losers of election don't acknowledge it and instead try to make a fake electors plot.
It is very well documented in detail what Trump tried.
Trump fake electors plot - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
And well Trump knew he lost. The January 6th hearings and investigations made that clear.
Jarring new video, evidence Trump knew he lost: Key takeaways from the latest Jan. 6 hearing
Video of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other congressional leaders calling for help during the riot was among the highlights of the Jan. 6 committee's final hearing before the election.
Trump said to Pence he was too honest.
Here it is described in detail for all of his potential voters.
Trump privately knew he had lost
Publicly, Trump insisted he was being robbed of an election he had won. Privately, he was conceding that he had lost, people close to him told the committee.
After the Supreme Court turned down his election case, Trump was "livid," according to a Secret Service email obtained by the committee, an observation former Trump aides echoed in testimony.
Alyssa Farah Griffin, then the head of White House strategic communications, told the Jan. 6 committee that she popped into the Oval Office "maybe a week after the election was called" to check on Trump.
"He was looking at the TV, and he said, 'Can you believe I lost to this effing guy?'" Farah Griffin said.
Another former White House aide, Cassidy Hutchinson, gave a similar account. The president told chief of staff Mark Meadows "something to the effect of 'I don't want people to know we lost, Mark. This is embarrassing. Figure it out,'" Hutchinson recalled. "'I don't want people to know that we lost.'"
Hutchinson further remembered Meadows telling her: "No, Cass, he knows it's over. He knows he lost. But we're going to keep trying. There are some good options out there still."
The testimony was presented to bolster a case the committee has sought to make: that Trump was acting in bad faith to keep power and deliberately deceiving his followers with false claims about the election to stir them up into what became the violent mob at the Capitol on Jan. 6.
"Claims that President Trump actually thought the election was stolen are not supported by fact and not a defense," said Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., the panel's vice chair. "There is no defense that Donald Trump was duped or irrational."
I think Bush stole the election. But the procedure was different how it went. In the case of Trump's defeat the loser was more clear and there was violence involved. Trump from the beginning planned this. This is why he falsely pretended there was absentee vote fraud on a large scale. Trump only acknowledges the results of an election if he wins and if this gets normalized this is a huge issue for democracies. Vance said in contrast to Pence he would have certified the results. Which proves they would steal the election if they could.
I'm not getting into talk about the intricacies of the 2020 election.
EternalShore
Hardworking Lass who Dreams of Love~ 💕✨
- Jun 9, 2023
- 901
hehe~ I read about this for way too long last night! >:3
In regards to this, Bush was winning under Al Gore's recount and given how it was requested to be implemented by the Florida Supreme Court and how it was actually implemented (some counties basically told them "screw you!", George Bush won~
In regards to undervotes (votes for only 1 candidate that don't puncture all the way), only completely disregarding undervotes gives Gore the win by 3 votes while including them to any degree (including any degree of hanging chad and dimples [which Gore requested]) hands George Bush the win~
In regards to undervotes and overvotes (votes for 2 candidates), Bush would win under the strictest and most states' standards (hanging from 2 or less edges) while Gore would win under the more lenient standards~ That being said, counting overvotes is kinda dumb considering that people aren't allowed to vote for 2 candidates in the first place~
you may disagree but given that Bush wins under most states' standards, the Florida Supreme Court's standards including how it was actually implemented, and Al Gore's own requests, it looks to me like George Bush won fairly~ :)
Last edited:
Well we have an online discussion on US politics and I point out your false claims. The "intricacies" were not that intricate for the judges and courts. The team around Trump filed 62 lawsuits contesting the election processes etc. And nearly all the suits were dismissed or dropped due to lack of evidence. And the very few which were not dismissed had close to zero impact on the election. The judges laughed them out of the room in most cases.
As in most of my polls I don't provide explicit long definitions for terms and I cannot elaborate all the context. I don't pretend I knew everything better than most people who vote this is why I leave it up for them.
In case of Trump I could imagine he stays in office even if he is not the winner of the next election. And I think he could ignore the term limit. The Supreme court ruling gives him so much power. I think the electors in the fake elector plot are another vulnerable point of the US democracy. Also that Vice presidents don't certify elections if they dislike the results.
The checks and balance work better in the instance of the media. Like for example this link I provided where they reported on the hearing the January 6th case. The media documented many lies of Trump. And if you vote for him there is no excuse for "but I could know that" if it is too late for the country. The power of the media is not in jeopardy compared other vulnerable points when he gets in office.
Last edited:
derpyderpins
Normie Life Mogs
- Sep 19, 2023
- 1,693
What specifically did I say that was "false"? Please quote it. I guess you're saying I made a false claim by saying Trump thought he won, because you think he's lying and never once thought he won the election? You can't argue that he left office because, well, ya know, he did.
I don't see the materiality of whether he believed his challenges to the election were legitimate. The point is he did challenge the election, lost the challanges, and ultimately left office.
Cool, that's how courts and challenges to elections should work.
Again, cool. Working well.
I'm not asking for a long definition, I'm asking for a short, simple definition. For democracy to be destroyed, does that mean all elections must end?
. . . it kinda seems like you think you know better.
Okay, cool. Thank you. That's what I've been wanting. So, if we have an election in 2028 and someone other than Trump (assuming he both wins and gets in this cycle) is elected and becomes president, I can come back here and say "looks like we were freaking out a little too much." Again, already happened once, and he did leave, even if begrudgingly and while trying to fight the result on many legal grounds, but I've been learning to have a long memory just for this type of discussion.
The media being always accurate and to be believed, especially the American media owned entirely by a handful of elite powerful companies.
It really never feels like you actually want discussions of politics from anyone unless they already agree with you, tbh. I have not taken the stance that Trump won 2020. I have not taken the stance that his challenges to the election were legitimate.
When you say "He thought he won and still stepped down" it implies he thought he won when he stepped down and I proved in my previous answer that he knew he lost before he stepped down. This is your false claim.
In the last TV debate he argued he won the 2020 election. He only left office because Pence did not certify the fake electors. This is why he pressured Pence not to certify them
No for democracy to be destroyed it does not mean all elections must end. It is enough when there are no free and fair elections, and the winner of the main election is predetermined like in Russia.
Last edited:
derpyderpins
Normie Life Mogs
- Sep 19, 2023
- 1,693
I can't reconcile these two statements as to whether you think he thought he won or not. There's also something where you can say you "lost" knowing it was technically a loss but still claim you had it stolen or whatever.
I still don't get why that matters: if he believed his challenges to the election or not. I'm here making a claim about him challenging the election and leaving office and you're latching onto this irrelevant wording. The point is that he made the challenges and left.
And who determines if free and fair elections have ended? The media? I guess I'll get my "I told you so" if Trump wins now and then a democrat in 2028.
You are a lawyer and claim the wording would no matter when we discuss this issue where I proved your false claim and false logic. That is an easy way out.
I have get some sleep now. I will respond tomorrow.
derpyderpins
Normie Life Mogs
- Sep 19, 2023
- 1,693
You didn't prove anything, especially regarding my logic. I told you I'm not diving into whether Trump thought his claims about 2020 were legitimate or not because I'm telling you it doesn't matter. It wasn't - and isn't - an issue for the purposes here. You are taking the easy way out by diverting the very simple main subject, which was never meant to be a debate!
This is why I - and others - avoid politics here. And it's not because you proved something with facts and logic. It's because I made a simple comment about this being an issue that has been visited before and then asked what counts as democracy being destroyed and I'm dragged into all this bs.
I like talking to you on here, and I'm rooting for you with your relationship stuff and your self-help group, but when it comes to politics . . . well, it's on me. I know better than to take the bait and respond.
Option 5: Biden has destroyed democracy and turned the country into a Communist dictatorship Trump will restore it.
Also one additional further correction. The US is a republic more than a democracy
Also one additional further correction. The US is a republic more than a democracy
Yep. I will read along and often shake my head in disbelief but no way is any conversation about the election anything but a gigantic dumpster fire at this point.
dune_dweller
Puella Aeternus
- Sep 6, 2024
- 24
At this point, I have no idea.
I was pro-Trump from 2017 to 2020.
I was a Q follower, believed in the conspiracies (still believe in most of them).
But I've since come to the realization that... both sides are just two sides of the same coin.
Both political parties/extremes are egregores - thought form entities that manipulate and "guide" humanity.
I'm a woman and would love a valid female president but it's clear that Harris is an establishment puppet, just as Trump is a "Trump Card" being used for a purpose as well.
I was pro-Trump from 2017 to 2020.
I was a Q follower, believed in the conspiracies (still believe in most of them).
But I've since come to the realization that... both sides are just two sides of the same coin.
Both political parties/extremes are egregores - thought form entities that manipulate and "guide" humanity.
I'm a woman and would love a valid female president but it's clear that Harris is an establishment puppet, just as Trump is a "Trump Card" being used for a purpose as well.
daley
Student
- May 11, 2024
- 102
The reason why a second Trump presidency might be more dangerous than the first is that the
Republican party has been Trumpified. My impression from the media is that in his first term
there were people around him that balanced him, and put the country first.
Many of these people were fired and replaced during his presidency.
In a second term he is more likely to be surrounded by people who will not oppose him,
because those are the kinds of people that he will choose.
I am getting this also by comparing J.D. Vance and Mike Pence.
So, that's what I get from the media (which doesn't say much) and not being an American.
Republican party has been Trumpified. My impression from the media is that in his first term
there were people around him that balanced him, and put the country first.
Many of these people were fired and replaced during his presidency.
In a second term he is more likely to be surrounded by people who will not oppose him,
because those are the kinds of people that he will choose.
I am getting this also by comparing J.D. Vance and Mike Pence.
So, that's what I get from the media (which doesn't say much) and not being an American.
WithTheFlow
Everything excellent is as difficult as it is rare
- Sep 2, 2024
- 52
Did the Republican Party get Trumpified or did Trump get Republicanified? I think it's the latter. He's much older and less enthusiastic than he was in 2016. He focuses on the economy and moderate positions like inflation and fracking ("drill baby drill"). This is a Republican candidate. The Republican establishment accepts him now that he's been brought into the fold.
Similar threads
- Jojogu
- Suicide Discussion
Suicide Discussion
Praying 4 a Miracle
Politics & Philosophy
Professor K
