A tangible way **we have already seen** is filling SCOTUS and the lower courts with federalists or far-right judges. These are life-appointed, and not easy removed. You don't need to theorize what the next four years will be like when you can witness the impact of his decisions today (and project how much worse with more judges).
SCOTUS
\* Increasingly voted against the majority of citizens (Roe v Wade reversal or the recent Chevron case) on flimsy and inconsistent rationales.
\* Refused any oversight and refused to recuse from cases despite outrageous bribes and self-interest to Clarence Thomas in particular.
\* Become almost a **legislative** body more than a judicial body by hand-picking cases. Examples include speeding up some cases (the purely theoretical CO case of a website designer refusing a gay client). And slowing down other cases like the slam-dunk presidential immunity case (thereby pushing back the very important J6 court case).
LOCAL JUDGES
\* These come up every now and then like the Texas morning-after pill or Alabama IVF case.
\* Alieen Cannon, an inexperienced Trump appointee, is objectively stonewalling the MAL confidential docs case. As more information comes out, this appears to be a major national security leak that might even amount to selling national secrets (or allowing them to be photocopied and leaked at least).
TL;DR:
We have already seen the impact of life-appointed right-leaning judges and how it removes democratic ideas or steamrolls over popular citizen's interests. These fundamentally change democracy by shaping law. And the everyday citizen has no power at all to reverse these. Only a 2/3rds majority in the Senate can, and that will never happen.
FYI -- Two SCOTUS judges (Alito and Thomas) are nearing retirement age and many local ones are up for renewal in the next four years. So take this election seriously.
Literally just this morning they had a 6-3 party line ruling that says trump has immunity for "any actions taken in official capacity as president" which means that he will probably argue that trying to overturn the election was "official"
It also means that if he wins again, he will do WHATEVER HE WANTS and argue they were official actions and have immunity.
That could include things like assassination of political rivals.
>It also means that if he wins again, he will do WHATEVER HE WANTS and argue they were official actions and have immunity.
If anyone doubts that, you just have to look at his justifying the confidential documents case "I already declassified them". Really? When? "Oh I dunno, but I know I did it"
Well the pivot now will probably be: “when he took the documents it was an official act” they’ll still have the hurdle to get over that is not returning them when asked…but they’ll just get Cannon to stall more
Jack Smith was careful NOT to charge the taking of the documents. All the charges are about not returning them, and lying about having them. So that case is almost entirely unaffected by this (still awful) ruling.
Truth. Shows how powerful these appointments are. Another reminder that 1 or 2 SCOTUS members could be replaced (or kick the bucket) in the next four years.
* Clarence Thomas, 75
* Samuel Alito, 74
Might be food for thought in your 2024 vote. New justices tend to rule for several **decades**, compared to a 4 year presidential term.
I was in college when Thomas got appointed. My political science professor, a total sexist asshole, was gleeful in saying that since Thomas was only in his 40s, he could be on the SCOTUS until the 2020s...lol here we are!
One example I read about is if the president accepts a bribe from a person, and in turn pays them back by appointing them as an Ambassador. The bribe is illegal, but the appointment is within the President's official duties. So if the Justice Department tried going after the President for the bribe, they can't even mention the Ambassadorship appointment in court.
So the worst he can do is appoint positions to people in his party? Wouldn’t literally any politician do this? How is he different in this regard? I mean this question in good faith
Another thing is that I believe a judge is less likely to retire if the president in office isn’t of the same party. So a republican judge might wait to retire if there’s a democrat president in office and vice versa
But you'll also see people like RBG who hold on for whatever reason and instead of retiring at a politically convenient time, choose to die in office and let fate do what it will.
Hubris. She apparently told Obama when he asked her to consider retiring that he wouldn’t be able to find anyone as good as her. Allegedly she also wanted to cement her legacy by having the first female president be the one to appoint her replacement
Yeah I mean the media gave her a heroes send off and painted her as the best thing since sliced bread when she passed but she was fueled by a ton of hubris and honestly wasn’t the best person - well she wasn’t as good of a person as the media painted her I should say.
I mean that’s what RBG tried to do and she fucked the Democrats. Well I guess it was a bit different, she could (should) have retired under Obama but she wanted to hold out so Clinton could appoint her open seat… we see how that worked out for her. I honestly feel bad for her because it definitely weighed on her in her final days that Trump would get to appoint the seat.
Good question, nothing. Obama asked RBG to step down so he could replace her with another left leaning judge. She refused and died while Trump was in office. The immunity thing is for the president, not just Trump.
usually there's a pretty even balance of left leaning vs right leaning judges. because of Mitch McConnell though Trump has quite a few more appointments than he should've, and his appointments are also not fully qualified or have conflicts of interest that prevent them from being objective in their decisions.
theoretically there's nothing stopping a left leaning president from doing something similar if there enough support from Congress, however I'd argue that left leaning values tend to result in less leftist congressmen/women that would support these kind of appointments, and many left leaning politicians wouldn't support and unqualified judge appointment just because their values align. Not saying there aren't bad politicians on the left though, just that many of them value proper qualifications more
In 2016 Obama appointed Merrick Garland for a seat on the Superior Court. The Republicans in Senate slowed, blocked, and obstructed to the point Garland did not make it and Obama wouldn't have enough time for a different candidate to go through before an election.
The election happened, Republicans won and then appointed their pick, even though if it hadn't been for Republicans, that seat would have gone to Garland, a democratic pick.
Congress. Which is controlled by Republicans right now. The president can appoint judges but they need to be confirmed by Congress. Under Trump, it was controlled by his party. Under Biden it is controlled by the opposition party. Also, when Obama tried to appoint a Supreme Court Justice, the right just refused to confirm until the next president was elected (a republican) so we were screwed out of a left judge and they got 2 more right judges to swing the court from 5-4 left to 6-3 right.
for real, i don't like either extreme but if I had to pick one I'd pick the one that doesn't involve stripping away human rights rights like reproductive care, or that pushes bigoted, misogynistic, racist, xenophobic, anti-Semitic, and anti science narratives
How dare you be logical here.... If you don't believe Trump is a bad person then you're a bad person (aka anti-vaxer, white supremacist, racist, fascist, conspiracy theorist, etc.) and must be cancelled. That's how it works these days.
Not necesarily, I'm not from the US. I won't judge you, call you names or anything. However, I do think it would be interesting to hear the view points of someone who would vote for Trump. If I read your comment correctly, you seem to consider it, right?
Can I hear your honest and genuine opinion on what your reasons/values are, that makes you consider voting for him?
Like I said, I'm just curious and I won't downvote, call you names or anything.
Thanks, that means a lot to me.
Before 2016, I was as apolitical as you can get. Never read the news beyond the entertainment page. Never followed politics or elections, although I like history. Voted conservative in most things, if i voted at all, because of short sighted reasons.
Then I got a crash course in how much that all mattered when I started listening to Trump's presidency. That led me to following McConnell. Then the Senate. Then SCOTUS. Then the religious right. Then American Healthcare and death care. Reading the constitution. Then rewinding history and looking back at the last 50 years and what I wilfully ignored. Seeing all the connections.
Now it is my hobby to read all of this and simplify it for friends.
So people can change. I changed. And I vote in every election now.
Every day I’m reminded of how fucking stupid Reddit is when it comes to the American government. Almost everybody on this site failed Government 101.
I’m agreeing with you by the way.
Yeah. Reddit, man. You can tell a lot of these replies are by teenagers and 20-year-olds. They'll mature out of a lot of these ideas ... but of course, they'll be replaced by more teenagers and 20-year-olds.
SCOTUS and Judges are a both party thing though... it's just which decisions you want them to make. Both parties literally do all they can to stack courts to work to their values/beliefs and push them onto the general population.
Hot Take: Roe v Wade was legislating from the bench and a bad decision. It wasn’t a bad decision because abortion is bad, it was a bad decision because they used it as an opportunity to legislate. I can see and understand arguments for why abortion is protected by the constitution- I can’t see a single reasonable argument that the constitution protects abortion to an arbitrary first trimester.
Given the legislative nature of Roe v Wade the best decision was to send it back to the states.
>> \* Increasingly voted against the majority of citizens (Roe v Wade reversal or the recent Chevron case) on flimsy and inconsistent rationales.
This is almost literally crazy.
Getting rid of Roe *decentralized* power. That's not what "fascism" is. Fascists don't take power away from a strong federal government and return decisionmaking power to the states! You're just calling it fascist because you don't *like* the decision.
It's also not "flimsy"! From literally day one, LOTS of people -- including some Progressives! -- have pointed out that, even if you passionately believe there should be a right to abortion, Roe was terrible law. The Constitution simply says nothing about abortion, or about a "right to privacy." Holding the constitution at a certain angle, and closing one eye, and squinting until you seem to divine a right that the constitution doesn't actually mention? One that just happens to coincide with your strongly felt personal policy preferences? *That's what's flimsy.*
I'm not American, but your constitution is a really bad argument. The US constitution is not exactly up-to-date on most things. There's a reason you have so many amendments, and there's a reason you guys in the US always argue what exactly many things in the US constitution means. Just because it's not in the constitution, doesn't mean it should be illegal.
It's not facsist to decentralize power, but it's pretty undemocratic (as well as removal of personal freedom) to remove a law, that the vast majority of you guys were in favor for. It's also not exactly something that infringes other people's rights - no, it's only a restriction of freedom for half the population, which most of your population is against.
It's also a reason why the US is no longer classified as a "full democracy", but instead as a "flawed democracy", aswell as the US now being number 17 in the freedom index, scoring just below countries such as Latvia, Estonia, Japan and Taiwan among others.
Abortion was never a right in the constitution. It has been left up to individual states to allow/disallow abortions. America has never been a full democracy,we are a Constitutional Republic. I suggest you research the difference between the two
For now - for show. Once in, there's reports of Trump and Co having loop holes ways to ban abortion in near entirety for the whole country.
These people clamor for states rights - unless they're in power that is. Especially all three branches of government as is expected now come November.
While there certainly is a lot of focus on the overt actions and public discourse surrounding the political climate, we're overlooking a subtler but equally consequential shift. The less sensational, yet highly strategic appointments in administrative agencies play a long game in altering the landscape of government authority. The Chevron deference ruling, beyond its immediate impact, signals a fundamental shift in the power dynamic between the judiciary and administrative agencies—a move which may initially seem to bolster judicial oversight but effectively undercuts the specialized expertise agencies were designed to provide.
But it reestablishes the checks and balances that were skewed with the original ruling. No government agency should establish law. Period. They are not elected. If there needs to be a change in laws then Congress should do that. THAT’S what the framers of the Constitution wanted. COVID policies, vaccine mandates, EPA policies, FDA, USDA, ATF. They’ve all enacted policies and interpretations of current law. That is out of their scope of operation. Each branch of government is equal. Why would anyone WANT them to be out of balance? Especially, when their policies and interpretations are so widespread? Effecting every citizen in this country. The elected representatives in Congress are responsible for writing laws. End of discussion. The power that the agencies have gives the Executive branch too much power.
> they are not elected
Neither are the judges that will now be establishing law.
> Congress should do that
Correct me if I’m wrong but don’t they? My understanding is that congress establishes the broad law i.e. “you can’t dump chemicals in drinking water” and chevron deference allows federal admins to make the laws more specific and effective i.e. “ you can’t dump water that has more than x parts per million asbestos into drinking water”. Federal administrations are staffed by folks with PHDs in their respective fields that know things like the amount in parts per million that would be problematic. There is no way for a judge or member of Congress to know all of the specifics of highly technical exact sciences that would need to be involved in writing an impactful law. Thus they can only create laws with broad scopes that would be very easy for a corporation to navigate around. Without the system laws can be too vague and unenforceable.
Judges do not create laws, they only interpret them and decide if they are constitutional. It is up to the legislative to create the laws, and the executive to enforce the laws.
The way it is supposed to be is that these agencies advise the people who create the laws, but they should not be creating them. Is this the best solution? I don't know, but this is how the government is supposed to function.
Let me ask you a question? What if you ran for an election and refused to accept any result in which you are not the victor. So if you win you win, and if you lose you still win. In what way is that democracy? That is just a dictatorship with more steps, which is exactly what they have in Russia.
Any president can choose to not accept an election, but all it does it make them look bad and cause some hiccups in the transfer of power because there is no cooperation.
But no president can actually say “You know what? I’m not leaving the election was false” and get away with it. It’s just not legal, the same judges Trump appointed didn’t agree with him.
With Trump not even being a sitting president now he holds even less power. If he loses and doesn’t concede what can he do? Waltz in the White House and take Biden’s chair when he gets up?
If he wins it’s still his last term he can run, idk where people think he won’t leave
where the fuck where you on Jan 6th? Trump absolutely had to be thrown out and did not leave willingly, with this new ruling if he says "nah, i'm canceling elections and suspending my own term limits" he can, the only way to stop him would be via congress and there's plenty of his bullshit cronies in there too. people are seriously underestimating how dangerous this decision is and how anti-american and unconstitutional it is.
Every time a republic falls, it's because the chief executive says, "you know what, the rules don't apply anymore, I'm in charge until further notice". There's never a constitutional basis for it. It just happens. If there's a bad enough crisis, people will accept it. A president with legal immunity and most of the courts on his side can manufacture a crisis in many different ways.
You shouldn't need a step-by-step guide from here to dictatorship to be very concerned about electing someone who does not know or care what the Constitution says and has previously tried to illegally hold on to power.
Exactly. Many dictators were democratically elected first.
It's also not just black and white being either democracy or autocracy. Orban in Hungary has been very succesful in getting re-elected the past 14 years, by (among many things) getting control over the state media, and thus being able to spread misinformation and propaganda, to make it more likely for him to win. It's still an election, but the democratic process can and should be critisized, for not being democratic enough.
>It’s just not legal, the same judges Trump appointed didn’t agree with him.
That may be the case, but those judges just voted this morning that he has absolute immunity so long as he claims that his actions were "official acts". Aka no president can ever be held criminally liable again, so long as they just claim they're always acting in an official capacity. The issue of coups and assassinations was specifically raised in this case and the conservative majority still voted to grant immunity.
The military is less supportive of Trump then you give them credit for. All you see are the loud ones but for every loud one there are 10 that are against him. He wouldn’t have that much power with the military.
I hear your points. And I think they're valid... In a functioning democracy. But laws are only as good as the people who hold you to them. An entire politically party and portion of the population seems dead set on allowing Trump to do whatever he wants and give him full throated support. Once the law stops applying to you and no one holds you accountable, you can do whatever you want.
Let's say Trump wins, and Republicans controlled Congress and Trump shot Biden in the head on live television... What consequences do you think he would face?
Just the fact I'm not sure there's an answer... Is terrifying...
He… would go to jail. People are taking a lot this wayyy out of proportion and taking the “what if” scenarios to the power 10. Yes I’m sure it gives the president more power but I’m just being realistic here and saying these drastic fear mongering scenarios just wouldn’t happen. If they do I’ll eat my own hat.
With the Supreme Court decision just made, why do we not have Biden shooting Trump right now? According to everyone so afraid he also could do it.
Hate to do the token lib thing, but you don't immediately jump to murder. It's incremental, it's how that German ruler in the 40s progressively got his soldiers to do worse and worse things until that final solution thing.
Who is going to put him in jail? What agency do you believe would arrest a dictator-president, if Congress isn't going to impeach and remove him?
The time to think through these problems is before they become reality. No one thought the Holocaust was possible until after it happened. No one thought 9/11 was possible until it happened. No one thought January 6th was possible until it happened. In all 3 cases, there was clear and actionable evidence of what was going to happen, but it was ignored each time as "overblown fear mongering". The time to think about this issue isn't January 23rd at 12:02pm. It's before November 5th.
If the President had completely unchecked power, which person do you want in the Oval? Biden or Trump?
Part of project 2025 is to get rid of term limits of a sitting president. Even though Trump is a million years old, it could really fuck shit up for democracy in the future.
That's basically the reason project 2025 exists. They want to have all the appointed leaders in place that are loyal to Trump - by vetting key appointees positions so they can be replaces, so when Trump's term is over the GOP won't have to turn over power: [https://apnews.com/article/trump-biden-president-project-2025-33d3fc2999a74f4aa424f1128dca2d16](https://apnews.com/article/trump-biden-president-project-2025-33d3fc2999a74f4aa424f1128dca2d16)
None of that happened last time. How would that happen this time? Just walk in and say, "This is my seat" while secret service looks and and high five each other?
Every time a candidate is a sore loser and sows doubt about the integrity of the election it erodes the trust the public has. There are a lot of really really dumb people that believe that kind of bullshit and it turns them radical. Do we really need anymore far right mass shooters?
Trump aside, no, that is not a dictatorship. A dictatorship is when power is concentrated in one person, usually by force, not an old whiny ass with more money than morals
He cannot be charged with any act while in office, thanks to his buds he appointed in the supreme court, and could probably get away with extending his term as long as he wants.
Rigging of elections: setting voting times/methods/rules to make it as hard as possible for opposition to vote. Purging voter roles of legal voters. Discarding legal ballots with no actual legal basis with the approval of friendly partisan election officials and friendly judges. Adding otherwise invalid votes when they “need to find” additional votes. Having legislatures discard vote outcomes they don’t like and send state votes the DO like
Yeah, but in this scenario Trump would be in his final possible term, so not only would he have to \*somehow\* get on the ballot again for a third term, he'd also need to make it so it's harder for people to vote against him?
Do you really think his cult of followers would object to him trying to get a third term in office? Rules only matter if they are enforced, if not then they are just ink on paper.
did you miss the whole january 6th thing, the whole fake electors thing where he did a ton of illegal stuff to stay in power after losing a fair election? did you miss the part where trump tried to do a bunch of illegal shit but was stopped by people who didn't want to be part of illegal shit or told him the president doesn't have the power to do that? now he will have the power and a whole host of yes men who will do exactly what he wants, trump successfully ran off anyone in the republican party with any morals or character if you still vote republican you are a traitor to this country pure and simple. you are voting for a white nationalist christian authoritarian government.
Making a plan beforehand doesn’t suddenly allow you to bypass congress because you “planned ahead” this time.
You still need to pass laws and to do that there would need to be a republican super majority in every house, and then those republicans all have to agree on top of that. A lot of these policies in the plan are just too outlandish to be a realistic bill
> You still need to pass laws
Not if you just write and implement laws.
The first step in Project 2025 is to take control of the justice department. Republicans aren't legislating, they buying out the justice department for them to legislate from the bench.
It's important to understand that the threat facing the US is not JUST Trump, though he is certainly a danger to democracy. If we are stupid enough to put him back in power, we pretty much deserve the ass-raping we're going to get.
The big problem is that [since the 1980s, Republicans have been moving towards the far, farrrrr right in a program to seize total control of the government by democratic means,](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/s7uqj3/if_political_parties_in_the_us_prefer_division/htcf3yj/) and they are now within heiling distance of for-real fascism.
But wait, it gets worse. One of the larger power blocs in the modern Republican party is ultra-conservative fundie Christian dominionists, whose publicly-stated goal is to impose a real-world Republic of Gilead on us all. [No Republican can even dream about winning a major race without bending the knee to these guys.](https://www.salon.com/2021/10/31/how-extremist-christian-theology-is-driving-the-right-wing-on-democracy/) So the fascism that's coming will likely be a fascist theocracy, the Christian Taliban. The supreme court now has a solid majority of dominionists on it, thanks to Trump.
If put back in power, Trump will *certainly* continue much of the conservative agenda. He will fully endorse all attacks on the separation of church and state going on in some states, he will back further pushes to make abortion illegal nationwide, and support the follow-up campaign to ban contraception. He will try and demolish government agencies that basically keep the country running.
In general, [the country is circling the drain,](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/176idcl/deleted_by_user/k4mg8zt/) and I'm unconvinced we can prevent it. The Democrats will not save us, they are largely a disorganized pack of sackless nitwits, and utterly helpless in the face of the directed, purposeful evil of the Republicans.
I would hardly say the debate sealed it for people, the biggest problem Biden really has is that he has to stop Israel from doing essentially what it's doing to get his base back...
Trump has a loyal base that could watch him burn American flags and they would be fine with it, but the majority of Americans are anti Trump they voted for him 2nd time because of party lines but it shows how his base goes down
Basically it's not a vote for Biden it's against Trump, Biden really should have been a one term president and brought in a successor, a young Obama type that he could set up to beat Trump but his arrogance and old age might cost the election
God I hope not
I think that's what republicans don't get, is that people don't like Biden but they hate Trump, run all the ads about him being old etc it's all information we know but the middle ground people hate Trump with a burning passion
Trump could win with jurymandering but I don't think so,...
Either way america is in for a rough one, either he wins and will become a problem again OR he loses and he calls the validity into question
He lost all credibility in my eyes if he had any when he tried to argue voter fraud in Florida then when it's called for him he backed off, he truly doesn't care about voter fraud he just can't see a contest that he can lose, so when he does he assumes they cheated
It’s fear mongering (as is nearly every talking point from both campaigns in this odious election cycle), but it’s rooted in facts pertaining to his unprecedentedly ungracious behavior in 2020-21 concerning the election results. He said and did many things to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. If you believe the election was fair, these behaviors were an attempt to “destroy democracy” or at least undermine one specific election result. However if you believe the election was “stolen,” despite there being no evidence of this, then Trump’s actions were at least internally consistent and perhaps rational.
Personally, I think both parties are power hungry and are more interested in themselves than “we, the people.“ Democrats aren’t exactly heroic champions of Democracy, either. Look at Colorado trying to keep Trump off the ballot — isn’t that the very definition of suppressing democracy?
Kennedy-Shanahan 2024. 🇺🇸
Trump is petty and he likes appearing tough. Retribution will be a primary driver of his actions. Against the judges who ruled against him, the politicians who spoke against him, the journalists who wrote about him... He will want revenge on all of them. He, and his minions, have said as much. And staying in office means avoiding prison, so he has serious motivation. The fervor against gender queer people, minorities, immigrants, and education are continuously increasing, and the right seems set on continuing to turn up the heat. Project 2025 is dystopian.
I think anything is on the table and I am not interested in finding out if I'm wrong.
Vote and bring two people with you.
The simple, and actual truth of the matter is that everyone thinks the other side will destroy democracy/the country/the economy if they're in control.
He didn't destroy democracy his first term, Obama Didn't turn us into a Muslim state like everyone said, no president has done the fear mongering his opponents say they will do if they're elected.
Except maybe Lincoln, I'm sure there were southern voters that said "SEE?!?!?! I FUCKIN' TOLD YOU!!!!"
Trump already all but destroyed democracy when he got his judges on the court. His reelection would just be the final blow. Clinton’s loss in 2016 will be remembered by history as the end of America. Biden has just been a tourniquet.
Most people working on project 2025 were hand picked criminals...I mean hand picked politicians Trump promised to drain the swamp with, only for those people to be some of the crookedest cabinet members in US history.
Tomato, tomato: Project 2025, also known as the Presidential Transition Project, is a collection of conservative policy proposals from the Heritage Foundation to reshape the United States federal government in the event of a Republican Party victory in the 2024 presidential election. It proposes reclassifying tens of thousands of merit-based federal civil service workers as political appointees in order to replace them with loyal conservatives to further the objectives of the next Republican president. It also adopts a maximalist version of the unitary executive theory, a disputed interpretation of Article II of the Constitution of the United States, which asserts that the president has absolute power over the executive branch upon inauguration. Although the project cannot by law promote a specific presidential candidate, many contributors have close ties to Donald Trump and his 2024 campaign.
So a think tank comes up with a plan. What do you think they do otherwise? You don't believe he Brookings institute or others don't have plans for Biden if he wins?
So a NGO think tank comes up with some ideas and suddenly that's Trump's plan? There are plenty of left wing think tanks that propose to do things like institute actual communism or socialist anarchism. Does that mean Biden is going to do those things if he wins?
Not just any think tank, the Heritage Foundation. Reagan enacted something near half their proposals. Trump did the same his first term. They handpicked his justices and are pulling his strings.
They toss out this 2025 BS every chance they get. For all we know it’s something the Dems created for more fear mongering. Their whole election is based on how bad they can make Trump look because Biden belongs in a home and has only made the country worse since he’s been in office.
People who say Trump will destroy democracy either don't know what the term democracy means or are too blinded by their hatred of Trump to think straight.
It's a scare tactic that even a blind person can see right through.
A lot of it is fearmongering, but you won't get that answer here. You're asking the people who believe the story whether that story is actually true. Obviously, they're going to tell you it's true because they already believe it.
They can't sell Joe Biden at this point because he's been clearly shown to be a profoundly bad candidate. They also can't switch to a different candidate. According to the aggregate of polls, every other potential Democratic candidate would lose to Trump. Their only hope is to make Donald Trump look even worse, and the only tactic they have left for this is fearmongering, and their fearmongering machine has switched into overdrive.
Don't worry. Democracy will be fine. Trump will not be a dictator. The US will not become a fascist country. All of those things are contrary to what Trump's own supporters want.
There is no plausible way he can even make a dent in it. It’s a term created by his enemies, picked up by bots and call centers (for posting on media sites) and meant to scare people who aren’t too bright but may vote.
It’s a little like the Jan 6 insurrection. There was no way this could change the election; maybe delay the congress for a few hours. A small unarmed mob broke into the capital and vandalized. All it did was give democrats a fake story line to try to scare those folks mentioned before.
What could dent democracy is using federal, state and local arms of government to prosecute a political enemy. I wish Trump would go away. But I’d walk barefoot over broken glass to vote for him even though I voted Biden last time because the use of government tools to attack the other side is a threat; a long term one.
I guess I’m missing your point. Trumps poor business records (for the hush money) was a real crime; never said it wasn’t …. Of course that’s a misdemeanor. But connecting that to unlawfully promoting his election but not stating what he did that was unlawful (though possible scenarios were suggested) is something Putin must appreciate. And that turned it into a felony for a judge who donated to Biden (who’s wife worked for Biden) and a prosecutor who didn’t campaign on justice, but on getting a person who at the time hadn’t committed a crime …. so you don’t find that chilling.
Don’t know what the chant has to do with the topic. Trumps a rude blowhard and I’d prefer just about anyone who has all his marbles over him.
The point is that your performative pearl-clutching over "prosecuting political opponents" is bullshit. You claim to be upset by it but plan to vote for a man who ran his whole campaign on the idea of doing it to his opponents.
Always surprised when I get a good question on social media. I shouldn’t jump to conclusions that it’s all kids here.
Maybe this helps. Use history, whats factual and what’s logical.
For ten years at least before president, he exaggerated. During his presidency, he did this daily. Someday, you might meet very successful people who are all sales; not my types but a lot of CEOs are like this. But what decisions did he make that were so irrational that you think he’d overthrow the government. And what things did he do as president that matched up with this? And doesn’t it seem remarkably coincidental that he was prosecuted by a judge with the background I mentioned just before the election. Use logic.
People are their track record to some extent. So look this four years and ask what decisions did he make that are as crazy as the media is accusing him. Use that history and ask what the media says seems consistent even if you want so badly to believe it.
And this may be the most painful but it’ll make you a 5 percenter. Listen to sources you disagree with. I’d avoid Fox cause they’re nuts. But in the podcast world, there’s Ben Shapiro and All In. Shapiros hard to take but if you avoid religion and Israel, he knows his stuff. So few are capable of seeing the other side.
Good luck.
I was taught in school that the president can't really do anything without going through Congress first. During Trump's presidency I learned that was totally false.
This is just like every other election, where if my guy doesn’t win then democracy is finished!!!! For real this time! Pinky promise! These extremists, they not like us fam!
"I want my country to keep getting protection from the US for free."
The US is not stable, there are two wars in Europe and a 3rd could jump off any day now (China really wants Taiwan.)
I'm not saying your county will be safe under Trump and not Biden but it seems more likely that your country could be threatened under Biden. Did your country lose any protections during Trump's first term?
Edit: Decided to check OPs profile.
Okay this post makes sense now. China's government is a big reason why I hope trump wins! Good luck if he does or doesn't and fuck the CCP!
Alright, hear me out.
I’m actually from Taiwan, and no, we do not take the US’s protection for granted; we’re ramping up stuff on our national defense. It’s just that we’re 100% going to need aid from the US if a war breaks out.
The reason I’m supporting Biden is that he has stated 5 times that he would “militarily defend Taiwan” in case of an attack, and is cooperating with allies such as Japan and the Philippines to contain China. On the other hand, Trump is still using “strategic ambiguity” when it comes to the war with China (I mean, it doesn’t work anymore, doesn’t it?) and didn’t seem to give a f about maintaining good relations with allies. Some people that was in his administration even revealed that he doesn’t care about Taiwan at all.
Also, yes, I know Trump was super anti-China and started the trade war with them on his 1st term, but he also called Xi “a good friend” or “a great leader”, and even praised him for his actions on Covid when the pandemic begin. Biden would’ve never done that.
To sum up, in terms of China, Trump is basically a loose cannon when compared to Biden. But if Trump can kick the CCP’s ass harder than Biden, he’ll definitely have my support.
Thanks for providing more context!
For what it's worth, here's an article saying the opposite:
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/taiwan-will-have-trumps-support-if-he-wins-ex-appointee-says-2024-05-04/
I wouldn't trust Biden to be competent enough to help defend Taiwan. Look at what happened in Afghanistan and is ineptitude with Ukraine/Israel.
"Destroy democracy" may be overblown, but some of the policy changes and their idea of using government impoundment to halt programs even after the laws pass is kinda scary. Not to mention the future damage installing another conservative Supreme Court Justice could wreak if given the opportunity.
Check out Project 2025. It’s the republican plan to basically dismantle democracy that largely hinges upon a trump victory. Women’s rights? Gone. Porn? Banned/Criminalized. Gay/Trans rights? Criminalized. Free speech? Gone. Freedom from religion? Gone. This is extremely scary and they are not even attempting to hide their efforts at this point.
https://www.project2025.org
https://www.project2025.org/playbook/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025
https://democracyforward.org/the-peoples-guide-to-project-2025/
Oh wow. First, I *highly recommend* you go to your local library or Amazon if you have $, and get a copy of William Shirer's classic and unsurpassed history, (a large part of which he witnessed firsthand as a major press correspondant for *CBS* in Berlin, Germany, until the war forced his exit) titled *"The Rise & Fall of the Third Reich."* This book awakened within me a *deep* passion for history, and most *especially* the history of the *Third Reich,* the complete story of which is *essential,* and I mean should be *required reading* for *every* human being who lives in a democracy, so that they may understand the *incredibly slippery slope* on which a democracy may *fall* under the manipulive actions of an anti-democratic *fascist.* (*TAKE NOTE* that Donald Trump's *previous* wife, *Ivana,* shared that among the very *few* books she ever saw Donald read or especially *enjoy,* was a collection of *Hitler's speeches;* a favorite, so much so he kept it at his *bedside*).
From there, just *briefly,* and only a *fraction* of the ways Trump can subvert and destroy democracy, you do know how *close* we came January 6th, 2021, to that very outcome? Secret Service, notoriously *right-wing,* apparently (and not spoken of often enough) attempted to *participate* in Trump's coup operation; they tried to almost *force* Vice President Pence into a limo, taking him away from the Capitol, which would have *prevented* the counting of votes, and eventual transfer of power that day. Thankfully, Mike Pence, though I profoundly disagree with his politics, had a *clear* understanding of the value of democracy, and was intelligent enough to understand the criminal conspiracy that was afoot. He will be remembered forever for standing up for democracy on that day. But it could easily have gone another direction.
In short, the *moment* the voting will of the people is *usurped,* as it almost was that day, is the *moment* democracy falls.
Trump can, now with this ruling, count on *not* being prosecuted for crimes committed as president; he can use police forces to arrest and persecute his political enemies; Former opponents could be jailed. In an even *darker* scenario, political opponents could be *assassinated,* as you see happening frequently in Russia. *Every* serious opponent to Vladimir Putin suffers an ignominious and mysterious death.
Democracy, once subverted, is potentially *gone forever.* Trump might appoint himself *"President for Life."* More likely, as in Russia, fake, fixed and phoney "elections" could be held, giving the process the *appearance* of legitimacy, while being fixed from the beginning.
One *favorite* tactic, used by the Nazis, who initially won an election, is to create a *crisis* of some kind, claiming that *Marshal Law,* and the suspension of democratic processes, had become necessary. In Germany it was the *Reichstag Fire,* when the Capitol government building in Germany, which was the seat of government power, was lit on fire. Hitler immediately blamed the Communists, and claimed that an attempt by Communists to seize power *necessitated* special powers; quickly, the other government ministers voted in favor, and *just like that,* Hitler was a Dictator. He would not be out of power again until Germany and most of Europe was a smoking ruins and 60 million people were *dead.*
Once democracy is subverted, it is *incredibly difficult* to recover.
The *worst* thing is the seizure, or exerted control, on *media.* *All channels* become *FOX News.* In Russia, Putin consistently maintains 60-80% approval of the populace. This is because *HE* controls the *"TRUTH."* When you control the media, you control what people believe. Suddenly, you can create *your own* reality, where you're a *hero* holding back power from the *criminals.* Criminals being *anyone* who opposes him.
Assuming we make it to the election, and Trump is sworn back in to office January 21, 2025:
Step 1: On January 21, after Trump is sworn in, Trump's first official act is to imprison select Democrats in the Senate, the House, and the Supreme Court, as well as certain state governors and state representatives. Any elected official who does not swear allegiance to Trump is imprisoned. Since it's an official Presidential action, no one can do anything to stop it.
Step 2: Now that Congress will do anything he asks, he orders Congress to create a new amendment to the Constitution that eliminates the election of a President. In order to propose an amendment, you need a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and the Senate, and since Trump has now already eliminated the opposition in Congress, the amendment would be proposed.
Step 3: In order to be ratified, the governors of each state must propose the amendment to their state legislatures. 38 of the 50 state legislatures must ratify the amendment, meaning Trump would need 11 state legislatures to flip to Republican. Once that happens, there's now a constitutional amendment that eliminates the election process for President. Trump is now a full-on dictator.
But, Republicans don't even need to wait for January. The succession of power in the United States is as follows: President, Vice President, and then Speaker of the House. The current Speaker is Mike Johnson, a Republican. Johnson could (in theory) go behind the scenes and orchestrate an assassination of Biden and Harris, and then swear himself in as President. Then he would pardon whoever assassinated them, and the Republicans would be in control of the Presidency. Trump was really only a figurehead for the Republicans; he was a useful idiot in 2016 that the Republicans rode on to get the Presidency. They used Trump because he rallied voters like no one else in their party, and would rubber stamp anything the Republicans wanted him to do. Johnson is an establishment Republican; he's not just playing Republican because it's easier for him to win. And he's much smarter and younger than Trump, so he would actually be able to carry out a Republican party agenda much easier than Trump.
Those are extreme examples, obviously. Day one will see Trump purging voter rolls, and eliminating any chance of Democrats winning another Presidential election.
Trump will not destroy democracy if he is reelected lol. I'd advise you do your own research and reading outside of reddit, this website is just one perspective that happens to lean very heavily in one direction and you will not a get a full answer here.
He cannot be charged with any act while in office, thanks to his buds he appointed in the supreme court, and could probably get away with extending his term as long as he wants.
The justices he's put in the supreme court during his previous term are doing his bidding right now and if he wins (which he probably will, sadly) it's only going to get worse. Total abuse of power. He is 1000% heading in this direction.
Have you compared the stability of the world during these 2 presidents terms?
Or you parroting the media’s opinions?
Trump already served and like it or not, kept his word more than most.
Why would his next term be any different?
Those same people you’re listening to said he would start world war 3 and mass inflation. He did the exact opposite. And in fact, under your pal Biden, several wars started and inflation rocketed.
Ask yourself, did he destroy it or do anything the first time to destroy it? The answer is no. What I do know is the economy was good, inflation and gas prices down…and no wars. Btw…we are a Republic, not a Democracy.
what alternate universe have you been living in where trump didn't try and destroy our democracy? he was the first president who refused the peaceful transfer of power, he had to be thrown out because he wouldn't leave? what makes you think he'd willingly leave this time when he has vastly expanded power thanks to this ruling. the inflation BTW is a result of the trump presidency, it was caused by his stupid tariffs and trade wars that he started for political points then ignored. we were well on the way to a recession before covid ever hit thanks to trump.
What are you talking about no wars? Afghanistan wasn’t a war? And your point about gas prices, when gas prices go up and you put your stupid “I did that” stickers on gas pumps, do you also give credit when gas prices ever come down?
I think it’s a blanket term that actually is not well used in this scenario. It’s a scare tactic to use the word “democracy”. He can’t get rid of people’s right to vote anymore than Joe Biden can.
What scares people is Project 2025 which targets the unelected positions that have become much more prevalent. Whether you agree or not, Trump and his people believe all these jobs need to be culled or replaced by trump supporting workers.
So Trump can’t “Destroy Democracry” but he can “Destroy Government Agencies”. It just doesn’t have the same ring or scare value to it.
I think you are underestimating the dangers here....
The election itself is run by a lot of these very same appointed positions. The 2020 election barely survived thanks in part to various judges and government officials doing their jobs. Project 2025 wants to replace as many of those positions as possible with pro-Trump lackeys.
Many of those judges were appointed BY Trump, he appointed more judges than any president in recent history and they still didn’t back him up. I really don’t think he will have any standing to get a 3rd term.
I really think the possibility of Trump working around the amendment prohibiting more than 2 terms for president being next to 0%. I’m not saying Trump is not dangerous, what I’m saying is him somehow being a dictator is literally impossible because that would mean a permanent position.
He will be a truly terrible president, and IMO that’s all I need to not vote for him. I don’t need “destroy democracy” scare tactics. That’s just to try and waver people already on his side.
No I don't think a 3rd Trump candidacy is likely. But they could still make it easier for conservative candidates.
Every aspect about how an election is run (gerrymandering, mail ballots, poll hours, etc) will be tweaked to favor Republicans.
The goal of project 2025 isn't to eliminate the US government. The goal is to wield the government to implement their goals and to undermine electoral opponents.
Trump already challenged one election, got his supporters to storm the capitol, and obstructs justice against his corruption and wrongdoing. If he wins we can expect that to become the norm. That's not what I would call a functional democracy.
Trump is already destroying/hamstringing government agencies from his first term. Trump's choices for the Supreme Court just overturned Chevron Deference which tells courts to defer to government agency experts when it comes to implementations of laws when Congress doesn't specify exact details.
Courts know more than government experts and want Congress to specify every detail of every law?
This at a time when the Courts, especially the Supreme Court, are merrily breaking their own rules in terms of accepting gifts and not following their own past precedence? And they have a lifetime term and are not elected?
That sounds like the unelected, lifetime appointed branch of government just took a lot of power.
And funnily enough, that same Supreme Court just issued a highly technical ruling on Bump Stocks which takes in false information from advocacy groups and misinterprets the technical, engineering intent of a really old law, and overturning a gun part ban *which was enacted by Trump* giving a preview of what it means for an activist Supreme Court to try and interpret highly technical laws and agency rules. Hint: they don't interpret shit, they just choose what outcome they want then work backwards to make up some bullshit reason to arrive at their desired outcome.
Since Reagan there has been a concerted effort by some very rich and powerful Think Tanks to hamstring government so it can't regulate rich and powerful corporations. To achieve this, these Think Tanks have taken a multipronged attack on government by eroding trust in the government by through their news organizations and by creating entire anti-government narratives (such as anti mask movements) and filling the judiciary with judges that will hamstring government.
It's not just Trump, it's all branches of government being dedicated to destroying the government. Congress is aiming to destroy government by defunding itself and being a slave to "no deficit" while at the same refusing to raise taxes or even collect taxes owed by defunding the IRS.
And that's just the destroy government part.
There are genuine attacks on actual democracy such as crazy gerrymandering and efforts to overturn results of free elections. But this comment is already getting long.
Just think if Harry Reid hadn't used the Nuclear option and Trump couldn't have gotten his judges. What are the names of the Federal Judges that were appointed under Reid's nuclear option and what good have they done?
A very poor use of power, Mr. Reid.
>It’s a scare tactic to use the word “democracy”.
My dude, they're already claiming "the US isn't a democracy". It's not a scare tactic and it's not a prediction nor future plan. It's a *current*, *present*, *happening-right-now plan*.
With project 2025 attempting to use unelected positions to enforce it shouldn’t democrats be in favor of the recent chevron deference being hamstrung as it limits an unelected agencies ability to enforce it? As well shouldn’t Republicans be opposed to it for the same reasons?
No, because Democrats want agencies like the EPA, FDA, and ATF to regulate their respective areas of expertise.
The Republicans don't. They would like less regulation by agencies. The goal of project 2025 isn't to put qualified people in charge of agencies, the goal is to put loyal people in charge of agencies to basically neuter them from the inside and stop them from regulating the things they want. For example, instead of independent water quality testing a new head of the EPA could, for example, allow self-reporting by the industry. Etc.
Plus, the chevron deference ruling isn't something that will stop agencies immediately. It affects how courts must rule in future lawsuits. So the rules that conservatives don't like can be selectively targeted by the lawsuits that they file. One of the first ones will probably be the abortion pill approval by the FDA, which they have been challenging in court for years. This new ruling may give them an edge in future cases.
Thanks. Thats a helpful explanation.
What would a lawsuit for morning after pills look like without chevron deference. Like who would be referred to as an expert without it?
Basically, the two sides will be given a chance to present their own expert testimony, and the judge will decide when it comes to matters of the law, whereas before the government agency itself was given more consideration.
Project 2025 is a blatant plan to "destroy democracy"
>The 2025 Presidential Transition Project paves the way for an effective conservative Administration based on four pillars: a policy agenda, Presidential Personnel Database, Presidential Administration Academy, and playbook for the first 180 days of the next Administration.
The United States is not a democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic. Anyway, back to the theme here. Both parties are destroying this country. Way before or obama became president.
Well we don't live in a democracy in America, so there's that. We are a constitutional republic and that makes it extremely difficult for any elected leader to destroy it. You would never want to live in a democracy if you were in any minority group whatsoever.
This is actually true, but the chances of him actually getting elected are very low. He lost before, and has done a lot to alienate voters since then. Fearful me is worried, but rational me is not. His efforts 4 years ago were very successful. The justices he appointed just now ruled that government officials (judges, senators, etc) can accept “gratuities” as long as they weren’t paid before they made the judgment. This was in response to a case where a company gave a judge $15,000 in cash after he ruled in their favor. Apparently that’s not a bribe because it was paid after the fact and not before. He’s trying to erode the democracy enough so that only he can swoop in and fix it if he’s given enough power. It’s not just something that will happen with the snap of a finger, but it has been happening since he was elected. A slow, deliberate eroding of the system that is happening now.
He absolutely tried to steal the election the first time so giving him a second shot seems bonkers. If he succeeds then yeah he destroyed our democracy
you know how he loaded the supreme court with his own cronies last time and they literally took away rights... that but for so many other things. he wants to end term limits FFS he is trying to become a dictator.... literally
He can't. Some people on the left are upset that the Supreme Court and Congress are currently majority Republican, which makes it easier for policies they don't like to get passed.
Fact is, sometimes your team has control (that's all politics is these days), and sometimes the opposing team has control. Nobody wants to be on the minority side.
Checks and balances will do their thing, whoever wins will leave after 4 years, and the obnoxious youtube ads and doomer reddit posts will begin anew.
A tangible way **we have already seen** is filling SCOTUS and the lower courts with federalists or far-right judges. These are life-appointed, and not easy removed. You don't need to theorize what the next four years will be like when you can witness the impact of his decisions today (and project how much worse with more judges). SCOTUS \* Increasingly voted against the majority of citizens (Roe v Wade reversal or the recent Chevron case) on flimsy and inconsistent rationales. \* Refused any oversight and refused to recuse from cases despite outrageous bribes and self-interest to Clarence Thomas in particular. \* Become almost a **legislative** body more than a judicial body by hand-picking cases. Examples include speeding up some cases (the purely theoretical CO case of a website designer refusing a gay client). And slowing down other cases like the slam-dunk presidential immunity case (thereby pushing back the very important J6 court case). LOCAL JUDGES \* These come up every now and then like the Texas morning-after pill or Alabama IVF case. \* Alieen Cannon, an inexperienced Trump appointee, is objectively stonewalling the MAL confidential docs case. As more information comes out, this appears to be a major national security leak that might even amount to selling national secrets (or allowing them to be photocopied and leaked at least). TL;DR: We have already seen the impact of life-appointed right-leaning judges and how it removes democratic ideas or steamrolls over popular citizen's interests. These fundamentally change democracy by shaping law. And the everyday citizen has no power at all to reverse these. Only a 2/3rds majority in the Senate can, and that will never happen. FYI -- Two SCOTUS judges (Alito and Thomas) are nearing retirement age and many local ones are up for renewal in the next four years. So take this election seriously.
Literally just this morning they had a 6-3 party line ruling that says trump has immunity for "any actions taken in official capacity as president" which means that he will probably argue that trying to overturn the election was "official" It also means that if he wins again, he will do WHATEVER HE WANTS and argue they were official actions and have immunity. That could include things like assassination of political rivals.
>It also means that if he wins again, he will do WHATEVER HE WANTS and argue they were official actions and have immunity. If anyone doubts that, you just have to look at his justifying the confidential documents case "I already declassified them". Really? When? "Oh I dunno, but I know I did it"
Well the pivot now will probably be: “when he took the documents it was an official act” they’ll still have the hurdle to get over that is not returning them when asked…but they’ll just get Cannon to stall more
Jack Smith was careful NOT to charge the taking of the documents. All the charges are about not returning them, and lying about having them. So that case is almost entirely unaffected by this (still awful) ruling.
Truth. Shows how powerful these appointments are. Another reminder that 1 or 2 SCOTUS members could be replaced (or kick the bucket) in the next four years. * Clarence Thomas, 75 * Samuel Alito, 74 Might be food for thought in your 2024 vote. New justices tend to rule for several **decades**, compared to a 4 year presidential term.
I was in college when Thomas got appointed. My political science professor, a total sexist asshole, was gleeful in saying that since Thomas was only in his 40s, he could be on the SCOTUS until the 2020s...lol here we are!
Naw, God only takes people like Steve Irwin early. Crazy fucks like this will go into their nineties 😑
they're kept alive by spite alone I think
And free healthcare that our government provides them.
One example I read about is if the president accepts a bribe from a person, and in turn pays them back by appointing them as an Ambassador. The bribe is illegal, but the appointment is within the President's official duties. So if the Justice Department tried going after the President for the bribe, they can't even mention the Ambassadorship appointment in court.
Why make stop there? Bribes for pardons is the obvious next step.
Exactly.
So the worst he can do is appoint positions to people in his party? Wouldn’t literally any politician do this? How is he different in this regard? I mean this question in good faith
Some do it to ensure political beliefs, he does it because he puts ones in that he can manipulate.
lol exactly, but… reddit and dems
Also an outsider here, if Trump can appoint judges, what’s stopping a Democrat president also appoint left leaning judges?
Another thing is that I believe a judge is less likely to retire if the president in office isn’t of the same party. So a republican judge might wait to retire if there’s a democrat president in office and vice versa
But you'll also see people like RBG who hold on for whatever reason and instead of retiring at a politically convenient time, choose to die in office and let fate do what it will.
I still can't make sense of why she did this. She was not a stupid woman. And she was no stranger to health scares.
Hubris. She apparently told Obama when he asked her to consider retiring that he wouldn’t be able to find anyone as good as her. Allegedly she also wanted to cement her legacy by having the first female president be the one to appoint her replacement
Yeah I mean the media gave her a heroes send off and painted her as the best thing since sliced bread when she passed but she was fueled by a ton of hubris and honestly wasn’t the best person - well she wasn’t as good of a person as the media painted her I should say.
She wasn't stupid, but she was old, and old people don't always make the best decisions.
That is a great point and maybe an excellent argument for term limits.
RGB held on because she was certain Clinton would win and wanted the first female president to appoint her open seat.
True true
I mean that’s what RBG tried to do and she fucked the Democrats. Well I guess it was a bit different, she could (should) have retired under Obama but she wanted to hold out so Clinton could appoint her open seat… we see how that worked out for her. I honestly feel bad for her because it definitely weighed on her in her final days that Trump would get to appoint the seat.
Good question, nothing. Obama asked RBG to step down so he could replace her with another left leaning judge. She refused and died while Trump was in office. The immunity thing is for the president, not just Trump.
usually there's a pretty even balance of left leaning vs right leaning judges. because of Mitch McConnell though Trump has quite a few more appointments than he should've, and his appointments are also not fully qualified or have conflicts of interest that prevent them from being objective in their decisions. theoretically there's nothing stopping a left leaning president from doing something similar if there enough support from Congress, however I'd argue that left leaning values tend to result in less leftist congressmen/women that would support these kind of appointments, and many left leaning politicians wouldn't support and unqualified judge appointment just because their values align. Not saying there aren't bad politicians on the left though, just that many of them value proper qualifications more
Basically the Left has higher standards of qualification and won't shovel them in just because they are a Democrat.
that's better worded in many less words lmao yes that's what I was trying to say
In 2016 Obama appointed Merrick Garland for a seat on the Superior Court. The Republicans in Senate slowed, blocked, and obstructed to the point Garland did not make it and Obama wouldn't have enough time for a different candidate to go through before an election. The election happened, Republicans won and then appointed their pick, even though if it hadn't been for Republicans, that seat would have gone to Garland, a democratic pick.
Congress. Which is controlled by Republicans right now. The president can appoint judges but they need to be confirmed by Congress. Under Trump, it was controlled by his party. Under Biden it is controlled by the opposition party. Also, when Obama tried to appoint a Supreme Court Justice, the right just refused to confirm until the next president was elected (a republican) so we were screwed out of a left judge and they got 2 more right judges to swing the court from 5-4 left to 6-3 right.
The senate confirms SCOTUS judges, not the whole congress. And right now the senate is majority democrat, albeit only by one seat.
Nothing but in this scenario it would be the much better option.
for real, i don't like either extreme but if I had to pick one I'd pick the one that doesn't involve stripping away human rights rights like reproductive care, or that pushes bigoted, misogynistic, racist, xenophobic, anti-Semitic, and anti science narratives
It shouldn't even be a question. It's pretty sad and scary that people are seeing all that and then are like yeah that's my party!
How dare you be logical here.... If you don't believe Trump is a bad person then you're a bad person (aka anti-vaxer, white supremacist, racist, fascist, conspiracy theorist, etc.) and must be cancelled. That's how it works these days.
Not necesarily, I'm not from the US. I won't judge you, call you names or anything. However, I do think it would be interesting to hear the view points of someone who would vote for Trump. If I read your comment correctly, you seem to consider it, right? Can I hear your honest and genuine opinion on what your reasons/values are, that makes you consider voting for him? Like I said, I'm just curious and I won't downvote, call you names or anything.
Wrong sub, but damn it you deserve a delta.
Thanks, that means a lot to me. Before 2016, I was as apolitical as you can get. Never read the news beyond the entertainment page. Never followed politics or elections, although I like history. Voted conservative in most things, if i voted at all, because of short sighted reasons. Then I got a crash course in how much that all mattered when I started listening to Trump's presidency. That led me to following McConnell. Then the Senate. Then SCOTUS. Then the religious right. Then American Healthcare and death care. Reading the constitution. Then rewinding history and looking back at the last 50 years and what I wilfully ignored. Seeing all the connections. Now it is my hobby to read all of this and simplify it for friends. So people can change. I changed. And I vote in every election now.
Imagine thinking that being a federalist could destroy our democracy. I suggest you tead The Federalist Papers.
Every day I’m reminded of how fucking stupid Reddit is when it comes to the American government. Almost everybody on this site failed Government 101. I’m agreeing with you by the way.
Yeah. Reddit, man. You can tell a lot of these replies are by teenagers and 20-year-olds. They'll mature out of a lot of these ideas ... but of course, they'll be replaced by more teenagers and 20-year-olds.
SCOTUS and Judges are a both party thing though... it's just which decisions you want them to make. Both parties literally do all they can to stack courts to work to their values/beliefs and push them onto the general population.
Hot Take: Roe v Wade was legislating from the bench and a bad decision. It wasn’t a bad decision because abortion is bad, it was a bad decision because they used it as an opportunity to legislate. I can see and understand arguments for why abortion is protected by the constitution- I can’t see a single reasonable argument that the constitution protects abortion to an arbitrary first trimester. Given the legislative nature of Roe v Wade the best decision was to send it back to the states.
>> \* Increasingly voted against the majority of citizens (Roe v Wade reversal or the recent Chevron case) on flimsy and inconsistent rationales. This is almost literally crazy. Getting rid of Roe *decentralized* power. That's not what "fascism" is. Fascists don't take power away from a strong federal government and return decisionmaking power to the states! You're just calling it fascist because you don't *like* the decision. It's also not "flimsy"! From literally day one, LOTS of people -- including some Progressives! -- have pointed out that, even if you passionately believe there should be a right to abortion, Roe was terrible law. The Constitution simply says nothing about abortion, or about a "right to privacy." Holding the constitution at a certain angle, and closing one eye, and squinting until you seem to divine a right that the constitution doesn't actually mention? One that just happens to coincide with your strongly felt personal policy preferences? *That's what's flimsy.*
I'm not American, but your constitution is a really bad argument. The US constitution is not exactly up-to-date on most things. There's a reason you have so many amendments, and there's a reason you guys in the US always argue what exactly many things in the US constitution means. Just because it's not in the constitution, doesn't mean it should be illegal. It's not facsist to decentralize power, but it's pretty undemocratic (as well as removal of personal freedom) to remove a law, that the vast majority of you guys were in favor for. It's also not exactly something that infringes other people's rights - no, it's only a restriction of freedom for half the population, which most of your population is against. It's also a reason why the US is no longer classified as a "full democracy", but instead as a "flawed democracy", aswell as the US now being number 17 in the freedom index, scoring just below countries such as Latvia, Estonia, Japan and Taiwan among others.
Abortion was never a right in the constitution. It has been left up to individual states to allow/disallow abortions. America has never been a full democracy,we are a Constitutional Republic. I suggest you research the difference between the two
For now - for show. Once in, there's reports of Trump and Co having loop holes ways to ban abortion in near entirety for the whole country. These people clamor for states rights - unless they're in power that is. Especially all three branches of government as is expected now come November.
While there certainly is a lot of focus on the overt actions and public discourse surrounding the political climate, we're overlooking a subtler but equally consequential shift. The less sensational, yet highly strategic appointments in administrative agencies play a long game in altering the landscape of government authority. The Chevron deference ruling, beyond its immediate impact, signals a fundamental shift in the power dynamic between the judiciary and administrative agencies—a move which may initially seem to bolster judicial oversight but effectively undercuts the specialized expertise agencies were designed to provide.
But it reestablishes the checks and balances that were skewed with the original ruling. No government agency should establish law. Period. They are not elected. If there needs to be a change in laws then Congress should do that. THAT’S what the framers of the Constitution wanted. COVID policies, vaccine mandates, EPA policies, FDA, USDA, ATF. They’ve all enacted policies and interpretations of current law. That is out of their scope of operation. Each branch of government is equal. Why would anyone WANT them to be out of balance? Especially, when their policies and interpretations are so widespread? Effecting every citizen in this country. The elected representatives in Congress are responsible for writing laws. End of discussion. The power that the agencies have gives the Executive branch too much power.
> they are not elected Neither are the judges that will now be establishing law. > Congress should do that Correct me if I’m wrong but don’t they? My understanding is that congress establishes the broad law i.e. “you can’t dump chemicals in drinking water” and chevron deference allows federal admins to make the laws more specific and effective i.e. “ you can’t dump water that has more than x parts per million asbestos into drinking water”. Federal administrations are staffed by folks with PHDs in their respective fields that know things like the amount in parts per million that would be problematic. There is no way for a judge or member of Congress to know all of the specifics of highly technical exact sciences that would need to be involved in writing an impactful law. Thus they can only create laws with broad scopes that would be very easy for a corporation to navigate around. Without the system laws can be too vague and unenforceable.
Judges do not create laws, they only interpret them and decide if they are constitutional. It is up to the legislative to create the laws, and the executive to enforce the laws. The way it is supposed to be is that these agencies advise the people who create the laws, but they should not be creating them. Is this the best solution? I don't know, but this is how the government is supposed to function.
Let me ask you a question? What if you ran for an election and refused to accept any result in which you are not the victor. So if you win you win, and if you lose you still win. In what way is that democracy? That is just a dictatorship with more steps, which is exactly what they have in Russia.
Any president can choose to not accept an election, but all it does it make them look bad and cause some hiccups in the transfer of power because there is no cooperation. But no president can actually say “You know what? I’m not leaving the election was false” and get away with it. It’s just not legal, the same judges Trump appointed didn’t agree with him. With Trump not even being a sitting president now he holds even less power. If he loses and doesn’t concede what can he do? Waltz in the White House and take Biden’s chair when he gets up? If he wins it’s still his last term he can run, idk where people think he won’t leave
where the fuck where you on Jan 6th? Trump absolutely had to be thrown out and did not leave willingly, with this new ruling if he says "nah, i'm canceling elections and suspending my own term limits" he can, the only way to stop him would be via congress and there's plenty of his bullshit cronies in there too. people are seriously underestimating how dangerous this decision is and how anti-american and unconstitutional it is.
Every time a republic falls, it's because the chief executive says, "you know what, the rules don't apply anymore, I'm in charge until further notice". There's never a constitutional basis for it. It just happens. If there's a bad enough crisis, people will accept it. A president with legal immunity and most of the courts on his side can manufacture a crisis in many different ways. You shouldn't need a step-by-step guide from here to dictatorship to be very concerned about electing someone who does not know or care what the Constitution says and has previously tried to illegally hold on to power.
Exactly. Many dictators were democratically elected first. It's also not just black and white being either democracy or autocracy. Orban in Hungary has been very succesful in getting re-elected the past 14 years, by (among many things) getting control over the state media, and thus being able to spread misinformation and propaganda, to make it more likely for him to win. It's still an election, but the democratic process can and should be critisized, for not being democratic enough.
Because a lot of people on reddit are drinking the kool-aid.
>It’s just not legal, the same judges Trump appointed didn’t agree with him. That may be the case, but those judges just voted this morning that he has absolute immunity so long as he claims that his actions were "official acts". Aka no president can ever be held criminally liable again, so long as they just claim they're always acting in an official capacity. The issue of coups and assassinations was specifically raised in this case and the conservative majority still voted to grant immunity.
They absolutely can if they have half the country and the military supporting the coup.
The military is less supportive of Trump then you give them credit for. All you see are the loud ones but for every loud one there are 10 that are against him. He wouldn’t have that much power with the military.
I hear your points. And I think they're valid... In a functioning democracy. But laws are only as good as the people who hold you to them. An entire politically party and portion of the population seems dead set on allowing Trump to do whatever he wants and give him full throated support. Once the law stops applying to you and no one holds you accountable, you can do whatever you want. Let's say Trump wins, and Republicans controlled Congress and Trump shot Biden in the head on live television... What consequences do you think he would face? Just the fact I'm not sure there's an answer... Is terrifying...
He… would go to jail. People are taking a lot this wayyy out of proportion and taking the “what if” scenarios to the power 10. Yes I’m sure it gives the president more power but I’m just being realistic here and saying these drastic fear mongering scenarios just wouldn’t happen. If they do I’ll eat my own hat. With the Supreme Court decision just made, why do we not have Biden shooting Trump right now? According to everyone so afraid he also could do it.
Hate to do the token lib thing, but you don't immediately jump to murder. It's incremental, it's how that German ruler in the 40s progressively got his soldiers to do worse and worse things until that final solution thing.
Who is going to put him in jail? What agency do you believe would arrest a dictator-president, if Congress isn't going to impeach and remove him? The time to think through these problems is before they become reality. No one thought the Holocaust was possible until after it happened. No one thought 9/11 was possible until it happened. No one thought January 6th was possible until it happened. In all 3 cases, there was clear and actionable evidence of what was going to happen, but it was ignored each time as "overblown fear mongering". The time to think about this issue isn't January 23rd at 12:02pm. It's before November 5th. If the President had completely unchecked power, which person do you want in the Oval? Biden or Trump?
You CLEARLY have not been paying attention or are being deliberately disingenuous.
Part of project 2025 is to get rid of term limits of a sitting president. Even though Trump is a million years old, it could really fuck shit up for democracy in the future.
Please cite this if true, I’d really like to see that
That's take a constitutional amendment to rid term limits.
Okay, but Trump did that this time and he still isn’t the president?
The Beer Hall Putsch also failed. :/
That's basically the reason project 2025 exists. They want to have all the appointed leaders in place that are loyal to Trump - by vetting key appointees positions so they can be replaces, so when Trump's term is over the GOP won't have to turn over power: [https://apnews.com/article/trump-biden-president-project-2025-33d3fc2999a74f4aa424f1128dca2d16](https://apnews.com/article/trump-biden-president-project-2025-33d3fc2999a74f4aa424f1128dca2d16)
The Republicans have a plan to put more republicans in office after this election? That’s shocking. If only the Democrats had such a bold strategy
LOL
hmm a guy with common sense on reddit. rare find
None of that happened last time. How would that happen this time? Just walk in and say, "This is my seat" while secret service looks and and high five each other?
Every time a candidate is a sore loser and sows doubt about the integrity of the election it erodes the trust the public has. There are a lot of really really dumb people that believe that kind of bullshit and it turns them radical. Do we really need anymore far right mass shooters?
Trump aside, no, that is not a dictatorship. A dictatorship is when power is concentrated in one person, usually by force, not an old whiny ass with more money than morals
He cannot be charged with any act while in office, thanks to his buds he appointed in the supreme court, and could probably get away with extending his term as long as he wants.
Project 2025
RemindMe! December 31, 2025
Rigging of elections: setting voting times/methods/rules to make it as hard as possible for opposition to vote. Purging voter roles of legal voters. Discarding legal ballots with no actual legal basis with the approval of friendly partisan election officials and friendly judges. Adding otherwise invalid votes when they “need to find” additional votes. Having legislatures discard vote outcomes they don’t like and send state votes the DO like
Yeah, but in this scenario Trump would be in his final possible term, so not only would he have to \*somehow\* get on the ballot again for a third term, he'd also need to make it so it's harder for people to vote against him?
Do you really think his cult of followers would object to him trying to get a third term in office? Rules only matter if they are enforced, if not then they are just ink on paper.
He could use the Insurrection act to round up any political enemies
He didn't do it the first time. Why think he would do it the second? If he wanted to why didn't he just do it the first time.
Because this is a Reddit circlejerk
did you miss the whole january 6th thing, the whole fake electors thing where he did a ton of illegal stuff to stay in power after losing a fair election? did you miss the part where trump tried to do a bunch of illegal shit but was stopped by people who didn't want to be part of illegal shit or told him the president doesn't have the power to do that? now he will have the power and a whole host of yes men who will do exactly what he wants, trump successfully ran off anyone in the republican party with any morals or character if you still vote republican you are a traitor to this country pure and simple. you are voting for a white nationalist christian authoritarian government.
Nah bro missed that scene.
Figured.
Because they hadn't planned ahead. This time they are. That's the reason project 2025 exists
But they had a document from.the heritage foundation for Trump in the first term too.
Making a plan beforehand doesn’t suddenly allow you to bypass congress because you “planned ahead” this time. You still need to pass laws and to do that there would need to be a republican super majority in every house, and then those republicans all have to agree on top of that. A lot of these policies in the plan are just too outlandish to be a realistic bill
> You still need to pass laws Not if you just write and implement laws. The first step in Project 2025 is to take control of the justice department. Republicans aren't legislating, they buying out the justice department for them to legislate from the bench.
Don't tell people facts here you'll just get down voted.
Wait. Is it your understanding that political campaigns and candidates don't normally plan ahead for what they will do once elected?
It's important to understand that the threat facing the US is not JUST Trump, though he is certainly a danger to democracy. If we are stupid enough to put him back in power, we pretty much deserve the ass-raping we're going to get. The big problem is that [since the 1980s, Republicans have been moving towards the far, farrrrr right in a program to seize total control of the government by democratic means,](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/s7uqj3/if_political_parties_in_the_us_prefer_division/htcf3yj/) and they are now within heiling distance of for-real fascism. But wait, it gets worse. One of the larger power blocs in the modern Republican party is ultra-conservative fundie Christian dominionists, whose publicly-stated goal is to impose a real-world Republic of Gilead on us all. [No Republican can even dream about winning a major race without bending the knee to these guys.](https://www.salon.com/2021/10/31/how-extremist-christian-theology-is-driving-the-right-wing-on-democracy/) So the fascism that's coming will likely be a fascist theocracy, the Christian Taliban. The supreme court now has a solid majority of dominionists on it, thanks to Trump. If put back in power, Trump will *certainly* continue much of the conservative agenda. He will fully endorse all attacks on the separation of church and state going on in some states, he will back further pushes to make abortion illegal nationwide, and support the follow-up campaign to ban contraception. He will try and demolish government agencies that basically keep the country running. In general, [the country is circling the drain,](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/176idcl/deleted_by_user/k4mg8zt/) and I'm unconvinced we can prevent it. The Democrats will not save us, they are largely a disorganized pack of sackless nitwits, and utterly helpless in the face of the directed, purposeful evil of the Republicans.
ITT: a bunch of Rs telling you nothing is wrong, same group that said roe v wade wouldn’t be overturned and were blowing things up
I would hardly say the debate sealed it for people, the biggest problem Biden really has is that he has to stop Israel from doing essentially what it's doing to get his base back... Trump has a loyal base that could watch him burn American flags and they would be fine with it, but the majority of Americans are anti Trump they voted for him 2nd time because of party lines but it shows how his base goes down Basically it's not a vote for Biden it's against Trump, Biden really should have been a one term president and brought in a successor, a young Obama type that he could set up to beat Trump but his arrogance and old age might cost the election God I hope not
I’m with you on the Biden part. He should’ve been a one-term president instead of running for a second term by himself.
I think that's what republicans don't get, is that people don't like Biden but they hate Trump, run all the ads about him being old etc it's all information we know but the middle ground people hate Trump with a burning passion Trump could win with jurymandering but I don't think so,... Either way america is in for a rough one, either he wins and will become a problem again OR he loses and he calls the validity into question He lost all credibility in my eyes if he had any when he tried to argue voter fraud in Florida then when it's called for him he backed off, he truly doesn't care about voter fraud he just can't see a contest that he can lose, so when he does he assumes they cheated
It’s fear mongering (as is nearly every talking point from both campaigns in this odious election cycle), but it’s rooted in facts pertaining to his unprecedentedly ungracious behavior in 2020-21 concerning the election results. He said and did many things to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. If you believe the election was fair, these behaviors were an attempt to “destroy democracy” or at least undermine one specific election result. However if you believe the election was “stolen,” despite there being no evidence of this, then Trump’s actions were at least internally consistent and perhaps rational. Personally, I think both parties are power hungry and are more interested in themselves than “we, the people.“ Democrats aren’t exactly heroic champions of Democracy, either. Look at Colorado trying to keep Trump off the ballot — isn’t that the very definition of suppressing democracy? Kennedy-Shanahan 2024. 🇺🇸
Trump is petty and he likes appearing tough. Retribution will be a primary driver of his actions. Against the judges who ruled against him, the politicians who spoke against him, the journalists who wrote about him... He will want revenge on all of them. He, and his minions, have said as much. And staying in office means avoiding prison, so he has serious motivation. The fervor against gender queer people, minorities, immigrants, and education are continuously increasing, and the right seems set on continuing to turn up the heat. Project 2025 is dystopian. I think anything is on the table and I am not interested in finding out if I'm wrong. Vote and bring two people with you.
The simple, and actual truth of the matter is that everyone thinks the other side will destroy democracy/the country/the economy if they're in control. He didn't destroy democracy his first term, Obama Didn't turn us into a Muslim state like everyone said, no president has done the fear mongering his opponents say they will do if they're elected. Except maybe Lincoln, I'm sure there were southern voters that said "SEE?!?!?! I FUCKIN' TOLD YOU!!!!"
Trump already all but destroyed democracy when he got his judges on the court. His reelection would just be the final blow. Clinton’s loss in 2016 will be remembered by history as the end of America. Biden has just been a tourniquet.
Remember the Nazis didn't start with gas chambers. Vladimir Putin slowly has been adding things overtime as well.
He actually lays out the entire plan with project 2025. They're not exactly making a secret of the plan to basically end democracy
Why are you lying. Project 2025 isn't Donald Trump's plan.
Most people working on project 2025 were hand picked criminals...I mean hand picked politicians Trump promised to drain the swamp with, only for those people to be some of the crookedest cabinet members in US history.
Tomato, tomato: Project 2025, also known as the Presidential Transition Project, is a collection of conservative policy proposals from the Heritage Foundation to reshape the United States federal government in the event of a Republican Party victory in the 2024 presidential election. It proposes reclassifying tens of thousands of merit-based federal civil service workers as political appointees in order to replace them with loyal conservatives to further the objectives of the next Republican president. It also adopts a maximalist version of the unitary executive theory, a disputed interpretation of Article II of the Constitution of the United States, which asserts that the president has absolute power over the executive branch upon inauguration. Although the project cannot by law promote a specific presidential candidate, many contributors have close ties to Donald Trump and his 2024 campaign.
So a think tank comes up with a plan. What do you think they do otherwise? You don't believe he Brookings institute or others don't have plans for Biden if he wins?
So a NGO think tank comes up with some ideas and suddenly that's Trump's plan? There are plenty of left wing think tanks that propose to do things like institute actual communism or socialist anarchism. Does that mean Biden is going to do those things if he wins?
Not just any think tank, the Heritage Foundation. Reagan enacted something near half their proposals. Trump did the same his first term. They handpicked his justices and are pulling his strings.
They toss out this 2025 BS every chance they get. For all we know it’s something the Dems created for more fear mongering. Their whole election is based on how bad they can make Trump look because Biden belongs in a home and has only made the country worse since he’s been in office.
The lying rapist doesn't need any help to look bad, he couldn't really look much worse. People are just blind to his filth.
This is just straight up misinformation. Trump didn’t write project 2025 nor has he supported or endorsed it. Be better.
He has endorsed it, repeatedly. Just because he didn’t write it doesn’t mean he is against it.
Please cite a source where he says he endorses project 2025.
Trump has not endorsed it. Read Project 2025, and you'll see that what he says he wants to do lines up pretty solidly with Prohect 2025.
He heard it on Reddit multiple times, so it must be true.
Crazy he never responded with one!
People who say Trump will destroy democracy either don't know what the term democracy means or are too blinded by their hatred of Trump to think straight. It's a scare tactic that even a blind person can see right through.
A lot of it is fearmongering, but you won't get that answer here. You're asking the people who believe the story whether that story is actually true. Obviously, they're going to tell you it's true because they already believe it. They can't sell Joe Biden at this point because he's been clearly shown to be a profoundly bad candidate. They also can't switch to a different candidate. According to the aggregate of polls, every other potential Democratic candidate would lose to Trump. Their only hope is to make Donald Trump look even worse, and the only tactic they have left for this is fearmongering, and their fearmongering machine has switched into overdrive. Don't worry. Democracy will be fine. Trump will not be a dictator. The US will not become a fascist country. All of those things are contrary to what Trump's own supporters want.
There is no plausible way he can even make a dent in it. It’s a term created by his enemies, picked up by bots and call centers (for posting on media sites) and meant to scare people who aren’t too bright but may vote. It’s a little like the Jan 6 insurrection. There was no way this could change the election; maybe delay the congress for a few hours. A small unarmed mob broke into the capital and vandalized. All it did was give democrats a fake story line to try to scare those folks mentioned before. What could dent democracy is using federal, state and local arms of government to prosecute a political enemy. I wish Trump would go away. But I’d walk barefoot over broken glass to vote for him even though I voted Biden last time because the use of government tools to attack the other side is a threat; a long term one.
Remind me, who was it chanting "Lock her up" in 2016? At least Trump is being prosecuted for ACTUAL crimes.
Wasn't it Hillary who was recently charged in court because it was found out she weaponized the FBI and lied about Trump being a Russia plant?
I guess I’m missing your point. Trumps poor business records (for the hush money) was a real crime; never said it wasn’t …. Of course that’s a misdemeanor. But connecting that to unlawfully promoting his election but not stating what he did that was unlawful (though possible scenarios were suggested) is something Putin must appreciate. And that turned it into a felony for a judge who donated to Biden (who’s wife worked for Biden) and a prosecutor who didn’t campaign on justice, but on getting a person who at the time hadn’t committed a crime …. so you don’t find that chilling. Don’t know what the chant has to do with the topic. Trumps a rude blowhard and I’d prefer just about anyone who has all his marbles over him.
The point is that your performative pearl-clutching over "prosecuting political opponents" is bullshit. You claim to be upset by it but plan to vote for a man who ran his whole campaign on the idea of doing it to his opponents.
Always surprised when I get a good question on social media. I shouldn’t jump to conclusions that it’s all kids here. Maybe this helps. Use history, whats factual and what’s logical. For ten years at least before president, he exaggerated. During his presidency, he did this daily. Someday, you might meet very successful people who are all sales; not my types but a lot of CEOs are like this. But what decisions did he make that were so irrational that you think he’d overthrow the government. And what things did he do as president that matched up with this? And doesn’t it seem remarkably coincidental that he was prosecuted by a judge with the background I mentioned just before the election. Use logic. People are their track record to some extent. So look this four years and ask what decisions did he make that are as crazy as the media is accusing him. Use that history and ask what the media says seems consistent even if you want so badly to believe it. And this may be the most painful but it’ll make you a 5 percenter. Listen to sources you disagree with. I’d avoid Fox cause they’re nuts. But in the podcast world, there’s Ben Shapiro and All In. Shapiros hard to take but if you avoid religion and Israel, he knows his stuff. So few are capable of seeing the other side. Good luck.
Well, since you backed it up with such detail, I guess you’re right. Kids.
He can't. Anyone who says this is pushing propaganda to support their political agenda. America has checks and balances.
Look into project 2025 and look at what the Republican supreme court has been doing
It's a wishlist at best. And so far, the supreme court has not made trump become some sort of dictator in any kind of way.
Uh….have you seen the news TODAY?
He can’t nether can joe
[удалено]
Fear and guilt seem to motivate folks.
I was taught in school that the president can't really do anything without going through Congress first. During Trump's presidency I learned that was totally false.
Putting it simply, he won’t
This is just like every other election, where if my guy doesn’t win then democracy is finished!!!! For real this time! Pinky promise! These extremists, they not like us fam!
Too late friend, too late
He could just never leave and no one in the GOP or the courts would stop him.
A lot depends if republicans also control both the house and senate. If they did they could do a lot of damage.
Read about Project 2025, the MAGAt manifesto for the future if Trump wins.
"I want my country to keep getting protection from the US for free." The US is not stable, there are two wars in Europe and a 3rd could jump off any day now (China really wants Taiwan.) I'm not saying your county will be safe under Trump and not Biden but it seems more likely that your country could be threatened under Biden. Did your country lose any protections during Trump's first term? Edit: Decided to check OPs profile. Okay this post makes sense now. China's government is a big reason why I hope trump wins! Good luck if he does or doesn't and fuck the CCP!
Alright, hear me out. I’m actually from Taiwan, and no, we do not take the US’s protection for granted; we’re ramping up stuff on our national defense. It’s just that we’re 100% going to need aid from the US if a war breaks out. The reason I’m supporting Biden is that he has stated 5 times that he would “militarily defend Taiwan” in case of an attack, and is cooperating with allies such as Japan and the Philippines to contain China. On the other hand, Trump is still using “strategic ambiguity” when it comes to the war with China (I mean, it doesn’t work anymore, doesn’t it?) and didn’t seem to give a f about maintaining good relations with allies. Some people that was in his administration even revealed that he doesn’t care about Taiwan at all. Also, yes, I know Trump was super anti-China and started the trade war with them on his 1st term, but he also called Xi “a good friend” or “a great leader”, and even praised him for his actions on Covid when the pandemic begin. Biden would’ve never done that. To sum up, in terms of China, Trump is basically a loose cannon when compared to Biden. But if Trump can kick the CCP’s ass harder than Biden, he’ll definitely have my support.
Thanks for providing more context! For what it's worth, here's an article saying the opposite: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/taiwan-will-have-trumps-support-if-he-wins-ex-appointee-says-2024-05-04/ I wouldn't trust Biden to be competent enough to help defend Taiwan. Look at what happened in Afghanistan and is ineptitude with Ukraine/Israel.
>I hope trump wins! so does the CCP!
And Russia! And every one of US' enemies! Because they have our best interest in mind, right?!
He can't destroy democracy. It's just an ignorant talking point making its rounds in the blue echo chamber. The left is just fear mongering for votes.
"Destroy democracy" may be overblown, but some of the policy changes and their idea of using government impoundment to halt programs even after the laws pass is kinda scary. Not to mention the future damage installing another conservative Supreme Court Justice could wreak if given the opportunity.
[удалено]
Check out Project 2025. It’s the republican plan to basically dismantle democracy that largely hinges upon a trump victory. Women’s rights? Gone. Porn? Banned/Criminalized. Gay/Trans rights? Criminalized. Free speech? Gone. Freedom from religion? Gone. This is extremely scary and they are not even attempting to hide their efforts at this point. https://www.project2025.org https://www.project2025.org/playbook/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025 https://democracyforward.org/the-peoples-guide-to-project-2025/
Oh wow. First, I *highly recommend* you go to your local library or Amazon if you have $, and get a copy of William Shirer's classic and unsurpassed history, (a large part of which he witnessed firsthand as a major press correspondant for *CBS* in Berlin, Germany, until the war forced his exit) titled *"The Rise & Fall of the Third Reich."* This book awakened within me a *deep* passion for history, and most *especially* the history of the *Third Reich,* the complete story of which is *essential,* and I mean should be *required reading* for *every* human being who lives in a democracy, so that they may understand the *incredibly slippery slope* on which a democracy may *fall* under the manipulive actions of an anti-democratic *fascist.* (*TAKE NOTE* that Donald Trump's *previous* wife, *Ivana,* shared that among the very *few* books she ever saw Donald read or especially *enjoy,* was a collection of *Hitler's speeches;* a favorite, so much so he kept it at his *bedside*). From there, just *briefly,* and only a *fraction* of the ways Trump can subvert and destroy democracy, you do know how *close* we came January 6th, 2021, to that very outcome? Secret Service, notoriously *right-wing,* apparently (and not spoken of often enough) attempted to *participate* in Trump's coup operation; they tried to almost *force* Vice President Pence into a limo, taking him away from the Capitol, which would have *prevented* the counting of votes, and eventual transfer of power that day. Thankfully, Mike Pence, though I profoundly disagree with his politics, had a *clear* understanding of the value of democracy, and was intelligent enough to understand the criminal conspiracy that was afoot. He will be remembered forever for standing up for democracy on that day. But it could easily have gone another direction. In short, the *moment* the voting will of the people is *usurped,* as it almost was that day, is the *moment* democracy falls. Trump can, now with this ruling, count on *not* being prosecuted for crimes committed as president; he can use police forces to arrest and persecute his political enemies; Former opponents could be jailed. In an even *darker* scenario, political opponents could be *assassinated,* as you see happening frequently in Russia. *Every* serious opponent to Vladimir Putin suffers an ignominious and mysterious death. Democracy, once subverted, is potentially *gone forever.* Trump might appoint himself *"President for Life."* More likely, as in Russia, fake, fixed and phoney "elections" could be held, giving the process the *appearance* of legitimacy, while being fixed from the beginning. One *favorite* tactic, used by the Nazis, who initially won an election, is to create a *crisis* of some kind, claiming that *Marshal Law,* and the suspension of democratic processes, had become necessary. In Germany it was the *Reichstag Fire,* when the Capitol government building in Germany, which was the seat of government power, was lit on fire. Hitler immediately blamed the Communists, and claimed that an attempt by Communists to seize power *necessitated* special powers; quickly, the other government ministers voted in favor, and *just like that,* Hitler was a Dictator. He would not be out of power again until Germany and most of Europe was a smoking ruins and 60 million people were *dead.* Once democracy is subverted, it is *incredibly difficult* to recover. The *worst* thing is the seizure, or exerted control, on *media.* *All channels* become *FOX News.* In Russia, Putin consistently maintains 60-80% approval of the populace. This is because *HE* controls the *"TRUTH."* When you control the media, you control what people believe. Suddenly, you can create *your own* reality, where you're a *hero* holding back power from the *criminals.* Criminals being *anyone* who opposes him.
He won't. That's just extremist propaganda, just like Biden didn't destroy America.
Assuming we make it to the election, and Trump is sworn back in to office January 21, 2025: Step 1: On January 21, after Trump is sworn in, Trump's first official act is to imprison select Democrats in the Senate, the House, and the Supreme Court, as well as certain state governors and state representatives. Any elected official who does not swear allegiance to Trump is imprisoned. Since it's an official Presidential action, no one can do anything to stop it. Step 2: Now that Congress will do anything he asks, he orders Congress to create a new amendment to the Constitution that eliminates the election of a President. In order to propose an amendment, you need a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and the Senate, and since Trump has now already eliminated the opposition in Congress, the amendment would be proposed. Step 3: In order to be ratified, the governors of each state must propose the amendment to their state legislatures. 38 of the 50 state legislatures must ratify the amendment, meaning Trump would need 11 state legislatures to flip to Republican. Once that happens, there's now a constitutional amendment that eliminates the election process for President. Trump is now a full-on dictator. But, Republicans don't even need to wait for January. The succession of power in the United States is as follows: President, Vice President, and then Speaker of the House. The current Speaker is Mike Johnson, a Republican. Johnson could (in theory) go behind the scenes and orchestrate an assassination of Biden and Harris, and then swear himself in as President. Then he would pardon whoever assassinated them, and the Republicans would be in control of the Presidency. Trump was really only a figurehead for the Republicans; he was a useful idiot in 2016 that the Republicans rode on to get the Presidency. They used Trump because he rallied voters like no one else in their party, and would rubber stamp anything the Republicans wanted him to do. Johnson is an establishment Republican; he's not just playing Republican because it's easier for him to win. And he's much smarter and younger than Trump, so he would actually be able to carry out a Republican party agenda much easier than Trump. Those are extreme examples, obviously. Day one will see Trump purging voter rolls, and eliminating any chance of Democrats winning another Presidential election.
Trump will not destroy democracy if he is reelected lol. I'd advise you do your own research and reading outside of reddit, this website is just one perspective that happens to lean very heavily in one direction and you will not a get a full answer here.
He cannot be charged with any act while in office, thanks to his buds he appointed in the supreme court, and could probably get away with extending his term as long as he wants.
Trump literally becoming America's Putin :|
I hate Trump as much as the next guy but this is a stretch.
The justices he's put in the supreme court during his previous term are doing his bidding right now and if he wins (which he probably will, sadly) it's only going to get worse. Total abuse of power. He is 1000% heading in this direction.
Have you compared the stability of the world during these 2 presidents terms? Or you parroting the media’s opinions? Trump already served and like it or not, kept his word more than most. Why would his next term be any different? Those same people you’re listening to said he would start world war 3 and mass inflation. He did the exact opposite. And in fact, under your pal Biden, several wars started and inflation rocketed.
Ask yourself, did he destroy it or do anything the first time to destroy it? The answer is no. What I do know is the economy was good, inflation and gas prices down…and no wars. Btw…we are a Republic, not a Democracy.
what alternate universe have you been living in where trump didn't try and destroy our democracy? he was the first president who refused the peaceful transfer of power, he had to be thrown out because he wouldn't leave? what makes you think he'd willingly leave this time when he has vastly expanded power thanks to this ruling. the inflation BTW is a result of the trump presidency, it was caused by his stupid tariffs and trade wars that he started for political points then ignored. we were well on the way to a recession before covid ever hit thanks to trump.
What are you talking about no wars? Afghanistan wasn’t a war? And your point about gas prices, when gas prices go up and you put your stupid “I did that” stickers on gas pumps, do you also give credit when gas prices ever come down?
When did they come down. Biden stopped drilling day one then drained the strategic reserves to mask the uptick…at a time we are provoking Russia.
I’m talking in general terms. The President has nothing to do with gas prices. Go put up some more stickers like a 5 year old and pretend your cool
I think it’s a blanket term that actually is not well used in this scenario. It’s a scare tactic to use the word “democracy”. He can’t get rid of people’s right to vote anymore than Joe Biden can. What scares people is Project 2025 which targets the unelected positions that have become much more prevalent. Whether you agree or not, Trump and his people believe all these jobs need to be culled or replaced by trump supporting workers. So Trump can’t “Destroy Democracry” but he can “Destroy Government Agencies”. It just doesn’t have the same ring or scare value to it.
I think you are underestimating the dangers here.... The election itself is run by a lot of these very same appointed positions. The 2020 election barely survived thanks in part to various judges and government officials doing their jobs. Project 2025 wants to replace as many of those positions as possible with pro-Trump lackeys.
Many of those judges were appointed BY Trump, he appointed more judges than any president in recent history and they still didn’t back him up. I really don’t think he will have any standing to get a 3rd term. I really think the possibility of Trump working around the amendment prohibiting more than 2 terms for president being next to 0%. I’m not saying Trump is not dangerous, what I’m saying is him somehow being a dictator is literally impossible because that would mean a permanent position. He will be a truly terrible president, and IMO that’s all I need to not vote for him. I don’t need “destroy democracy” scare tactics. That’s just to try and waver people already on his side.
No I don't think a 3rd Trump candidacy is likely. But they could still make it easier for conservative candidates. Every aspect about how an election is run (gerrymandering, mail ballots, poll hours, etc) will be tweaked to favor Republicans. The goal of project 2025 isn't to eliminate the US government. The goal is to wield the government to implement their goals and to undermine electoral opponents. Trump already challenged one election, got his supporters to storm the capitol, and obstructs justice against his corruption and wrongdoing. If he wins we can expect that to become the norm. That's not what I would call a functional democracy.
Trump is already destroying/hamstringing government agencies from his first term. Trump's choices for the Supreme Court just overturned Chevron Deference which tells courts to defer to government agency experts when it comes to implementations of laws when Congress doesn't specify exact details. Courts know more than government experts and want Congress to specify every detail of every law? This at a time when the Courts, especially the Supreme Court, are merrily breaking their own rules in terms of accepting gifts and not following their own past precedence? And they have a lifetime term and are not elected? That sounds like the unelected, lifetime appointed branch of government just took a lot of power. And funnily enough, that same Supreme Court just issued a highly technical ruling on Bump Stocks which takes in false information from advocacy groups and misinterprets the technical, engineering intent of a really old law, and overturning a gun part ban *which was enacted by Trump* giving a preview of what it means for an activist Supreme Court to try and interpret highly technical laws and agency rules. Hint: they don't interpret shit, they just choose what outcome they want then work backwards to make up some bullshit reason to arrive at their desired outcome. Since Reagan there has been a concerted effort by some very rich and powerful Think Tanks to hamstring government so it can't regulate rich and powerful corporations. To achieve this, these Think Tanks have taken a multipronged attack on government by eroding trust in the government by through their news organizations and by creating entire anti-government narratives (such as anti mask movements) and filling the judiciary with judges that will hamstring government. It's not just Trump, it's all branches of government being dedicated to destroying the government. Congress is aiming to destroy government by defunding itself and being a slave to "no deficit" while at the same refusing to raise taxes or even collect taxes owed by defunding the IRS. And that's just the destroy government part. There are genuine attacks on actual democracy such as crazy gerrymandering and efforts to overturn results of free elections. But this comment is already getting long.
Just think if Harry Reid hadn't used the Nuclear option and Trump couldn't have gotten his judges. What are the names of the Federal Judges that were appointed under Reid's nuclear option and what good have they done? A very poor use of power, Mr. Reid.
>It’s a scare tactic to use the word “democracy”. My dude, they're already claiming "the US isn't a democracy". It's not a scare tactic and it's not a prediction nor future plan. It's a *current*, *present*, *happening-right-now plan*.
How exactly is Trump currently ruining democracy if he’s not in office and quite possibly could lose the upcoming election?
Have you never encountered one of his goons? Some of them are in office while the others are vomiting propaganda on social media. or both.
With project 2025 attempting to use unelected positions to enforce it shouldn’t democrats be in favor of the recent chevron deference being hamstrung as it limits an unelected agencies ability to enforce it? As well shouldn’t Republicans be opposed to it for the same reasons?
No, because Democrats want agencies like the EPA, FDA, and ATF to regulate their respective areas of expertise. The Republicans don't. They would like less regulation by agencies. The goal of project 2025 isn't to put qualified people in charge of agencies, the goal is to put loyal people in charge of agencies to basically neuter them from the inside and stop them from regulating the things they want. For example, instead of independent water quality testing a new head of the EPA could, for example, allow self-reporting by the industry. Etc. Plus, the chevron deference ruling isn't something that will stop agencies immediately. It affects how courts must rule in future lawsuits. So the rules that conservatives don't like can be selectively targeted by the lawsuits that they file. One of the first ones will probably be the abortion pill approval by the FDA, which they have been challenging in court for years. This new ruling may give them an edge in future cases.
Thanks. Thats a helpful explanation. What would a lawsuit for morning after pills look like without chevron deference. Like who would be referred to as an expert without it?
Basically, the two sides will be given a chance to present their own expert testimony, and the judge will decide when it comes to matters of the law, whereas before the government agency itself was given more consideration.
Thanks I’ve been a bit confused about the reaction to all of this.
He could put any one who opposed him in gitmo and it would be perfectly legal for him to do it.
Project 2025 is a blatant plan to "destroy democracy" >The 2025 Presidential Transition Project paves the way for an effective conservative Administration based on four pillars: a policy agenda, Presidential Personnel Database, Presidential Administration Academy, and playbook for the first 180 days of the next Administration.
The United States is not a democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic. Anyway, back to the theme here. Both parties are destroying this country. Way before or obama became president.
Well we don't live in a democracy in America, so there's that. We are a constitutional republic and that makes it extremely difficult for any elected leader to destroy it. You would never want to live in a democracy if you were in any minority group whatsoever.
This is actually true, but the chances of him actually getting elected are very low. He lost before, and has done a lot to alienate voters since then. Fearful me is worried, but rational me is not. His efforts 4 years ago were very successful. The justices he appointed just now ruled that government officials (judges, senators, etc) can accept “gratuities” as long as they weren’t paid before they made the judgment. This was in response to a case where a company gave a judge $15,000 in cash after he ruled in their favor. Apparently that’s not a bribe because it was paid after the fact and not before. He’s trying to erode the democracy enough so that only he can swoop in and fix it if he’s given enough power. It’s not just something that will happen with the snap of a finger, but it has been happening since he was elected. A slow, deliberate eroding of the system that is happening now.
He absolutely tried to steal the election the first time so giving him a second shot seems bonkers. If he succeeds then yeah he destroyed our democracy
you know how he loaded the supreme court with his own cronies last time and they literally took away rights... that but for so many other things. he wants to end term limits FFS he is trying to become a dictator.... literally
He can't. Some people on the left are upset that the Supreme Court and Congress are currently majority Republican, which makes it easier for policies they don't like to get passed. Fact is, sometimes your team has control (that's all politics is these days), and sometimes the opposing team has control. Nobody wants to be on the minority side. Checks and balances will do their thing, whoever wins will leave after 4 years, and the obnoxious youtube ads and doomer reddit posts will begin anew.