Fear of "backlash" is no reason to let Donald Trump make an illegal run for president
Fear of "backlash" is no reason to let Donald Trump make an illegal run for president
Don't negotiate with MAGA terrorism
So let's say we let him run to avoid a violent backlash.
What happens if he loses? We let him overturn the election to avoid another violent backlash?
All we're doing is proving to the fascists that we will kowtow to them if they are angry and violent enough. If we want to remain a free-ish country we're going to have to piss them off at some point by doing the right thing, and we'll need to deal with the fallout.
And if he wins the fascists will take that as endorsement. Whatever they would have done via backlash will become the norm since their present supports it.
I really think people either forgot or still don't understand just how close the insurrection was to succeeding. Change one part of Mike Pence's story and we'd be in a whole different -- and much darker -- timeline. There's plenty of evidence that suggests a different outcome if a similar coup is attempted this time. The law is on our side, and so are states' rights, we need to enforce them.
By 'deal with the fallout', of course you mean apply the law to criminals. Arrest them, charge them, send them to court, let them be convicted, and serve their sentences. Justice delayed is justice denied.
I personally can’t wait. All the 2nd Amendment idiots trying to take on the police and military?
It’d be glorious.
I personally can’t wait. All the 2nd Amendment idiots trying to take on the police and military?
Well, I've got some news for you.
House Republicans All Vote Against Neo-Nazi Probe of Military, Police
Which we deals with the fallout though? Would you, as an individual, risk being their target? That's the hard part. Easy to say we as a society shouldn't cave, but would you like to be name dropped by Trump as the enemy?
They're going to be violent; it's only a matter of when, how much, and for how long. Kicking the can down the road puts "when" further away by making "how much" and "for how long" much worse.
But that’s how we solve every problem in life.
Something something always do the right then when we have no other choice.
Rudy has already hinted at violence Republicans are priming the cult. Tonight the rural red folk are out at night practicing with their night scoped rifles. Prepare accordingly.
Good point, though I would counter that there's a lot of blustering about taking our country back but I haven't seen many serious attempts or people capable of actually planning and executing such a thing, and I've had a good bit of contact with what y'all would consider to be American far right rebels.
For all I know, the far righties talking about their revolution is about as productive as the tankies talking about theirs. Nobody sees a future in this country where the workers seize the means of production and we actually eat the rich, right?
Nobody sees a future in this country where the workers seize the means of production and we actually eat the rich, right?
Comrade, I think you might be lost. I'm confident there are plenty of people on Lemmy who 100% envision such a future -- I can't be the only one!
If the backlash is the scary imagine how frightening the presidency would be. Fucking cowards.
Remember how frightening the first one was. You know, with the Nazi "very fine people" and giving Putin a BJ on international TV and trying to destroy NATO and...
Pick your poison:
Backlash now from an angry mob
Full-swing shift into an oppressive authoritarian state once he’s elected
Many of these politicians are hoping that it will be someone else's problem.
For them, the poisons are:
A) Backlash now and get possibly killed
B) Meh. Let someone else deal with it after I retire
Keep in mind that in 2020, many of the Republican Secretaries of State were threatened for not giving the election to Trump. They did the right thing and got death threats over it.
When people stand their ground, we have to remember that they are the last line of defense against democracy. I don't say that lightly. Many Republicans saw the resistance and either replaced these people or wrote laws to make overturning an election easier.
If the Republicans see that they have lost, it won't be another January 6th. It will be a bloodless coup because they've already done the work to bring themselves into power.
And that's why this election is not only important but potentially dangerous. I don't know many liberals who are willing to put their lives on the line to stand up to fascism. Myself included. I'd like to believe I would. But I don't know if I could if it came down to it.
There won't be a " bloodless coup." It won't happen because there is only one president at a time, so no matter how the election goes, Biden sits alone at the levers of ultimate power until Trump is sworn in.
The only way a "bloodless coup" could happen is with the full foreknowledge and cooperation of the US military's senior officer corps, but that's impossible both because it's too difficult to coordinate, and because the senior officer corps absolutely despises Trump as a liar and a coward and for many other reasons that I'm sure will occur to you when you think back on his presidency.
He is widely seen as a gutless incompetent and deeply dishonorable idiot.
Your comment is bang on. The rise of Hitler and Mussolini in the 1930s should be mandatory reading for everyone. I bet less than 5% of the US population know how the Fascists came to power in Germany and Italy. Most people probably don't realize that Hitler was a populist who rose to power through legal means and then used a false flag operation to jail his opponents and seize power permanently, again using legal means. It would be all too easy for Trump to replicate that scenario if he gets the presidency again. If he gets elected legally (or at least with the appearance of legality), and then uses false flag operation to take out a good chunk of Congress, he could terrify the public and declare martial law. January 6 shows that he has the kind of supporters that would be willing to do something like that. In that scenario, even the US military probably wouldn't stop him.
I don't know many liberals who are willing to put their lives on the line to stand up to fascism. Myself included. I'd like to believe I would. But I don't know if I could if it came down to it.
I'm with you on that. Honestly, I don't think I'd trust someone who sounded sure on that. They're either lying to themselves or a little too eager for violence.
I also "fear backlash" if he runs and loses the election. He won't hesitate to get his followers to commit acts of violence. According to the logic of the "for fear of backlash we should allow him to run" people, we should just annoint Trump President for Life. After all, we can't do anything that might cause MAGA to become violent, right? /s
No insurrectionists in any elected office. Makes perfect sense one would wish to have this key point in one's constitution, heck, even from the beginning. What about insurrectionists who were appointed by insurrectionist(s)? Seems pretty dubious. We need to either remove the insurrectionist appointees, or expand the SCOTUS to water down the insurrectionists in government. Putin must be chortling in his cocoa puffs.
Yes, we need to remove Scotus and retry all those cases
No insurrectionists in any elected office.
TBH in hindsight, this was only ever a milquetoast alternative to the gallows.
Imagine the alternative timeline in which confederate leaders didn't get to go back to their states and become governors, senators, KKK members, in which the confederacy didn't get to install one of their own by putting a bullet in Lincoln's brain, who would then subsequently veto legislation from congress that sought to prevent southern states from re-establishing with the same leadership that led up to the confederacy.
For that matter, Andrew Johnson as Lincoln's VP had every appearance of signaling a unity ticket (see? we will give concessions if you participate in good faith!) but in retrospect he was effectively the confederacy's deepest mole and most powerful enabler.
Imagine, if you will, the timeline in which confederate leaders were hanged and the confederacy was in fact dismantled vs. being protected from consequence
It boils down to this: You don't stop MAGA violence by giving in, but the opposite. You stop it by fighting back and holding people accountable. Removing Trump from the ballot, as the law requires, is a first step. It sends a strong message to MAGA: This is what happens when you use violence to get your way. By not taking his name off the ballot, states are signaling that they will accede to violent threats. We should not be surprised if rewarding MAGA violence means we see more of it.
Yeuup
Basically, for evil to success is needed that the good doesn't do anything.
Giving them concessions because you're afraid they'll act badly tells them to act badly when they want concessions.
The right course of action is to make acting badly (like participating in a coup, or engaging in political violence or threats of it) have painful consequences.
I have no idea why concessions are still being made to these assholes.
They're the political equivalent of the pan handlers you give five dollars to on the way into a gas station. And by the time you walk out they forgot you already gave them money and give you the same story.
They can get their way 99.99% of the time, but that 0.01% of the time you hold them to the same standard as everyone else, they start screaming they're being persecuted.
Fuck em. They act the same no matter what so just don't give them anything. It's still the same amount of terroristic threats in the end.
getting more than everyone else and then crying oppression is baked into conservative dna. it's the essence of the movement.
I don't think it's entirely about "fear of backlash". I think the real fear people are expressing is the fear of the election appearing rigged, Ahmadinejad-style. If the Republicans nominate Trump, and he goes unconsidered with "unknown numbers" of write-in votes in enough states to affect the election, he would obviously argue that he actually won on votes and might even be convincing to non-Republicans.
When the Colorado Supreme Court decided against Trump, it was a split decision by an all-Democrat panel that questioned what "due process" should be on the matter. There's so many ways that this can be spun nationally or internationally by the modern equivalent of the way the South created sympathy through propaganda after the Civil War that survives today. Hundreds of millions of people throughout the world will likely question the legitimacy of the president or US elections after this matter no matter who wins or how chips fall.
BUT, there's also no right answer, and none of the above reasons are sufficient to just put Trump back on the ballot and hope. It should never have gotten to this. Someone that is publicly believed by a significant percent of America to not be eligible should not have party support in the first place. And if it did, Congress should have stepped in before now.
Ultimately, the Republicans are again objectively hurting America for their own agenda.
If Republicans want a candidate on the ballot, they can nominate someone who didn't start an insurrection. They have no shortage of choices for other candidates. If anything, that's why the rulings should be laid out right now before the Republican Iowa Caucus.
In a vacuum, I could see the point of the world not seeing the US President as being democratically elected. In practice, this is only going to be an issue for countries that have their own problems with fascist political parties, and I'm not inclined to care.
Awful lot of extra words for "terrorists".
Because that's exactly what they are threatening, doxing, death threat, shooting up clubs hell even tried to attack the FBi and of course the attempt to overthrow the government..... Literally the most successful terrorist there ever was and we still won't call it at face value for what the maga group is....
https://apnews.com/article/fbi-cincinnati-armed-man-b4701596a0eb9770e3b29e95328f5704
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/blame-abc-news-finds-17-cases-invoking-trump/story?id=58912889
Literally the most successful terrorist there ever was
Definitely not. He wasn't successful at all.
Terrorism is to drive change and action through the threat of terror/fear etc.
He's not in jail, his blinded followers barely got punished for the severity of their crimes and we are all sitting here talking about if it's democratic to not put him in the ballot and fucking contemplating the very real prospect of a "one day dictator"
What other terrorist group has driven so much change in their favor? Do we all think Binladin was maybe on to something? How about ISIS ..?
He is closest to really overthrowing this whole ship, unless maybe we all vote for the oldest president there ever was....
We are on a knifes edge and it's fucking horrifying and baffling. This isn't 2020 we all know the "it will never happen" thoughts of trump getting elected were wrong and we shouldn't delude ourselves with thinking this will never happen either..... The highest court in the land is stacked and taking bribes now openly with no consequences, our past president almost assuredly sold nuclear secrets and still lives and allowed to fuck this whole country.... What higher power do you think is soundly going to hold people accountable and uphold the law, cause I don't see it.
I think it's far simpler than that. Biden doesn't win 2024 if his opponent isn't Trump, his entire campaign message is designed to go head to head with Trump and only Trump. The dems don't want him to be removed from enough ballots that someone else wins the republican primary.
Donald Trump is not qualified to be considered a decent human being let alone president.
If Jan 6 shows any indication, a simple police presence will be enough to stop most violence and the outliers will be found.
I think this is a lot more true than many people here suspect. What we're realistically looking at is relatively low-intensity insurrection on the level of, say, Northern Ireland during the height of The Troubles. It's still a very bad thing, but it's not existential and if the comparison to The Troubles is accurate, the violence will mostly target federal law enforcement and any military that's brought to bear should Biden invoke the insurrection act.
The real existential threat is Trump actually winning another term.
Trump miscalculated. He thought Pence was spineless. Had Pence stopped the transition as they wanted and instead assisted with the fake electors they created and intended to deliver that day the insurrection would likely have worked. Trumps lawyer has already agreed to testify about the faked electors, and we know Pence got thrown off that day and then thrown to the wolves. I think Trump wanted the crowds of his followers there so when they submitted the fake electors and denounced the official vote he could have video of "everyone" cheering on live TV and he could look like he stopped a stolen election while he himself stole it. Narcissistic idea one might say.
It becomes a reason if it were to work... - hence why they keep trotting it out I suppose, just to see what sticks.
fear of backlash
negotiating with terrorists
corporate wants you to find the difference between these this picture and this picture
If the only backlash there is to fear is death, then I have nothing to lose.
This is an opinion piece from someone who thinks they know better than the entirety of the US judicial body. You can skip this one.
What Judicial body? Every currently standing ruling regarding the merits of Trump's eligibility to be president under the 14th amendment have found that he is not eligible (although all are still in limbo pending the inevitable SCOTUS appeal). There is a colorable technical argument to be made that he is not excluded, but most of the legal community is not convinced by them.
The legal arguments about his eligibility to appear on the primary ballot are more nuanced, but seem kind of silly if he ultimately is inneligable to hold the office.
The states that have ruled that Trump can remain on the primary ballot all did so on some sort of procedural ground. Typically of the form "state law does not require a candidate to be elligable to hold office to appear on a primary ballot". In fairness to those states' lawmakers, what sort of braindead political party would try nominating someone who was inneligable to hold office?
Whenever someone devises a system to be foolproof, someone goes out and finds a greater fool. The Republican party is nothing if not overflowing with greater fools
I honestly believe taking Trump off would hurt Biden. I feel there's a reasonable number who are looking at voting for him because he's not Trump.