Republicans Are Suddenly Afraid of Democracy - The Atlantic

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  john-russell  •  2 weeks ago  •  73 comments

By:   George Packer (The Atlantic)

Republicans Are Suddenly Afraid of Democracy - The Atlantic
Fearing defeat at the polls, the GOP is laying the groundwork to delegitimize the results, and to block an electoral majority from governing.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Fearing defeat at the polls, the GOP is laying the groundwork to delegitimize the results, and to block an electoral majority from governing.

12:24 PM ET George Packer Staff writer for The Atlantic original.jpg Brendan Smialowski / AFP / Getty

"We're not a democracy," Republican Senator Mike Lee tweeted in the middle of Wednesday night's vice-presidential debate. He was reacting to something he'd heard onstage there, in his home state of Utah. Another tweet: "The word 'democracy' appears nowhere in the Constitution, perhaps because our form of government is not a democracy. It's a constitutional republic. To me it matters. It should matter to anyone who worries about the excessive accumulation of power in the hands of the few." Hours after the debate Lee was still worrying the thought: "Democracy isn't the objective; liberty, peace, and prosperity are. We want the human condition to flourish. Rank democracy can thwart that."

Why did Lee choose this moment—less than four weeks before an election in which his party seems likely to suffer defeat—to make the familiar, even pedantic, point that we live in a republic rather than a pure democracy? Why did he insist on the point so vehemently that he neglected to mention that power in the American system ultimately lies with the people, which means that our system could also be called a representative democracy? Did he mean rank as in "foul," "rancid," or "outright"? If the last, does that mean the tyranny of the majority leading to perverse rule by "the few"? What did this short, misleading course in Civics 101 have to do with anything?

My guess is that Lee wasn't just being pedantic. Worried about an election in which the people can express their will, Lee was laying the groundwork to contest the results or block an elected majority from governing.

The Trump administration is using the last weeks of the campaign to soften up the country for a repudiation of democracy itself. This project will take some doing. Getting rid of checks on presidential power in the form of inspectors general, congressional committees, special counsels, and nonpartisan judges might drive pundits and experts crazy, but such moves don't hit home for many citizens. The post-Watergate norms established to preserve the Justice Department's integrity are not widely understood. But voting is something else. Your vote is your most tangible connection to the idea of democratic government. It's the only form of political power most Americans possess. It's proof that government of, by, and for the people hasn't yet perished from the Earth. Your vote is personal. For a president to throw it out would be an audacious undertaking.

Trump keeps promising to try. Every time he talks about "massive fraud" and sending the election to a Supreme Court with a conservative majority, he's preparing you to have your vote taken away—to make that shocking prospect a little more normal, even inevitable. Each new controversy, each norm broken, each authoritarian pose makes Trump's intention to nullify the election results clear.

In just the past two weeks, Trump's children, his entourage, and the president himself engaged in ostentatious rule-breaking at the presidential debate. The president refused to condemn white supremacists or promise a peaceful transfer of power. Vice President Mike Pence engaged in less aggressive but more persistent interruptions and lies in Wednesday's debate, and gave his own nonanswer to a question about accepting election results. Trump's contempt for health protocols at a White House event introducing his new Supreme Court nominee led to the viral contagion of his staff and much of the executive branch's senior leadership. The president's flight back from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on Marine One ended with a climb up the White House steps and a dramatically lit self-unmasking and salute, like a winded Mussolini. Attorney General William Barr rescinded Justice Department rules in order to be able to investigate supposed vote fraud just before an election. Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe released tricked-up evidence of a Barack Obama-Joe Biden-Hillary Clinton conspiracy against the Trump campaign in 2016. Trump expressed annoyance with both Barr and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for taking too long to produce more "evidence" that could undermine Biden in the election's final days. When the FBI broke up a plot to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer by right-wing extremists of the kind the president won't renounce, Trump hurled insults at their intended target.

These incidents, coming faster than anyone can absorb, are all expressions of raw, undemocratic power—of might making right. They signify that Trump and his enablers will trample on any rules, and finally majority rule. Senator Lee made a constitutional case on Twitter for what President Trump will try to do by chin-jutting fiat. What Lee calls "rank democracy," Trump calls a "rigged election." Later, Lee explained that he's concerned about the protection of minority rights from a coercive majority. That sounds like a hedge against an election blowout.

Lee's contortions recall the antidemocratic arguments of Senator John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, whose theory of nullification by concurrent majorities claimed constitutional grounds for the slave states to defy federal authority. History rendered a negative verdict on Calhoun's theories and the evil system he defended to his last breath. Like the antebellum South, today's Republican Party is composed of a demographically and economically weakening population. It appeals ever harder to an ever-shrinking base of older, white, male, rural, less-educated Americans. And, like the antebellum South, the Republican Party holds on to power by exploiting the Constitution's unrepresentative features—the Senate, the Electoral College, and unelected justices with lifetime appointments. These institutions have concentrated outsize power in a minority party that doesn't hesitate to break the rules for maximum advantage. Its skill in drawing inside straights and turning weak hands into political domination has been impressive. But next month's election seems poised to begin the return of majority rule.

If so, then Republicans who trashed checks and balances for four years in order to consolidate conservative power will suddenly rediscover them. Not to constrain presidential abuses, but to thwart the popular will—first by trying to send the election to legislatures and courts and then, failing that, by blocking every move of a Democratic president and Congress. We'll hear a lot of talk about the rights of minorities, the importance of separation of powers, and how America isn't really a democracy. Last night Senator Ben Sasse released a statement warning that Biden intends to "effectively kill two of our three branches of government by abolishing the Senate and packing the Supreme Court." Sasse was referring to the prospect of newly empowered Democrats ending the legislative filibuster and adding justices to the court.

Both of those possibilities deserve to be debated, before the election as well as after. Biden and his vice-presidential nominee, Senator Kamala Harris, should remind voters that Republicans, not Democrats, have turned the Senate into a body that produces no legislation but simply functions as a conveyor belt to cram every level of the judiciary with partisan conservative judges, filling seats that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell forced President Obama to leave empty. The goal of this strategy is to seize control of the third, unelected branch of government and use it to prevent the elected branches, if they ever return to majority rule, from governing. What we're hearing now from these latter-day Calhouns is fear of representative democracy.

Having chained their party to Trump, Republicans will follow him in his frantic effort to delegitimize the coming election. But I don't think it will work. The vote remains too powerful an idea in the minds of Americans. They are already standing in long lines to cast the ballots that Trump claims are fraudulent. The word democracy might not be found in the Constitution, but Senator Lee is right to be frightened by it.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.

George Packer is a staff writer at The Atlantic . He is the author of Our Man: Richard Holbrooke and the End of the American Century and The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America .


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  seeder  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago
Why did Lee choose this moment—less than four weeks before an election in which his party seems likely to suffer defeat—to make the familiar, even pedantic, point that we live in a republic rather than a pure democracy? Why did he insist on the point so vehemently that he neglected to mention that power in the American system ultimately lies with the people, which means that our system could also be called a representative democracy? Did he mean rank as in "foul," "rancid," or "outright"? If the last, does that mean the tyranny of the majority leading to perverse rule by "the few"? What did this short, misleading course in Civics 101 have to do with anything? My guess is that Lee wasn't just being pedantic. Worried about an election in which the people can express their will, Lee was laying the groundwork to contest the results or block an elected majority from governing.
 
 
 
Kavika
1.1  Kavika   replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago
Why did Lee choose this moment

Because he's a Tea Party nut case.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Kavika @1.1    2 weeks ago

A teabagger nut case.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2  seeder  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago

This is the most important part of this article-

Both of those possibilities deserve to be debated, before the election as well as after. Biden and his vice-presidential nominee, Senator Kamala Harris, should remind voters that

Republicans, not Democrats, have turned the Senate into a body that produces no legislation but simply functions as a conveyor belt to cram every level of the judiciary with partisan conservative judges, filling seats that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell forced President Obama to leave empty. The goal of this strategy is to seize control of the third, unelected branch of government and use it to prevent the elected branches, if they ever return to majority rule, from governing.

What we're hearing now from these latter-day Calhouns is fear of representative democracy.
 
 
 
Sean Treacy
2.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @2    2 weeks ago

The Senate has had to move for cloture more during the Trump Presidency than in all other Presidencies combined. If the Republicans have time for nothing other than confirming executive nominees, it's because the Democrats have broken it with unprecedented obstruction.  They've done nothing but gum up the Senate.    And now, should they win the Presidency and Senate, they will remove the check they used to curb executive power and use their own breaking of Senate norms to justify gutting the Senate. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1    2 weeks ago

We have had enough of the minority party obstructing the people's business. The Republicans are right now the minority party in terms of how many Americans their senators represent. We have gone along with 'minority rule' long enough. I believe they will end the filibuster because they will have no other choice if they want to keep campaign pledges. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    2 weeks ago

how many people each senator represents us irrelevant. as it is set at 2 per state.

why do so many Democrats want to abandon the way we do things?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.3  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.2    2 weeks ago

Why would the number of people being represented in congress by the two parties be irrelevant?

When we had a Congress that acted in a bi partisan way (or if you prefer, when there were more moderates in Congress) the number of Senators from which states was not very relevant. But when you have senators and congresspeople who almost always vote a party line, the fact that the Republicans represent a minority of the American people is very much relevant. We are having minority rule. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.3    2 weeks ago

because the number of Senators isn't based on population.

therefore. the number of people they represent us irrelevant

 
 
 
Ozzwald
2.1.5  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.2    2 weeks ago
why do so many Democrats want to abandon the way we do things?

Because we often outgrow the way we do things.

  • Slavery
  • Civil rights
  • Women's votes.
  • Etc.

This is why Democrats are PROgressive, and Republicans are REgressive.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
3  Hal A. Lujah    2 weeks ago

I drove to an event a couple weeks ago, about an hour through rural areas with a couple towns along the way.  Where I live you don’t see any Trump signs, but as you get further into the sticks they start showing up here and there.  In 2016 it was much more prevalent, and where you saw Trump signs you simply didn’t see any Hillary signs.  Now it is different - you see Trump signs in the sticks but they are interspersed with Biden signs.  In the urban areas there is no sign of Trump.  I was passing through Ohio a few months ago and took a detour near Youngstown, and drove by the massive shuttered Lordstown GM plant.  The roads were intensely potholed, the area was completely falling apart, and there were zero Trump signs but many Biden signs.  There’s no question in my mind that the only way Trump “wins” this time is by subverting our democracy.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @3    2 weeks ago

In the past 30 years there has only been one Republican candidate that won the popular vote, George W Bush in 2004. They know that the demographic direction of the country will prevent them from winning it in the foreseeable future, so Republicans lack motivation to believe in democracy. Of course it is their own fault. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    2 weeks ago
In the past 30 years there has only been one Republican candidate that won the popular vote, George W Bush in 2004.

If we changed the way we elect Presidents, you might have had a point.

The Republicans won the electoral college like everyone else does who sits in the WH.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.1    2 weeks ago

Whether they won the electoral college or not they are a minority party.  Yet they try and rule in Congress as if the majority of Americans are on their side. People are sick of it. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    2 weeks ago
Yet they try and rule in Congress as if the majority of Americans are on their side

I believe they are doing their best, you don't.

Simple as that.

The GOP won the WH and Senate. 

Not too shabby, and I bet Dems would change places in an instant!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.4  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.3    2 weeks ago

and now we have another election.  Your time to say that the Democrats didnt accept Trump's victory is just about over. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.1.5  XDm9mm  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.3    2 weeks ago
I believe they are doing their best, you don't.

That's quite true.  They try to engage the Democrats in civilized discourse, but the Dems are still stuck in impeachment mode.

Simple as that. The GOP won the WH and Senate. 

And I submit will again.

Not too shabby, and I bet Dems would change places in an instant!

That they will most certainly try.   Hell, one of their Democrat platform items is making DC the 51st state.  That's been tried before and failed and will fail again as it will take a Constitutional amendment to accomplish.  And as to Puerto Rico, the people there enjoy the benefits of being citizens without the burden of paying federal income tax with a few governmental employees responsible for that.  They don't want to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.1.6  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    2 weeks ago
Your time to say that the Democrats didnt accept Trump's victory is just about over. 

Really JR?  Still trust those polls do you?   You'll be saying President Trump until January 2025.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
3.1.7  Bob Nelson  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    2 weeks ago

A Republican minority prevented the California legislature from governing for a couple decades. The result was enduring Democratic super-majorities.

We may hope that the same thing happens nationally. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.1.8  XDm9mm  replied to  Bob Nelson @3.1.7    2 weeks ago
The result was enduring Democratic super-majorities.

And we see the results of that now don't we.  In fact people all over the country and around the world see the cesspool the once great State of California has devolved to and no one, let me repeat that NO ONE wants that in their state, county, city or town.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
3.1.9  Bob Nelson  replied to  XDm9mm @3.1.8    2 weeks ago
... and no one, let me repeat that NO ONE

Well... there are the residents of California... 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.1.10  XDm9mm  replied to  Bob Nelson @3.1.9    2 weeks ago
Well... there are the residents of California... 

Are you speaking of those with the ability to leave doing so?  Or are you speaking of those that have no options to escape that insanity?  I know, you MUST be speaking of the latter, as other states are being overrun with the pseudo intellectuals running from that shit hole, only to bring the same shithole mind set with them to make the places they resettle to mirror images of what they escaped in the first place.

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
3.1.11  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  XDm9mm @3.1.8    2 weeks ago

How delusional.  I know quite a few people in CA.  They have zero interest in leaving.  I’ve seen countless people interviewed about losing their house to wildfires who show no interest in leaving their state.  With those insights you must be a Libertarian.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
3.1.12  Sean Treacy  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @3.1.11    2 weeks ago

California is a great state for the Rich and the poor. It’s the middle who leaves.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
3.1.13  Bob Nelson  replied to  XDm9mm @3.1.10    2 weeks ago

Anyone who wants to move - from California or from any other state - can do so. 

Anyone who wants to vote against the party in power - in California or in any other state - can do so.

Californians may be unhappy with the Dems... but they clearly think the GOP would be worse. 

 
 
 
Sunshine
3.1.14  Sunshine  replied to  XDm9mm @3.1.10    2 weeks ago
 only to bring the same shithole mind set with them to make the places they resettle to mirror images of what they escaped in the first place.

Colorado is a good example.

 
 
 
Sunshine
3.1.15  Sunshine  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @3.1.11    2 weeks ago
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/californians-leaving-state-data/2078950/
For the seventh straight year, more people left California than moved in, according to new census data. More than 86,000 people left California for Texas, nearly 70,000 left for Arizona and about 55,000 left for Washington. 
 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.16  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    2 weeks ago

well, 4 years later and I still see and hear lots of whining about 2016, so thats great if those folks will FINALLY stop

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
3.1.17  Bob Nelson  replied to  Sunshine @3.1.14    2 weeks ago

What has happened to Colorado? 

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
3.1.18  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Sunshine @3.1.15    2 weeks ago

According to the United Van Lines Annual National Movers Study, CA made neither the top ten inbound or outbound list, regardless of the fact that climate change is routinely burning large swaths of the state down.  The way they get talked about by the right you’d expect them to top the outbound list.  

https://www.unitedvanlines.com/newsroom/movers-study-2018

 
 
 
Sunshine
3.1.19  Sunshine  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @3.1.18    2 weeks ago

What does that have to do with anything?

CA is going to loose a Congressional seat because so many are fleeing.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-12-31/la-me-ln-california-apportionment-2020-census

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
3.1.20  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sunshine @3.1.19    2 weeks ago

Could lose. the census hasn't been calculated yet. Read the article

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
3.1.21  Trout Giggles  replied to  Bob Nelson @3.1.17    2 weeks ago

They got a little more progressive over the years

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.1.22  XDm9mm  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @3.1.18    2 weeks ago
regardless of the fact that climate change is routinely burning large swaths of the state down.  

Maybe if the Democrats permitted forest management in those "large swaths" of the state, they would not be seeing those forest fires.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
3.1.23  Bob Nelson  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.1.21    2 weeks ago

Oh. 

So fascist-fellow-travelers don't have anything specific to complain about? They complain because the state doesn't vote as they wish.... but they have no particular gripes?

... right... 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
3.1.24  Trout Giggles  replied to  Bob Nelson @3.1.23    2 weeks ago

My MIL doesn't like the Texans coming to Colorado and raising the cost of living. She doesn;'t say much about Californians, tho.

Californians can come to Arkansas! Let's make this state purple!

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.25  Texan1211  replied to  Bob Nelson @3.1.7    2 weeks ago

so who was governing California during that time period?

 
 
 
Sunshine
3.1.26  Sunshine  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.1.20    2 weeks ago

That makes a huge difference in the point of the article.  🙄 Do you understand what the point is?

 
 
 
Sunshine
3.1.27  Sunshine  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.1.20    2 weeks ago

Delete 

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
3.1.28  Bob Nelson  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.25    2 weeks ago

C'mon Tex! I'm not your research assistant.... 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.29  Texan1211  replied to  Bob Nelson @3.1.28    2 weeks ago

well, research isn't necessary to tell me someone was running the state.

And after all, I am not the one who claimed the state legislature couldn't do their duties for at least 20 years because of a conservative minority.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
3.1.30  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sunshine @3.1.26    2 weeks ago

Do you?

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.31  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.4    2 weeks ago

The 'president' still can't get over those 3 million more votes cast for Hillary or the e-mails.  

tenor.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.2  Tessylo  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @3    2 weeks ago

That's the only way they can win, by lying, cheating and stealing, voter suppression.  

The 'president' said as much with mail in voting, when we all vote, republicans lose.  

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
4  Bob Nelson    2 weeks ago

We first started hearing "The US is not a democracy" over a decade ago. Being a naive optimist, I thought it was just ignorance.

It was in fact a battle cry. America's fascists and their fellow-travelers were announcing their intentions. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
4.1  XDm9mm  replied to  Bob Nelson @4    2 weeks ago
America's fascists and their fellow-travelers were announcing their intentions.

Bob, it's not nice to speak of the Democrats that way.   

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.2  Tacos!  replied to  Bob Nelson @4    2 weeks ago
We first started hearing "The US is not a democracy" over a decade ago.

That might be when you first heard it, but that is a failure of whatever education system you went through. We have been electing the president the same way for 230 years.

 
 
 
JBB
5  JBB    2 weeks ago

It is no wonder the once Grand Old Party of Abraham Lincoln is now known merely as "the damn gop"...

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
6  Trout Giggles    2 weeks ago

I thought the US was more of a representative democracy because we elect people at all levels to represent our interests. And when I say all levels I mean all the way from the White House to the local dog catcher

 
 
 
Tacos!
6.1  Tacos!  replied to  Trout Giggles @6    2 weeks ago

You thought right. But like children, even some adults will cry "not fair" when things don't go their way.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
7  Sean Treacy    2 weeks ago

 And at the end of the day, they expect both parties to work together to get the people's business done. What they don't expect is for one party - be it Republican or Democrat - to change the rules in the middle of the game so that they can make all the decisions while the other party is told to sit down and keep quiet. The American people want less partisanship in this town, but everyone in this chamber knows that if the majority chooses to end the filibuster - if they choose to change the rules and put an end to democratic debate - then the fighting and the bitterness and the gridlock will only get worse.

From one of those fascist enemies of democracy.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @7    2 weeks ago
On Tuesday, senators representing 153 million Americans outvoted senators representing 168 million Americans.

A majority of the US public supports President Donald Trump’s   impeachment   and removal from office, and an   overwhelming majority   wants new witnesses to testify in the Senate’s impeachment trial. But Senate Republicans appear almost certain to succeed in acquitting Trump and blocking the admission of new evidence.

On Tuesday, the first day of the Senate’s trial, Republicans defeated a   series of amendments   by Democrats to admit new evidence and call new witnesses on a 53–47 party-line vote. What explains the disconnect between the actions of Senate Republicans and the views of the public? Put simply, Senate Republicans do not represent a majority of Americans.

The Republicans who blocked the admission of new evidence represent   15 million fewer Americans   than the Democrats who voted yes, according to Ian Millhiser of   Vox .

jan 22, 2020

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/01/gop-senators-representing-a-minority-of-americans-are-preventing-a-fair-impeachment-trial/
 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @7.1    2 weeks ago

If and when the Democrats retake control of the Senate, they should end the filibuster rule.  They will at that point represent far more Americans than the Republican senators will, yet without a "majority rules " Senate, the minority can block every piece of legislation that the majority prefers, and they will. 

Enough is enough. If there was reason to believe that bi-partisanship will be reborn sometime in the near future there might be a case to be made to keep the filibuster, but that is not the case.  The Republicans have chose to govern by raw power , even though they represent a noticeable minority of Americans, and now the Democrats have to do the same. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8  seeder  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago

I think what we may see over the next 25 years or so is more "liberals" being willing to relocate to red states and at some point they will be enough in number to turn these states purple or blue. And then the right will lament that they didnt try to be more bi-partisan when they had the chance. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
8.1  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @8    2 weeks ago
And then the right will lament that they didnt try to be more bi-partisan when they had the chance. 

Oh please JR.  The Republican and the right have tried and tried.  It's the Democrats that are totally unwilling to compromise.  It's their way or the highway so to speak.

What's very telling is that there are many voters that are not responding to the Democrat promises of old.  They've been had too often and have finally awakened to the fact that the Democrats have and continue to make 'promises' that they know will not be kept as they will need to make those promises during the next election cycle to buy those votes yet one more time.  

It's taken quite some time, but they've finally learned the real meaning of that old quip.  "Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me."  And of course my new twist on that with the last newly added part...  "Try to fool me a third, fourth or fifth time....  FUCK OFF I'm not dependent on the Democrats any more."

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @8.1    2 weeks ago

We have today a House that represents the majority of Americans, and a Senate that does not reflect the majority of Americans, and a presidency that does not reflect the majority of Americans. If you think that is tenable to have good government you are sorely mistaken. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
8.1.2  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.1    2 weeks ago
If you think that is tenable to have good government you are sorely mistaken. 

It's quite preferable to what the Democrats have in store for this Constitutional Republic if they gain all three branches of government.   I can't see this country as a mirror image of China or Russia with one party rule and no opposition to the dictatorships those countries endure.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.3  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @8.1.2    2 weeks ago
one party rule and no opposition to the dictatorships those countries endure.

There will be an opposition, they just won't have enough votes. You know, the situation in reverse that you are so happy with now. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
8.1.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  XDm9mm @8.1.2    2 weeks ago
I can't see this country as a mirror image of China or Russia with one party rule and no opposition to the dictatorships those countries endure.

A little fear mongering to start your weekend, Xm?

 
 
 
XDm9mm
8.1.5  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.3    2 weeks ago
There will be an opposition, they just won't have enough votes. You know, the situation in reverse that you are so happy with now.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news JR, but the opposition stopped the removal of a duly elected President by the blathering mindless Trump haters in the House of Representatives.  So, your pathetic analogy doesn't wash.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
8.1.6  XDm9mm  replied to  Trout Giggles @8.1.4    2 weeks ago
A little fear mongering to start your weekend, Xm?

What fear mongering?   Maybe you should actually read the entire Democrat platform to see exactly what they desire for the future.

Addition of another state, specified as DC, but that won't come to pass as it requires a Constitutional amendment, but that would mean an additional two senators, and I will posit right now that they would in perpetuity be Democrat.

They desire per recent musings of Chuck Schumer to pack the Supreme Court with additional seats and of course those seats would be occupied by staunch far left Democrats or even socialists.  Of course that would permit the passage of ANY legislation, even removing portions of the Constitutional protections we currently enjoy simply by having it challenged and then have a judicial fiat ruling from SCOTUS agreeing with said legislation. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
8.1.7  Trout Giggles  replied to  XDm9mm @8.1.6    2 weeks ago
but that would mean an additional two senators, and I will posit right now that they would in perpetuity be Democrat.

How is that different from Utah's mostly red Congressional leaders? I think they had one Democrat in the last decade?

I think you are afraid that Chucky's stuff will come true. I don't think it will, because there are still moderate democrats and republicans who hold him by his belt and not let him leap off that ledge

 
 
 
Snuffy
8.1.8  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.1    2 weeks ago

And here I always thought that the House was designed to represent the people of their districts and the Senate was set up to represent the individual states. IMO the idea of having the entire legislative branch set up to represent only the people completely removes states rights from government. Removing the electoral college from the election of the president also removes the voice of the States from government. At that point IMO all we have is mob rule and reduced protections for the minority.

But a positive note on that would be job creation. With the voice of the State removed from government we really no longer need individual state governments so new jobs could be had to tear down the individual state capitals and create new colosseums in their place. The federal government will have great need for bread and circuses at this point.

 
 
 
Tacos!
9  Tacos!    2 weeks ago
Why did Lee choose this moment—less than four weeks before an election in which his party seems likely to suffer defeat—to make the familiar, even pedantic, point that we live in a republic rather than a pure democracy?

It's hardly pedantic. Pedantry focuses on minor, unimportant details. The distinction that the USA is a constitutional republic as opposed to a pure democracy is a fundamental, defining characteristic of our country, and one that many Democrats have chosen to ignore for years.

As soon as Trump was elected, Democrats and liberal media were declaring that the event was a failure of democracy. It's not. Electing the President of the United States has never been a process of direct democracy, and as long as people claim it's supposed to be, educated people should point out how wrong that idea is. As for the timing, it's probably never more important to remind people of this than in the times near to an election. The implication that it's somehow inappropriate - or otherwise odd - to do so four weeks prior to the election is silly.

I am sympathetic to Democrats on several issues, but as an American who respects our laws and systems, I am offended every time they act like the Constitution is some kind of scam that is in their way.

Every time he talks about "massive fraud" and sending the election to a Supreme Court with a conservative majority, he's preparing you to have your vote taken away—to make that shocking prospect a little more normal, even inevitable.

Donald Trump has as much right to dispute the results of an election as anyone else. We should stop acting like something special, undemocratic, or even illegal would be happening if he sought redress in the courts. Here's a thought: do the election the right way, and he won't have a reason to go to court.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
10  Freedom Warrior    2 weeks ago

There is nothing about Republicans you can generalize anymore unless they mean to say they are resistant to tyranny, otherwise this article is a complete fucking lie.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
11  Buzz of the Orient    2 weeks ago

Well, I guess America is not much different from Belarus, on the basis that a majority of honest votes doesn't win an election.  "Majority Rules"?  Is that an American joke?

However, what made me laugh was this line in the article: "Trump and his enablers will trample on any rules".  Of COURSE they will, because have they not already established that?  Do thay obey laws - like stealing music from the musicians?  Neil Young and the Leonard Cohen estate are suing because they outright denied the right for it being played at Trump events.  Do they obey international rules and protocols?  Like breaking into a foreign consulate seeking evidence of espionage which they didn't have, and still not finding any.  Do they obey traditional rules like the Hatch Act?  Like holding an election event on the White House lawn, or like Pompeo sending a message from Jerusalem to be read at a Trump campaign event.  Do they even bother to obey election debate rules that were agreed to by their own committee?  Like not just refusing to pay attention to speaking time limits, but ignoring the moderator entirely.  Of course they will trample any rules, because laws, international protocols, the Hatch Act, agreed-to debate rules MEAN FUCK ALL TO TRUMP AND HIS ENABLERS.  They are criminals, they have proven themselves to be criminals, and pity the USA if Trump is re-elected.

So if you think Trump's (and his Post Office boss buddy) are not successful in what they have been doing to suppress the ballots being counted, and Trump STILL doesn't win the election, I expect that what's going to happen in America will lead to a chaos like America has not experienced since the Civil War, and if he DOES win, I think that what we have been watching in Belarus on TV will be far exceeded in America.  I will have to hope that my son and his family escape to back home and are allowed to do so as family reunification by the Canadian government (his mother and sister live in Toronto). 

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
11.1  Bob Nelson  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @11    2 weeks ago
Of course they will trample any rules, because laws, international protocols, the Hatch Act, agreed-to debate rules MEAN FUCK ALL TO TRUMP AND HIS ENABLERS.

Well put. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
11.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @11    2 weeks ago

Oh, add to my list of lawbreaking by Trump that the tariffs he imposed in 2018 and his bans on ByteDance's TikTok and on WeChat contrevene the rules of the World Trade Organization - LOL Mr. Law and Order, LOL.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
11.2.1  Bob Nelson  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @11.2    2 weeks ago

I wonder if it was legal when he declared Canada to be a national security threat. He had to do that to assume authority to decree tariffs. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
11.2.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Bob Nelson @11.2.1    2 weeks ago

Of course Canada is a national security threat.  The beavers, moose and polar bears are going to invade the USA if Trump is re-elected.  And the Canadian air force of Canada Geese will bombard with their "droppings".

I do have a question.  If the plural of goose is "geese", why isn't the plural of moose "meese"?

 
 
 
bccrane
11.2.3  bccrane  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @11.2.2    2 weeks ago
Canadian air force of Canada Geese will bombard with their "droppings".

Funny you should bring that up, this is what is happening now here in Michigan.  The immigrants from Canada flew in and now hardly even leave, other than the coldest part of winter do they leave, they nest, they eat, and they crap.  They graze off our crops, they're almost worse than the deer, and you can't go to a beach without having to watch your step with all the droppings.  There were beaches closed due to E.coli outbreaks and the blame was put on the farmers when all you had to do was go to the lake and see all these geese all summer long on the beaches and in the water with the stench of goose droppings.  We need more snapping turtles.

 
 
 
Kavika
11.2.4  Kavika   replied to  bccrane @11.2.3    2 weeks ago

MOA5ZYRNIZHFBNOEJQJYOCNDRM.jpg

Golfer pisses of Candian Goose, gets knocked out.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
11.2.5  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Kavika @11.2.4    2 weeks ago

And the lesson is.......don't mess with the Canada Goose Force. 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Gordy327
JBB
MAGA
Krishna
bbl-1
Dismayed Patriot
Tacos!


23 visitors