A Political Thread pt. 2

[Ragey Erasmus]

I don't think the Trump immunity ruling is quite as bad as has been made out in isolation, it's more what it enables down the line. It's clear they want to help him and I think they've got as close to basically declaring he can do whatever the hell he wants without actually doing so, but the idea that a president can do things that would be deemed "illegal" as part of their official duties was already kinda accepted. What is the issue is where you draw the line on official duties, which this case has not resolved. What it's done is strengthen the case for Trump being protected if they can argue what he did were part of his official duties.

It's the next step that's going to be the killer, if they determine basically anything the president does is part of his official duties, then that's where the trouble starts and you really enter dictator territory. Securing the integrity of the election can be deemed to be part of the official duties of the president, although a strong argument can be made that it's not for them to resolve but instead for the states. However there is no rational person who can believe that Trumps actions were in any way to ensure actual election integrity.

When people ask how the likes of Hitler rose to power, look no further than the USA right now. They are following the exact sort of path that other dictators took. A power mad individual with a sizeable number of enablers who are willing to tear the country apart and view their own countrymen as enemies to be crushed. They dipped their toes into political violence, as did the Nazis before they escalated it to a level that enabled them to take over.

 

[Saintjay]

I don't think the Trump immunity ruling is quite as bad as has been made out in isolation, it's more what it enables down the line. It's clear they want to help him and I think they've got as close to basically declaring he can do whatever the hell he wants without actually doing so, but the idea that a president can do things that would be deemed "illegal" as part of their official duties was already kinda accepted. What is the issue is where you draw the line on official duties, which this case has not resolved. What it's done is strengthen the case for Trump being protected if they can argue what he did were part of his official duties.

It's the next step that's going to be the killer, if they determine basically anything the president does is part of his official duties, then that's where the trouble starts and you really enter dictator territory. Securing the integrity of the election can be deemed to be part of the official duties of the president, although a strong argument can be made that it's not for them to resolve but instead for the states. However there is no rational person who can believe that Trumps actions were in any way to ensure actual election integrity.

When people ask how the likes of Hitler rose to power, look no further than the USA right now. They are following the exact sort of path that other dictators took. A power mad individual with a sizeable number of enablers who are willing to tear the country apart and view their own countrymen as enemies to be crushed. They dipped their toes into political violence, as did the Nazis before they escalated it to a level that enabled them to take over.

In all fairness the treatment of Germany by the Allied powers after WW1 didn't help. A crushed economy and starving dimoralised country that was still very traditionaly military bought into Hitler to make Germany great again so to speak.

I'd hope the USA still has the right balances and economic stability to not be a complete basket case.

My main concern is still Russia and the Ukraine. With the US being or becoming isolated from it and indifferent to the troubles in Europe as per the start of WW2. (Trump/US self interest) over everyone else.

 

[Amiga500]

How?

"Democrats are a threat to our freedom. Lock them up. No one knows more about threats to democracy than me."

"I order the state apparatus to disband their gatherings and arrest their leaders (under "trumped" up charges)."


About the only thing far fetched in the above is Trump being able to say a (relatively) obscure word like apparatus - and in the correct context.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

 

[ncurd]

"Democrats are a threat to our freedom. Lock them up. No one knows more about threats to democracy than me."

"I order the state apparatus to disband their gatherings and arrest their leaders (under "trumped" up charges)."


About the only thing far fetched in the above is Trump being able to say a (relatively) obscure word like apparatus - and in the correct context.

That require the state apparatus to be complicit. That takes way more effort than just having one guy say that stuff.

You act like all the machinations of government will do blindly what he says cause he's the president.

 

[Amiga500]

That require the state apparatus to be complicit. That takes way more effort than just having one guy say that stuff.

You act like all the machinations of government will do blindly what he says cause he's the president.

Your relying on everyone underneath having the balls and morals to say no.

It only takes one domino.

 

[Saintjay]

Your relying on everyone underneath having the balls and morals to say no.

It only takes one domino.

Equally you're relying on everyone in a position of power saying Yes. Willingly and blindly following orders. Especially on a military and law enforcement level.

Look at Trumps orders to find votes and to Mike Pence. Enough people had the balls to say No to him them.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

In all fairness the treatment of Germany by the Allied powers after WW1 didn't help. A crushed economy and starving dimoralised country that was still very traditionaly military bought into Hitler to make Germany great again so to speak.

I'd hope the USA still has the right balances and economic stability to not be a complete basket case.

My main concern is still Russia and the Ukraine. With the US being or becoming isolated from it and indifferent to the troubles in Europe as per the start of WW2. (Trump/US self interest) over everyone else.

this is a really interesting point because yes in that situation very real issues lead to Hitler coming to power

over the years i have come to the opinion that there is this huge victim mentality growing throughout the US, everyone hates us, "they're" all coming here to take our guns and freedom etc...so where are Germany had very real slights that lead to where they ended up....the US has all the perceived slights which might take them somewhere bad

and it becomes self for filling...everyone hates us so F them we're the best....so people start to dislike you because your acting like a dick

 

[Which Tyler]

That require the state apparatus to be complicit. That takes way more effort than just having one guy say that stuff.

You act like all the machinations of government will do blindly what he says cause he's the president.

Out of interest - have you looked into the "Project 2025" and "Schedule F" stuff?

 

[ncurd]

Out of interest - have you looked into the "Project 2025" and "Schedule F" stuff?

It's interesting but still requires a level of complicitness throught the macinations of governement I don't think will be there. It's important to remember Trump is deeply unpopular even within Republican ranks. He's just not Biden (Democrat).

If he is President he's still unlikely to win the popular vote. That's over 50% of voting country he has convince to bend to his tune many of whom will have positions of power and authority.

As noted last time house and senate republicans said no.

It's like the Tories when they selected Truss or Labour when they selected Corbyn.

 

[General Melchett]

I don't think Trump is that popular in the Republican party. They have just accepted that he is the 800 pound gorilla of the party (as Mitt Romney described him) that nobody is shifting anytime soon.

If he wins another term they will start jostling for position in a couple of years but I'd be surprised if Trump doesn't have aspirations of passing the baton to one of his kids or his son in law.

The idea of Romney becoming President doesn't seem so bad now when we look at the current Republican option.

 

[ncurd]

I don't think Trump is that popular in the Republican party. They have just accepted that he is the 800 pound gorilla of the party (as Mitt Romney described him) that nobody is shifting anytime soon.

If he wins another term they will start jostling for position in a couple of years but I'd be surprised if Trump doesn't have aspirations of passing the baton to one of his kids or his son in law.

The idea of Romney becoming President doesn't seem so bad now when we look at the current Republican option.

Romney was pretty much to the left of party in vein of Cameron for the Tories still way too right wing for me but people do have accept working with these people otherwise you drive them to the populists or the actual extreme right agitators.

Obamacare and Romneycare were very similar.

Interesting Trump never repealed it although he did weaken it. Again its harder to do these things than people actually imagine.

Trump is in it for the power, prestige and money (not direct wealth but making what he does legal). He has no real political ideology if he did he wouldn't be such a hypocrite.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Interesting Trump never repealed it although he did weaken it. Again its harder to do these things than people actually imagine.

He tried to didn't he? Even with Rep. majorities in both houses. The problem is what he was trying to replace it with, which certain members wouldn't agree to.

Trump is in it for the power, prestige and money (not direct wealth but making what he does legal). He has no real political ideology if he did he wouldn't be such a hypocrite.

 

[Reiser99]

Trump becoming a dictator at this point is extremely hypothetical. A lot has to happen first. The big question is how could it be abused down the line, because it certainly adds a lot of grey area to the presidency. It's also the start of a very slippery slope. All it takes is one arrest of a political opponent on a trumped up charge and suddenly your into authoritarian territory.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Trump becoming a dictator at this point is extremely hypothetical. A lot has to happen first. The big question is how could it be abused down the line, because it certainly adds a lot of grey area to the presidency. It's also the start of a very slippery slope. All it takes is one arrest of a political opponent on a trumped up charge and suddenly your into authoritarian territory.

Which republicans claim is already happening...

 

[Which Tyler]

Which republicans claim is already happening...

Exactly.
As ever, they're accusing others of what have done, or want to do themselves.

Project 2025 gives Trump a simple "to do" list, that all he has to do is add a signature to as and when. Schedule F means that he gets to place whoever he likes in public roles.

It doesn't matter than last time, the check and balances swayed, but more-or-less held firm. The supreme court has been weakening those checks and balances for the last 4 years, and people who aren't Trump have done all the ground work for him, telling him who to appoint where, and sign this, you don't even need to bother reading it (though I suspect there's a 2 bullet-point summary for each).

He won't become dictator on day one; but it's a real possibility that he will have by day 1400. It's "just" a matter of whether he feels like actually doing it, and can remember where he left the list.

8 years ago, he didn't know what he was doing, didn't really care, and expected to just turn up and everyone would do what he says - which isn't how it works. It was being tested by a bull in a china shop.
This time, other people know what they want him to do, how to go about doing it, and make it so that everyone ends up just doping what he says or be fired, effective immediately. It's being tested by a trained fighter (or at least, his handlers are trained fighters).

It may well be that the checks and balances are stronger than we've been led to believe, and that the right wing 6:3 Supreme Court does decide to reign him in. But I'm not personally confident in that. Other opinions are, of course, valid.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Postal vote delays: Royal Mail denies backlog as concerns raised

Postal affairs minister urges Royal Mail to do "all they can" to ensure postal votes arrive in time.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[General Melchett]

Another bullshit thing I would change. A PM's ability to call a GE on the date of their choosing. People away on holiday, postal votes a shambles etc. Have a fixed date that is known well in advance and make it a day to maximise turnout if they really believe in democracy. I saw that some European cities offered free public transport on the day (a Sunday) of the European parliament elections to maximise turnout.

That and party members getting to choose a new party leader (new PM) while they are in Government. It's ********. Any change in leader/PM should require a snap GE. I don't care if the manifesto is the same. A small group of old rich white men shouldn't have the power to choose a new PM while the rest of the country gets no say.

The referendum this country needs the most is to change our political system. That is far more pressing than another EU membership referendum.

 

[Which Tyler]

Another bullshit thing I would change. A PM's ability to call a GE on the date of their choosing. People away on holiday, postal votes a shambles etc. Have a fixed date that is known well in advance and make it a day to maximise turnout if they really believe in democracy. I saw that some European cities offered free public transport on the day (a Sunday) of the European parliament elections to maximise turnout.

That and party members getting to choose a new party leader (new PM) while they are in Government. It's ********. Any change in leader/PM should require a snap GE. I don't care if the manifesto is the same. A small group of old rich white men shouldn't have the power to choose a new PM while the rest of the country gets no say.

The referendum this country needs the most is to change our political system. That is far more pressing than another Brexit referendum.

Here here.
Voting day should be a bank holiday, and the idea of free public transport is a good one.
I'm not so sure about having a date set in stone in advance - it shouldn't be an issue if the post office wasn't such a mess; but a longer lead-time may be a good idea (though the idea of another 2 weeks of campaigning is pretty galling).
If we have to have ID to vote, then there should be a national ID card that every has automatically, and is valid for voting (not something I'm fond of, but then, I'm not fond of the idea of requiring ID to vote).

A change of PM should absolutely trigger a GE (a reason that would immediately count against the idea of a date set in stone every 5 years). I know we don't vote for the PM, and technically we vote for the candidate not the party - but out in the real world, it's simply not the case. PM is the leader of the governing party, and they set the agenda and requirements of government. A change in leader IS a change in government, even if the cabinet remains unchanged. We should have had a GE in 2007, and again in 2016 (and 2023, and 2023, not forgetting 1990, of course).

Any referendum that essentially changes our constitution (be it Brexit, PR or whatever else) should have a 60% pass mark (maybe with a proviso of 50% of eligible voters). We absolutely need PR, or to ditch political parties (which IMO would be realistically impossible). IIRC I proposed my favoured system of PR here a few weeks ago.

 

[General Melchett]

We're stuck with a political system where power simply rotates between two parties (a political duopoly) and almost every vote these days is a protest vote against whoever is in power which to me indicates that constitutional change is needed.