Trump Wants You To Snap to Attention

[drumdude]

So you have a lot of options from history:

Trump can manufacture a crisis and claim he needs more time to deal with it like Roosevelt did. Note that Roosevelt did this without becoming a dictator, so that alone is not sufficient to end democracy.

Trump can hide behind the Supreme Court ruling and just declare himself President forever as an official act. Again he needs to frame this in a way that preserves the idea of America that so many of these right wing Republicans worship. I see that being very difficult.

He can get the military to swear an oath to the president instead of the country. And hope again that all these Republican military people will be fine trampling on the constitution.

These all seem like great works of fiction. But plausible? I am not convinced.

[Kishkumen]

So you have a lot of options from history:

Trump can manufacture a crisis and claim he needs more time to deal with it like Roosevelt did. Note that Roosevelt did this without becoming a dictator, so that alone is not sufficient to end democracy.

The end of Roosevelt's life ended his hold on power. He did not seem too concerned about how many terms he had as president. I think, in fact, that the GOP is specifically looking to have its Roosevelt, one who will reverse all the supposed damage Roosevelt did. This one will do the same kinds of things as Roosevelt in terms of taking action, but it will be aimed at dismantling the kind of state that Roosevelt's presidency created. This seems like a plausible route to me, but I am not reassured that Trump would not take things much farther, seeing as he is a much simpler and more morally debased person.

Trump can hide behind the Supreme Court ruling and just declare himself President forever as an official act. Again he needs to frame this in a way that preserves the idea of America that so many of these right wing Republicans worship. I see that being very difficult.

He can get the military to swear an oath to the president instead of the country. And hope again that all these Republican military people will be fine trampling on the constitution.

These all seem like great works of fiction. But plausible? I am not convinced.

I think you give the enemies of democracy too little credit. They have already established minority rule in this country pretty successfully through gerrymandering and closing polls. They will seek to set as many bars to voting as they possibly can, including making proof of citizenship a requirement to vote. The problem here is not that lots of non-citizens vote--they don't--the problem is that every requirement you stack onto the process will probably deter more legitimate voters, usually people who work such long hours that they have no time to chase down every document they might need, or fact they might have to learn (poll test). All of these tactics are designed to keep citizens from voting.

Having achieved the dilution and diminishment of their opposition's voting power, they have used that to pack the court with right-wing nuts. These right-wing nuts have used their power to grant the president further power and impunity.

If you think the architects of these moves are not going to find a way to keep calling whatever diminished shell of a democratic republic we have a democratic republic, then you aren't paying attention. You might even come here to argue with me about how right they are and how I am just an alarmist. Because, you see, that's how these things tend to work. It would not work to call Trump a king. Just as it did not work to call Augustus a king. America does not have kings, and Rome did not have kings. You tailor your image to fit the culture, while making the substance of your power virtually unassailable by any potential opposition.

The Right is hard at work on this. Inveighing against the free press. Suppressing the vote. Capturing the Judicial Branch. We could end up with a president for life. Or single party rule. All of these things would result in a significant erosion of democracy to the point where it is only a democracy or republic on paper. In fact, it would be an authoritarian regime. I am comfortable saying that the current GOP is an authoritarian party. Surely they will seek to put their stamp on the nation once they claim they have a mandate that consists of a minority of the voters in fact.

I do not look forward to any of this, and I hope I don't have to argue with you that the fact that Trumpian rule uses republican terminology doesn't make it substantively republican, because I can easily see this all going that way based on what I have seen and am seeing of the Trumpers and you.

[drumdude]

So you have a lot of options from history:

Trump can manufacture a crisis and claim he needs more time to deal with it like Roosevelt did. Note that Roosevelt did this without becoming a dictator, so that alone is not sufficient to end democracy.

The end of Roosevelt's life ended his hold on power. He did not seem too concerned about how many terms he had as president. I think, in fact, that the GOP is specifically looking to have its Roosevelt, one who will reverse all the supposed damage Roosevelt did. This one will do the same kinds of things as Roosevelt in terms of taking action, but it will be aimed at dismantling the kind of state that Roosevelt's presidency created. This seems like a plausible route to me, but I am not reassured that Trump would not take things much farther, seeing as he is a much simpler and more morally debased person.

Trump can hide behind the Supreme Court ruling and just declare himself President forever as an official act. Again he needs to frame this in a way that preserves the idea of America that so many of these right wing Republicans worship. I see that being very difficult.

He can get the military to swear an oath to the president instead of the country. And hope again that all these Republican military people will be fine trampling on the constitution.

These all seem like great works of fiction. But plausible? I am not convinced.

I think you give the enemies of democracy too little credit. They have already established minority rule in this country pretty successfully through gerrymandering and closing polls. They will seek to set as many bars to voting as they possibly can, including making proof of citizenship a requirement to vote. The problem here is not that lots of non-citizens vote--they don't--the problem is that every requirement you stack onto the process will probably deter more legitimate voters, usually people who work such long hours that they have no time to chase down every document they might need, or fact they might have to learn (poll test). All of these tactics are designed to keep citizens from voting.

Having achieved the dilution and diminishment of their opposition's voting power, they have used that to pack the court with right-wing nuts. These right-wing nuts have used their power to grant the president further power and impunity.

If you think the architects of these moves are not going to find a way to keep calling whatever diminished shell of a democratic republic we have a democratic republic, then you aren't paying attention. You might even come here to argue with me about how right they are and how I am just an alarmist. Because, you see, that's how these things tend to work. It would not work to call Trump a king. Just as it did not work to call Augustus a king. America does not have kings, and Rome did not have kings. You tailor your image to fit the culture, while making the substance of your power virtually unassailable by any potential opposition.

The Right is hard at work on this. Inveighing against the free press. Suppressing the vote. Capturing the Judicial Branch. We could end up with a president for life. Or single party rule. All of these things would result in a significant erosion of democracy to the point where it is only a democracy or republic on paper. In fact, it would be an authoritarian regime. I am comfortable saying that the current GOP is an authoritarian party. Surely they will seek to put their stamp on the nation once they claim they have a mandate that consists of a minority of the voters in fact.

I do not look forward to any of this, and I hope I don't have to argue with you that the fact that Trumpian rule uses republican terminology doesn't make it substantively republican, because I can easily see this all going that way based on what I have seen and am seeing of the Trumpers and you.

I think the larger trend transcends any particular candidate or any particular party. The executive branch has become too powerful. There have been rationalizations for every increase in its power, but no sitting president has ever sought to diminish the capabilities of the office.

The two party system makes this inevitable. The founders didn’t intend this to be a competition between red and blue. But now that it is, each side seeks more power to crush the opposition. Democrats may be a little more restrained but traditionally they favor sweeping federal laws more than diverse state laws.

Add in the concentration of wealth, rise of a handful of billionaires who can buy politicians for pennies, and ensure that their monopolies aren’t threatened and you have a scary picture.

This can look like some conspiratorial master plan to keep Republicans in power forever, to enslave blacks again and put women in breeding cages. But that feels contrived to me. This is just people acting in their own self interest, to enrich their families and friends. And if they achieve the goal of ending the American experiment then ultimately they are only hurting themselves.

You would have to really go deep down an Orwellian dystopian fantasy to think all of this is being orchestrated perfectly by nefarious forces rather than just people being people. I think our nation is resilient, and despite current events we’re still the world’s best hope. I’m having children and I have to stay optimistic. Not in spite of the facts, but because we can’t just live on ingesting fear porn all day long. We can imagine the worst, hope for the best, and live in the world between those two as it unfolds.

[Kishkumen]

I think the larger trend transcends any particular candidate or any particular party. The executive branch has become too powerful. There have been rationalizations for every increase in its power, but no sitting president has ever sought to diminish the capabilities of the office.

I am not fighting with you about this claim. I am not sure what your point is. So, the next step could be a lifetime president. Or just the unitary executive wielded in damaging ways. In this round, we see a right-wing dominated Supreme Court larding the presidency with more power. OK? Agreed? Imminently dangerous? I can tell you that I am 100% certain that the current Supreme Court, or one that Trump puts more justices on, will never address the problem. Maybe a non-Trump Supreme Court that is meaningfully reformed will. If the chances are only meager, they are better than they will be with GOP dominance in the near future.

Democrats may be a little more restrained but traditionally they favor sweeping federal laws more than diverse state laws.

Add in the concentration of wealth, rise of a handful of billionaires who can buy politicians for pennies, and ensure that their monopolies aren’t threatened and you have a scary picture.

No argument there, but your depiction of the current situation is obviously a false equivalence. As you put it, both sides are equally bad. I disagree. I think the evidence shows overwhelmingly that when it comes to the expansion of executive power in the present time, the GOP is being much more aggressive.

This can look like some conspiratorial master plan to keep Republicans in power forever, to enslave blacks again and put women in breeding cages. But that feels contrived to me. This is just people acting in their own self interest, to enrich their families and friends. And if they achieve the goal of ending the American experiment then ultimately they are only hurting themselves.

Yeah, I don't think you even understand what my concerns are; you are making up straw men to bat down, and that is discouraging. Try to avoid hyperbole when you engage with me. I am not talking about the enslavement of blacks or putting women in breeding cages. While you think this kind of hyperbole makes you look like the reasonable one, all it says to me is that you need cheap rhetorical tricks to try to carry your point.

You would have to really go deep down an Orwellian dystopian fantasy to think all of this is being orchestrated perfectly by nefarious forces rather than just people being people. I think our nation is resilient, and despite current events we’re still the world’s best hope. I’m having children and I have to stay optimistic. Not in spite of the facts, but because we can’t just live on ingesting fear porn all day long. We can imagine the worst, hope for the best, and live in the world between those two as it unfolds.

Um, the published plans of Trump and Project 2025 are right there for the reading. No one needs to, and certainly I am not, "going really deep down an Orwellian dystopian fantasy." I am pleased that you feel the country is resilient. I hope very much that it is. That said, I don't appreciate you distorting my concerns. I am deeply concerned about the actual plans the Trump people have published and promulgated. The actual decisions of the Supreme Court and how they might be used in those plans. Such is not "fear porn."

[drumdude]

Is ignoring the term limits part of Project 2025?

[Kishkumen]

Is ignoring the term limits part of Project 2025?

It is a logical concern derived from Trump’s refusal to accept the results of free and fair elections.

[Hound of Heaven]

I had the unfortunate experience of crossing paths with Donald Trump back in 1990 during my time working on a high-end construction remodel in New Jersey. He and his team were brought on as consultants to assist us in navigating the challenges we encountered during the project. I'm not sure about the exact amount that was paid for their services, but it was definitely excessive. Right from the beginning, it was clear that their team's main focus was to acquire our project for a fraction of its worth, so they could gain complete control. Being in a room with Trump was, and probably still is, a complete waste of time. However, he possesses a certain charisma that captivates those who cross paths with him. This is truly a unique experience. He's taken a similar approach with the Republican Party. He confidently strode in and effortlessly assumed control, while others willingly yielded to his authority. In my opinion, it's quite clear that he's not being truthful and I find it difficult to comprehend why anyone would support him.

[yellowstone123]

I had the unfortunate experience of crossing paths with Donald Trump back in 1990 during my time working on a high-end construction remodel in New Jersey. He and his team were brought on as consultants to assist us in navigating the challenges we encountered during the project. I'm not sure about the exact amount that was paid for their services, but it was definitely excessive. Right from the beginning, it was clear that their team's main focus was to acquire our project for a fraction of its worth, so they could gain complete control. Being in a room with Trump was, and probably still is, a complete waste of time. However, he possesses a certain charisma that captivates those who cross paths with him. This is truly a unique experience. He's taken a similar approach with the Republican Party. He confidently strode in and effortlessly assumed control, while others willingly yielded to his authority. In my opinion, it's quite clear that he's not being truthful and I find it difficult to comprehend why anyone would support him.

Thanks, Hound of Heaven:

You wrote ""Right from the beginning, it was clear that their team's main focus was to acquire our project for a fraction of its work."

To me it also sounds's like Romney and Bane Capital. I always wondered what Trump and Romney were discussing when a photo of them was taken at candle lit dinner. They both like money. Maybe it was about that.

Also, my understanding is that Trump would look at the work completed on his properties and say I'm not paying for that, sue me, and he and his entourage would just walk off. Many bills submitted by contractors for the work they did for him were just not paid and they don't have an army of lawyers to go against Trump.

[yellowstone123]

Drumdude wrote:

"Add in the concentration of wealth, rise of a handful of billionaires who can buy politicians for pennies, and ensure that their monopolies aren’t threatened and you have a scary picture."

I think that's correct but I also think that you have millionaires/billionaires talking to multi-millionaire politicians. They both have a common interest: money and how to get more of it. It's from the left and right. You have Paul Pelosi, husband of Nancy Pelosi buying and selling computer chip type technology prior to votes in congress on computer chip type technology.

[Kishkumen]

I had the unfortunate experience of crossing paths with Donald Trump back in 1990 during my time working on a high-end construction remodel in New Jersey. He and his team were brought on as consultants to assist us in navigating the challenges we encountered during the project. I'm not sure about the exact amount that was paid for their services, but it was definitely excessive. Right from the beginning, it was clear that their team's main focus was to acquire our project for a fraction of its worth, so they could gain complete control. Being in a room with Trump was, and probably still is, a complete waste of time. However, he possesses a certain charisma that captivates those who cross paths with him. This is truly a unique experience. He's taken a similar approach with the Republican Party. He confidently strode in and effortlessly assumed control, while others willingly yielded to his authority. In my opinion, it's quite clear that he's not being truthful and I find it difficult to comprehend why anyone would support him.

Thanks, HoH. I appreciate you taking the time to share your firsthand experience with Trump. It lines up with everything I have read about his behavior in the business world. Like you, I find it difficult to comprehend why anyone would support him. His presence in almost any situation seems to me to generate a net loss, except where fiction is untethered from reality in more harmless ways, such as The Apprentice.