Trump’s indictment can’t solve the real threat: our undemocratic electoral system ( www.theguardian.com )

Arotrios , 10 months ago

If Trump takes office without winning the popular vote, it will very likely lead to civil war. Not because the people will rise up to defend Biden, but because his policies are simultaneously cruel, poorly implemented, unjust, and most importantly to the wealthy who run the country, unprofitable. There were a lot of people in the business community who haven't forgotten the China trade war of 2020. And the fact of the matter is that with climate change beginning to have a real affect on the economy, an unsteady hand on the wheel is the last thing Wall Street wants.

Dictators that successfully put such policies in place do so after the fascist state is established to quell dissent. Trump can't even establish a state of denial.

Could he win? Possibly on a electoral vote basis - I think the popular vote is far out of reach for him. But I don't see the country lasting for long if he does - he doesn't have the skill to run a fascist state, much less build one, and he'd be completely out of his depth confronting a real uprising. DeSantis, on the other hand, could build such a state and has been somewhat successful in laying the groundwork in Florida. I don't think Trump will chose him as VP, but if he does, that's a match made in hell.

PowerCrazy , 10 months ago

I don’t’ understand how you can say that Trump being elected is a dictatorship, but Biden being elected is a healthy democracy. Either America’s democracy is illegitimate (I Agree), or you are just mad that the other team won. Pick a lane.

czech , 10 months ago

You'd have to follow current events to understand the difference. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/trump-plans-to-massively-expand-executive-power-if-elected-report-says

Arotrios , 10 months ago

Dictators get elected all the time, Hitler being the one most historians refer to. It's the policies they implement after election that define them as dictators. Trump began the process while in office, but was horribly incompetent at it, as demonstrated by his flailing coup attempt. Moreover, he didn't have Hitler's popular support, effectively getting into office on a technicality.

Biden was elected by both the popular and electoral vote. His policies thus far, while centrist, have been built on bi-partisan cooperation where possible, and he's been as hands off as possible regarding the political elements of the court cases against Trump. He's also been supportive of civil rights, and has rolled back a number of Trump's crueler policies.

The same cannot be said of Trump, nor will it be. You can actually boil it down to one definitive action: Dictators lock children in cages.

Trump qualifies under this definition, having been responsible for the detainment of over 500,000. Biden doesn't qualify under this definition, nor any other. At worst, he's a middling centrist who is most concerned with keeping the country running, as a President should be.

As to the legitimacy of America's electoral process, I absolutely agree that it needs to be reinforced, but I don't believe that there was any substantial fraud in the 2020 election.

I would ideally like to see all voting machines require paper trails, and have universal mail-in voting, as it's been a resounding success in OR and CA. I would also like to see a restructuring of the electoral college that more accurately reflects the popular vote while still allowing rural areas to have a significant voice - after all, urban needs can easily override rural ones to the detriment of all citizens. In a perfect world, that balance would also be properly reflected in Senate seats, to more properly represent the country as a whole.

PowerCrazy , 10 months ago

The same cannot be said of Trump, nor will it be. You can actually boil it down to one definitive action: Dictators lock children in cages.

Was Obama a dictator? washingtonpost.com/…/8ff96f3c-1532-11eb-82af-8646…

I get that you can wring your hands and call the cages Obama built “holding cells” or whatever, but let’s get your definitions straight.

Now as far as the voting process, I don’t believe there has been any fraud that has affected a presidential election in any way that matters, except POSSIBLY Florida in 2000, but even then I wouldn’t put a lot of stock in it. But the important part about America’s sham democracy is that the choices are rigged from the start. You don’t get to vote for an environmentalist, you don’t get to vote for a leftist, you don’t’ get to vote for a candidate that will dismantle the CIA, that will recall 100% of America’s armed forces, that will stop supporting Israel, that will stop sending cluster munitions to Ukraine. The only thing you get to vote for is which flavor of Capitalist you prefer. You also don’t’ get to vote for reforming our first past the post system. So given this reality, why should I give fuck that the Red Capitalist technically matches some Ivory Tower definition of Dictator, but conveniently the Blue Capitalist is just shy of that definition?
By the way the Biden administration is still holding children in cages.

Debating these minute differences sounds like Manufacturing Consent to me.

dingus , 10 months ago

Debating these minute differences sounds like Manufacturing Consent to me.

Obama is far from a saint, and every US President has the same blood of Empire on their hands.

But this is rich from a guy who bailed after it was pointed out that Trump literally has no platform, only offers racism, sexism, xenophobia, hate and authoritarianism, and that maybe we shouldn’t be trying to court the opinions of people who support those things.

I’m sure all the people in Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana will surely be lining up to vote for whatever out of touch liberal you are supporting instead of the person who actually engages with them.*

In this hypothetical, Trump was the person who actually engaged with them, and he won in 2016 because of that outreach.

I’m sure that buffoon really engaged them with his fucking unhinged rants and making fun of disabled people. His voters have been very honest about who they are, and it’s not our fault you’re not listening and instead arguing we should be engaging with authoritarians.

Sounds like Manufacturing Consent to me, from someone happy to debate the minute differences when it suits them.

PowerCrazy , 10 months ago

I responded and I’ve made my point.

mrpants , 10 months ago

It was a bad point. You should have saved your time and not posted.

dingus , 10 months ago

Yeah I guess this guy forgot that Mr. Trump notoriously had a lot of white collar white people voting for him, and that his “base” absolutely isn’t just the rural working class.

I guess the working class in cities don’t exist or something. /s

Arotrios , 10 months ago

Was Obama a dictator?

Clearly not from the context of the article you provided, as they describe how the cages were part of an expansion to a larger facility that corrected a worse detention situation at the border, where there was no air conditioning. Do I think this was a humane design choice? No, but it was an improvement. At the time they were built, family separation wasn't performed except in extreme circumstances. Nor do I think that Obama was personally involved in the design decisions.

Trump undid that policy, and filled the cages that Obama built. Family separation was the point. And again and again he bragged about it. He was personally involved in the decision, and lauded it.

The Biden administration is still detaining children, but they've drastically reduced the number (see the graph on the article provided), and no longer enforces family separation to my knowledge. More work needs to be done here, I agree, but ignoring the scope to say both he and Trump are the same is lazy thinking.

From a purely leftist standpoint (far left in the US), you're right - the electoral process and two party system as they currently exist will never allow a true progressive to set policy, and we're stuck in a cycle of choosing between bad and worse. It's my hope ranked choice voting starts getting some real traction as a counter, but I'm not holding my breath.

So why should you care?

Because in a choice between bad and worse, if you don't vote, you end up with worse.

PowerCrazy , 10 months ago

I vote and I have voted in every federal election and most of my local elections since I was first eligible to vote in 2000. But I never vote for the “Bad” choice, nor the “worse” choice. I always vote in the primary of the majority party which was usually Dem, but in Texas I voted in the GoP primary. When it comes to the General Election, locally you have no excuse to vote for bad or worse, you typically have multiple candidates, some that are even good. On a federal level, there is no reason to vote for bad or worse either because even in swing states, voting for “Bad” means you support the bad, telling yourself the alternative is “worse” is just a coping mechanism and ensures no one will ever get any other choices.

dingus , 10 months ago

So you’re an accelerationist. Got it.

voting for “Bad” means you support the bad, telling yourself the alternative is “worse” is just a coping mechanism and ensures no one will ever get any other choices.

This is what someone with no agency and no ability to ever organize something like a nationwide vote strike/write-in campaign tells themselves as a big fucking cope. Sure, you’ve got agency in this system, buddy. Sure you do.

PowerCrazy , 10 months ago

Yea, I never once claimed to have agency in our system, and the liberal rallying cry about voting is absolutely an example of that. What are you actually upset about? That I am accurately describing our shitty society?

dingus , 10 months ago

No, that you have the smug superiority of someone who is like “I vote with my principles” which is great and all, but it literally doesn’t make you better than anyone else or have a reason to tell others that participating means “they support it” especially if that’s literally the only actual agency they have in this shitty fucking system, voting. (Protip, it’s literally the only agency they have.)

On top of the verifiable harm that attitude that does to minorities in the USA. It’s easily arguable that no matter what party you vote for, you’re hurting minorities all over the planet, but sorry sir, I’m about general harm reduction, even if it’s halfassed in the short term.

I don’t think letting the worse win for your pyrrhic personal victory is in any way fucking helpful, nor is acting like you’re somehow better, smarter, or more capable than others for it, or that it means they support those things.

I’m on the left, and you’re just being a smug asshat, dude. Maybe not classist, but sure obviously think you’re better than everyone else here. Do you think that’s helpful? Great job not using classist words but still acting like a smug know it all prick who thinks they know better but can’t be fucked to actually help educate, but instead wants to put others down for not already knowing. Sounds pretty fucking classist to me.

Like there’s a thousand ways you could have participated in this thread without being a rude jerk. You chose to be a rude jerk, what does that say about you?

PowerCrazy , 10 months ago

I get it, you are “on the left.” You would have voted for Obama a third-time if you could, Biden was the next best thing obviously. Anyone who implies differently is an “asshat.”

dingus , 10 months ago

Resorting to making assumptions that couldn’t be further off base? Obama solidified the worst aspects of the Bush presidency and told us to “look forward, not backward” in regards to fucking war criminals. He had plenty of scandals that were mostly swept under the rug by the media. He himself admitted that if he had ran in the 1980’s he would have been running as a Republican. He ran on a public option but then said “Fuck you people” and gave us RomneyCare.

Seriously, grow up.

pinkdrunkenelephants , 10 months ago

Holy shit, we have people defending literal concentration camps in the thread

Good job, Lemmy. You have officially gone full retard.

FormerlyChucks , 10 months ago

The popular vote literally doesn’t matter and it never did for deciding the presidency. Why do people still bring this up? You want a pure democracy? Better hope you’re always part of the 51%

Arotrios , 10 months ago

It matters as a gauge of popular support and perceived legitimacy of the President, which affects their ability to get legislation passed. You'll note I didn't argue for a pure majority vote, but rather an adjustment to the system to make it more representative.

Franzia , 10 months ago

This is just off-topic doomposting.