When does Biden drop out of the race?

[kalm]

1) It’s not ideal but we’ve handled it before and probably to a much larger extent than the public knows.

2). Biden’s debate performance and other speaking gaffes are no guarantee that he can’t still make decisions or govern. I don’t know how you measure that other than impartial and verifiable cognitive testing. That’s on him and his administration to produce or convince the public otherwise. This is the corner he’s in now.

3). Let’s be honest, the guy he’s running against isn’t fit for office either.

It’s semi-decrepit old guy with a stutter and aphasia vs. megalomaniac malignant narcissist. Which one is more of a threat to harm the country?

Luckily, I don't think either bad candidate can really harm the country. Trump was certainly restricted in his first term in office by the checks and balances of our federal system of government. It's not pretty at times, but it is really effective at limiting the chances of a power grabbing meglamaniac from succeeding in doing that, and it would again. The bright side has been, this is very likely the last time either of these guys runs for office - by 2028 we'll have a whole new slate of folks to choose from. One will be term limited out of running again and the other will be that much older.

As for the #1 answer above, I know it's happened, we've talked about it here (Wilson after the stroke, Roosevelt in the final weeks, Reagan in his last year). The differences here, and big ones, is that 1) we didn't know about those issues in real time and even those who knew were very limited - heck, Wilson's was just his wife and doctor and 2) none of those previous ones were known widely and publicly that they weren't fit to hold office and none of those previous were trying to run for another term of office in such a condition.

But it seems like the Dems might not have a choice - Biden would have to be dragged kicking and screaming to take him out of this race it seems. I don't see how the Dems can do that. The die may hav e been cast given Biden's stubbornness.

I’m sorry but that’s simply silly. Both can harm our nation. Economic decisions that last decades, environment and energy, SCOTUS and cabinet appointments, foreign policy, immigration policy, bodily autonomy, LGBTQ rights.

One of hundreds of quick examples…

[houndawg]

Evil Jill is the only one he would listen too

Problem is she’s evil

Who in their right mind would run this idiot out there for another four years?

And this behind the scenes group of decision makers has been running the Biden administration since day one, that’s why he’s always saying things that they have to correct …

Joey Rotten has become everyone’s nightmare

gannonfan just told you.....its OK to have your head up your ass but you should leave your ears outside...

[GannonFan]

Luckily, I don't think either bad candidate can really harm the country. Trump was certainly restricted in his first term in office by the checks and balances of our federal system of government. It's not pretty at times, but it is really effective at limiting the chances of a power grabbing meglamaniac from succeeding in doing that, and it would again. The bright side has been, this is very likely the last time either of these guys runs for office - by 2028 we'll have a whole new slate of folks to choose from. One will be term limited out of running again and the other will be that much older.

As for the #1 answer above, I know it's happened, we've talked about it here (Wilson after the stroke, Roosevelt in the final weeks, Reagan in his last year). The differences here, and big ones, is that 1) we didn't know about those issues in real time and even those who knew were very limited - heck, Wilson's was just his wife and doctor and 2) none of those previous ones were known widely and publicly that they weren't fit to hold office and none of those previous were trying to run for another term of office in such a condition.

But it seems like the Dems might not have a choice - Biden would have to be dragged kicking and screaming to take him out of this race it seems. I don't see how the Dems can do that. The die may hav e been cast given Biden's stubbornness.

I’m sorry but that’s simply silly. Both can harm our nation. Economic decisions that last decades, environment and energy, SCOTUS and cabinet appointments, foreign policy, immigration policy, bodily autonomy, LGBTQ rights.

One of hundreds of quick examples…

I was thinking bigger than that - we're constantly told democracy is at stake in this election, and past ones. Sure, policies and the direction for the country are always impacted by the Presidents in charge. Trump's large tax cut out last time out will surely be with us for awhile along with the debt that it caused. Likewise, Biden's disastrous spending spree caused inflation that will be with us for years to come. Both are bad and both negatively impact our economic future. But no matter who's elected, America will still be a democratic republic 4 years from now and the nation, in that regard, will be unchanged. Neither of these two old guys are going to destroy America in that regard.

[kalm]

When will Trump drop out?

[houndawg]

1) It’s not ideal but we’ve handled it before and probably to a much larger extent than the public knows.

2). Biden’s debate performance and other speaking gaffes are no guarantee that he can’t still make decisions or govern. I don’t know how you measure that other than impartial and verifiable cognitive testing. That’s on him and his administration to produce or convince the public otherwise. This is the corner he’s in now.

3). Let’s be honest, the guy he’s running against isn’t fit for office either.

It’s semi-decrepit old guy with a stutter and aphasia vs. megalomaniac malignant narcissist. Which one is more of a threat to harm the country?

Luckily, I don't think either bad candidate can really harm the country. Trump was certainly restricted in his first term in office by the checks and balances of our federal system of government. It's not pretty at times, but it is really effective at limiting the chances of a power grabbing meglamaniac from succeeding in doing that, and it would again. The bright side has been, this is very likely the last time either of these guys runs for office - by 2028 we'll have a whole new slate of folks to choose from. One will be term limited out of running again and the other will be that much older.

As for the #1 answer above, I know it's happened, we've talked about it here (Wilson after the stroke, Roosevelt in the final weeks, Reagan in his last year). The differences here, and big ones, is that 1) we didn't know about those issues in real time and even those who knew were very limited - heck, Wilson's was just his wife and doctor and 2) none of those previous ones were known widely and publicly that they weren't fit to hold office and none of those previous were trying to run for another term of office in such a condition.

But it seems like the Dems might not have a choice - Biden would have to be dragged kicking and screaming to take him out of this race it seems. I don't see how the Dems can do that. The die may hav e been cast given Biden's stubbornness.

I'd agree with you 98% of the time but not this time - as you said, the checks and balances mostly worked this time - because of the adults in the room who won't be there this time. This time its an admin of hand-picked felons and they have one goal in mind and that is getting rid of those checks and balances and looting whatever they can get their hands on and they have no plans to leave when their term is up and their stooges are in place. You know that.

[UNI88]

Luckily, I don't think either bad candidate can really harm the country. Trump was certainly restricted in his first term in office by the checks and balances of our federal system of government. It's not pretty at times, but it is really effective at limiting the chances of a power grabbing meglamaniac from succeeding in doing that, and it would again. The bright side has been, this is very likely the last time either of these guys runs for office - by 2028 we'll have a whole new slate of folks to choose from. One will be term limited out of running again and the other will be that much older.

As for the #1 answer above, I know it's happened, we've talked about it here (Wilson after the stroke, Roosevelt in the final weeks, Reagan in his last year). The differences here, and big ones, is that 1) we didn't know about those issues in real time and even those who knew were very limited - heck, Wilson's was just his wife and doctor and 2) none of those previous ones were known widely and publicly that they weren't fit to hold office and none of those previous were trying to run for another term of office in such a condition.

But it seems like the Dems might not have a choice - Biden would have to be dragged kicking and screaming to take him out of this race it seems. I don't see how the Dems can do that. The die may hav e been cast given Biden's stubbornness.

I'd agree with you 98% of the time but not this time - as you said, the checks and balances mostly worked this time - because of the adults in the room who won't be there this time. This time its an admin of hand-picked felons and they have one goal in mind and that is getting rid of those checks and balances and looting whatever they can get their hands on and they have no plans to leave when their term is up and their stooges are in place. You know that.

You bring up an interesting point. I do think trump plans to make sure he's surrounded by bootlicking sycophants who will attempt to implement his agenda regardless of whether it's Constitutional or not. There will still be checks & balances though:

1. Whatever immunity SCOTUS has given only applies to Presidents. The people who carry out their orders can still be prosecuted.
2. Military leadership - their duty to the Constitution and the country supersedes their duty to an individual President. trump might go through quite a few generals looking for ones that will do his bidding & deploy forces domestically. The military will be the worse for prioritizing loyalty over competency in leadership.
3. The Courts - attempts to implement Project 2025 will surely result in lawsuits and injunctions that will take years to litigate. It will be interesting to watch a king of slow walking lawsuits belly ache about the courts not ruling in his favor quickly enough. Hopefully, conservative justices rule based on the law and not ideology.
4. Congress controls the purse strings.

[BDKJMU]

Well, as for making decisions, I would argue that's an important thing. We have a President for a reason - we're not electing an unknown group of advisors to run things. There does need to be someone who has the final say on things like policy and issues and who also interacts with and negotiates with other heads of state. Sure, there are always committees and advisors behind that, but the person we elect is the person we want to be there making the tie-breaking decisions on what we do as a country.

And that does lead into the electability - Biden's becoming less and less electable because if he's not the one making the decisions why even have him there in the first place? If he can't even functionally do the job, then why have him at all? The Dems can make the case that at least the White House would stay in Democratic control, and the benefits that come along with that, but the Presidency, at least in modern times (although I'd argue it has been for almost all the time) has been about the person running for the office. If the person isn't electable, then it doesn't matter what party they represent. It's odd, because Trump, as a person, is completely unelectable to a wide swath of the country, but clearly there is also a wide swath of the country that does like him. If Biden continues, as it seems he, or his closest advisors are saying, then he risks a November blowout because his own base of support is split on whether he should even run.

I don't know, I would've thought after the disastrous debate, after the unreassuring interview on Friday, and after a terrible weekend of people calling for him to stepdown that he would step down early this week. But that letter that just came out is like a shot across a bow by the power brokers that control Biden - they don't appear to be in any hurry to leave and they're not going to let him step out of the race anytime soon.

1) It’s not ideal but we’ve handled it before and probably to a much larger extent than the public knows.

2). Biden’s debate performance and other speaking gaffes are no guarantee that he can’t still make decisions or govern. I don’t know how you measure that other than impartial and verifiable cognitive testing. That’s on him and his administration to produce or convince the public otherwise. This is the corner he’s in now.

3). Let’s be honest, the guy he’s running against isn’t fit for office either.

It’s semi-decrepit old guy with a stutter and aphasia vs. megalomaniac malignant narcissist. Which one is more of a threat to harm the country?

Lol Biden is every bit the narcissist as Trump. How many of his mostly made up stories the last 4 years he’s told have been all about ‘me’ amd ‘I’. 20, 40, 60+ years ago ‘I did this’, ‘I was that’…

[kalm]

1) It’s not ideal but we’ve handled it before and probably to a much larger extent than the public knows.

2). Biden’s debate performance and other speaking gaffes are no guarantee that he can’t still make decisions or govern. I don’t know how you measure that other than impartial and verifiable cognitive testing. That’s on him and his administration to produce or convince the public otherwise. This is the corner he’s in now.

3). Let’s be honest, the guy he’s running against isn’t fit for office either.

It’s semi-decrepit old guy with a stutter and aphasia vs. megalomaniac malignant narcissist. Which one is more of a threat to harm the country?

Lol Biden is every bit the narcissist as Trump. How many of his mostly made up stories the last 4 years he’s told have been all about ‘me’ amd ‘I’. 20, 40, 60+ years ago ‘I did this’, ‘I was that’…

All politicians are narcissists. Trump is the world champ.

And have you ever been around the elderly? They like to reminisce through personal stories, both true and embellished.

Like that time Houndy, me, and John Prine kayaked down the Cache River near Little Egypt.

[UNI88]

1) It’s not ideal but we’ve handled it before and probably to a much larger extent than the public knows.

2). Biden’s debate performance and other speaking gaffes are no guarantee that he can’t still make decisions or govern. I don’t know how you measure that other than impartial and verifiable cognitive testing. That’s on him and his administration to produce or convince the public otherwise. This is the corner he’s in now.

3). Let’s be honest, the guy he’s running against isn’t fit for office either.

It’s semi-decrepit old guy with a stutter and aphasia vs. megalomaniac malignant narcissist. Which one is more of a threat to harm the country?

Lol Biden is every bit the narcissist as Trump. How many of his mostly made up stories the last 4 years he’s told have been all about ‘me’ amd ‘I’. 20, 40, 60+ years ago ‘I did this’, ‘I was that’…

biden is definitely a narcissist but I don't think he's trump's equal as a megalomaniac or malignancy.

And while trump might not be as far down dementia lane as biden he has certainly begun his journey and will be drooling in his porridge in a few short years.

Neither is fit for office.

[houndawg]

I'd agree with you 98% of the time but not this time - as you said, the checks and balances mostly worked this time - because of the adults in the room who won't be there this time. This time its an admin of hand-picked felons and they have one goal in mind and that is getting rid of those checks and balances and looting whatever they can get their hands on and they have no plans to leave when their term is up and their stooges are in place. You know that.

You bring up an interesting point. I do think trump plans to make sure he's surrounded by bootlicking sycophants who will attempt to implement his agenda regardless of whether it's Constitutional or not. There will still be checks & balances though:

1. Whatever immunity SCOTUS has given only applies to Presidents. The people who carry out their orders can still be prosecuted.
2. Military leadership - their duty to the Constitution and the country supersedes their duty to an individual President. trump might go through quite a few generals looking for ones that will do his bidding & deploy forces domestically. The military will be the worse for prioritizing loyalty over competency in leadership.
3. The Courts - attempts to implement Project 2025 will surely result in lawsuits and injunctions that will take years to litigate. It will be interesting to watch a king of slow walking lawsuits belly ache about the courts not ruling in his favor quickly enough. Hopefully, conservative justices rule based on the law and not ideology.
4. Congress controls the purse strings.

I have little hope that it will happen that way. This is all about the Harlan Crow Court installing a system to perpetuate minority rule

[houndawg]

1) It’s not ideal but we’ve handled it before and probably to a much larger extent than the public knows.

2). Biden’s debate performance and other speaking gaffes are no guarantee that he can’t still make decisions or govern. I don’t know how you measure that other than impartial and verifiable cognitive testing. That’s on him and his administration to produce or convince the public otherwise. This is the corner he’s in now.

3). Let’s be honest, the guy he’s running against isn’t fit for office either.

It’s semi-decrepit old guy with a stutter and aphasia vs. megalomaniac malignant narcissist. Which one is more of a threat to harm the country?

Lol Biden is every bit the narcissist as Trump. How many of his mostly made up stories the last 4 years he’s told have been all about ‘me’ amd ‘I’. 20, 40, 60+ years ago ‘I did this’, ‘I was that’…

But he isn't a convicted felon or a rapist or a perpetrator of fraud who operates phony charities for veterans and kids with cancer and pockets the donations, so there's that. And he doesn't kowtow to Putin on worldwide TV, that's nice

[Caribbean Hen]

1) It’s not ideal but we’ve handled it before and probably to a much larger extent than the public knows.

2). Biden’s debate performance and other speaking gaffes are no guarantee that he can’t still make decisions or govern. I don’t know how you measure that other than impartial and verifiable cognitive testing. That’s on him and his administration to produce or convince the public otherwise. This is the corner he’s in now.

3). Let’s be honest, the guy he’s running against isn’t fit for office either.

It’s semi-decrepit old guy with a stutter and aphasia vs. megalomaniac malignant narcissist. Which one is more of a threat to harm the country?

Lol Biden is every bit the narcissist as Trump. How many of his mostly made up stories the last 4 years he’s told have been all about ‘me’ amd ‘I’. 20, 40, 60+ years ago ‘I did this’, ‘I was that’…

Exactly right on Joey Rotten behind every bit the narcissist that Trump is …. Hard for these guys to see it watching Racheal Maddow….

[UNI88]

Lol Biden is every bit the narcissist as Trump. How many of his mostly made up stories the last 4 years he’s told have been all about ‘me’ amd ‘I’. 20, 40, 60+ years ago ‘I did this’, ‘I was that’…

Exactly right on Joey Rotten behind every bit the narcissist that Trump is …. Hard for these guys to see it watching Racheal Maddow….

Don't cut biden too much slack. He might be behind trump as a narcissist but he's still world-class.

[Caribbean Hen]

Exactly right on Joey Rotten behind every bit the narcissist that Trump is …. Hard for these guys to see it watching Racheal Maddow….

Don't cut biden too much slack. He might be behind trump as a narcissist but he's still world-class.

Being…. It’s late

Goodnight John Boy

[houndawg]

Lol Biden is every bit the narcissist as Trump. How many of his mostly made up stories the last 4 years he’s told have been all about ‘me’ amd ‘I’. 20, 40, 60+ years ago ‘I did this’, ‘I was that’…

All politicians are narcissists. Trump is the world champ.

And have you ever been around the elderly? They like to reminisce through personal stories, both true and embellished.

Like that time Houndy, me, and John Prine kayaked down the Cache River near Little Egypt.

Good times....John never said so explicitly but I believe that trip was his inspiration for writing Paradise, which is only an hour and a half away

[kalm]

I’m sorry but that’s simply silly. Both can harm our nation. Economic decisions that last decades, environment and energy, SCOTUS and cabinet appointments, foreign policy, immigration policy, bodily autonomy, LGBTQ rights.

One of hundreds of quick examples…

I was thinking bigger than that - we're constantly told democracy is at stake in this election, and past ones. Sure, policies and the direction for the country are always impacted by the Presidents in charge. Trump's large tax cut out last time out will surely be with us for awhile along with the debt that it caused. Likewise, Biden's disastrous spending spree caused inflation that will be with us for years to come. Both are bad and both negatively impact our economic future. But no matter who's elected, America will still be a democratic republic 4 years from now and the nation, in that regard, will be unchanged. Neither of these two old guys are going to destroy America in that regard.

We’ve already lost a bit of our democratic republic thanks to recent SCOTUS rulings.

Jan 6th and the fake electors scheme showed a willingness by far too many to subvert the rule of law and the constitution.

Project 2025 takes us further away.

Not just Trump but who he’d pick to administer his desires would increase the threat. And it would be about HIS desires rather than the constitution or will of the people.

The far right has insisted we are not a democracy for years. To them, we are constitutional republic. That’s what Hungary is. People still vote there but the results are baked in through various laws, the courts, and media control. This is literally and transparently the Republican’s very public agenda.

If, as you stated, “policies and the direction for the country are always impacted by the Presidents in charge” those can chip away at the foundations of our democratic republic. I sincerely hope you’re right and that our system of checks and balances holds up but it’s all a little too close for comfort me. And it’s already started in many quarters.

[GannonFan]

I was thinking bigger than that - we're constantly told democracy is at stake in this election, and past ones. Sure, policies and the direction for the country are always impacted by the Presidents in charge. Trump's large tax cut out last time out will surely be with us for awhile along with the debt that it caused. Likewise, Biden's disastrous spending spree caused inflation that will be with us for years to come. Both are bad and both negatively impact our economic future. But no matter who's elected, America will still be a democratic republic 4 years from now and the nation, in that regard, will be unchanged. Neither of these two old guys are going to destroy America in that regard.

We’ve already lost a bit of our democratic republic thanks to recent SCOTUS rulings.

Jan 6th and the fake electors scheme showed a willingness by far too many to subvert the rule of law and the constitution.

Project 2025 takes us further away.

Not just Trump but who he’d pick to administer his desires would increase the threat. And it would be about HIS desires rather than the constitution or will of the people.

The far right has insisted we are not a democracy for years. To them, we are constitutional republic. That’s what Hungary is. People still vote there but the results are baked in through various laws, the courts, and media control. This is literally and transparently the Republican’s very public agenda.

If, as you stated, “policies and the direction for the country are always impacted by the Presidents in charge” those can chip away at the foundations of our democratic republic. I sincerely hope you’re right and that our system of checks and balances holds up but it’s all a little too close for comfort me. And it’s already started in many quarters.

Now you're slipping into hyperbole.

First of all, we haven't lost any of our democratic republic through recent SCOTUS rulings. You can make an argument about Citizen's if you want, but that was 14 years ago now and we're still hanging in there. Chevron was a problematic ruling when it itself overturned even longer precedent and it's been chipped away at almost since it came down. And Chevron was only needed, or thought to be needed, because Congress has been negligent for decades now when it comes to actually legislating and passing/modifying laws. And Roe and abortion are going to be issues no one will agree on until we have a technological breakthrough and can make artificial wombs that can accept fetuses at conception or soon after. So basically, no time soon.

But what this country is, a free democratic republic, hasn't changed and will not change with four years of a lame-duck Trump presidency. There's no time to do that, and he wouldn't have the means to do that, even if he brings in every sycophant he can find. Courts, like they did in Trump's first round and they've done to Biden as well, will tie up a lot of things. Trump couldn't do a fraction of what he wanted to do on immigration thanks to multiple injunctions, just like Biden hasn't been able to eradicate student debt with a flick of his pen. And if anything, the most current SCOTUS rulings further emphasize that - the Executive branch can't do the work of other branches, most especially the legislative branch. If Congress wants something done they need to pass laws to get those things done. The system of checks and balances are very much in place.

So if the laws and the courts aren't rigged and baking the results of elections, as you contend, then the last thing on your list is media control. No one anywhere could possibly contend that Trump has any control of the media. Fox is one media outlet, and it's always been right of center, and even they weren't lockstep with everything Trump did in his first term. But the wide swath of other media is nowhere close to being able to be controlled by Trump. Heck, given the current controversy with a compliant media hiding much of Biden's infirmities for the past two years, if not longer, all in the hope of keeping him a strong enough candidate to beat Trump in the next election, I would be far more worried about a left-wing takeover of the media than anything Trump could do.

Come 2028, we'll have an election that won't involve Trump or Biden, and we'll have that election, and then one after it every four years, and the democratic republic we have now will endure for years to come. Sometimes Democrats will win, sometimes Republicans will win, and the country will continue. It's fine to be vigilant and protective about our country and its foundations, as long as that doesn't slip into hyperbolic paranoia.

[kalm]

We’ve already lost a bit of our democratic republic thanks to recent SCOTUS rulings.

Jan 6th and the fake electors scheme showed a willingness by far too many to subvert the rule of law and the constitution.

Project 2025 takes us further away.

Not just Trump but who he’d pick to administer his desires would increase the threat. And it would be about HIS desires rather than the constitution or will of the people.

The far right has insisted we are not a democracy for years. To them, we are constitutional republic. That’s what Hungary is. People still vote there but the results are baked in through various laws, the courts, and media control. This is literally and transparently the Republican’s very public agenda.

If, as you stated, “policies and the direction for the country are always impacted by the Presidents in charge” those can chip away at the foundations of our democratic republic. I sincerely hope you’re right and that our system of checks and balances holds up but it’s all a little too close for comfort me. And it’s already started in many quarters.

Now you're slipping into hyperbole.

First of all, we haven't lost any of our democratic republic through recent SCOTUS rulings. You can make an argument about Citizen's if you want, but that was 14 years ago now and we're still hanging in there. Chevron was a problematic ruling when it itself overturned even longer precedent and it's been chipped away at almost since it came down. And Chevron was only needed, or thought to be needed, because Congress has been negligent for decades now when it comes to actually legislating and passing/modifying laws. And Roe and abortion are going to be issues no one will agree on until we have a technological breakthrough and can make artificial wombs that can accept fetuses at conception or soon after. So basically, no time soon.

But what this country is, a free democratic republic, hasn't changed and will not change with four years of a lame-duck Trump presidency. There's no time to do that, and he wouldn't have the means to do that, even if he brings in every sycophant he can find. Courts, like they did in Trump's first round and they've done to Biden as well, will tie up a lot of things. Trump couldn't do a fraction of what he wanted to do on immigration thanks to multiple injunctions, just like Biden hasn't been able to eradicate student debt with a flick of his pen. And if anything, the most current SCOTUS rulings further emphasize that - the Executive branch can't do the work of other branches, most especially the legislative branch. If Congress wants something done they need to pass laws to get those things done. The system of checks and balances are very much in place.

So if the laws and the courts aren't rigged and baking the results of elections, as you contend, then the last thing on your list is media control. No one anywhere could possibly contend that Trump has any control of the media. Fox is one media outlet, and it's always been right of center, and even they weren't lockstep with everything Trump did in his first term. But the wide swath of other media is nowhere close to being able to be controlled by Trump. Heck, given the current controversy with a compliant media hiding much of Biden's infirmities for the past two years, if not longer, all in the hope of keeping him a strong enough candidate to beat Trump in the next election, I would be far more worried about a left-wing takeover of the media than anything Trump could do.

Come 2028, we'll have an election that won't involve Trump or Biden, and we'll have that election, and then one after it every four years, and the democratic republic we have now will endure for years to come. Sometimes Democrats will win, sometimes Republicans will win, and the country will continue. It's fine to be vigilant and protective about our country and its foundations, as long as that doesn't slip into hyperbolic paranoia.

I skimmed your homily.

The threat is a combination of rulings and events that already happened as well as where they can lead and future power grabs they enable.

This clip, made by former Republicans who are far more experienced and aware of the possibilities than you and I is specifically intended for you. It’s based literally on public statements and platforms.

If you want to argue in good faith about degrees of threat, fine. I’ll enjoy your optimism. But to be dismissive of previous events as you’ve tended to do or, the currant threat, is obtuse.

[GannonFan]

Now you're slipping into hyperbole.

First of all, we haven't lost any of our democratic republic through recent SCOTUS rulings. You can make an argument about Citizen's if you want, but that was 14 years ago now and we're still hanging in there. Chevron was a problematic ruling when it itself overturned even longer precedent and it's been chipped away at almost since it came down. And Chevron was only needed, or thought to be needed, because Congress has been negligent for decades now when it comes to actually legislating and passing/modifying laws. And Roe and abortion are going to be issues no one will agree on until we have a technological breakthrough and can make artificial wombs that can accept fetuses at conception or soon after. So basically, no time soon.

But what this country is, a free democratic republic, hasn't changed and will not change with four years of a lame-duck Trump presidency. There's no time to do that, and he wouldn't have the means to do that, even if he brings in every sycophant he can find. Courts, like they did in Trump's first round and they've done to Biden as well, will tie up a lot of things. Trump couldn't do a fraction of what he wanted to do on immigration thanks to multiple injunctions, just like Biden hasn't been able to eradicate student debt with a flick of his pen. And if anything, the most current SCOTUS rulings further emphasize that - the Executive branch can't do the work of other branches, most especially the legislative branch. If Congress wants something done they need to pass laws to get those things done. The system of checks and balances are very much in place.

So if the laws and the courts aren't rigged and baking the results of elections, as you contend, then the last thing on your list is media control. No one anywhere could possibly contend that Trump has any control of the media. Fox is one media outlet, and it's always been right of center, and even they weren't lockstep with everything Trump did in his first term. But the wide swath of other media is nowhere close to being able to be controlled by Trump. Heck, given the current controversy with a compliant media hiding much of Biden's infirmities for the past two years, if not longer, all in the hope of keeping him a strong enough candidate to beat Trump in the next election, I would be far more worried about a left-wing takeover of the media than anything Trump could do.

Come 2028, we'll have an election that won't involve Trump or Biden, and we'll have that election, and then one after it every four years, and the democratic republic we have now will endure for years to come. Sometimes Democrats will win, sometimes Republicans will win, and the country will continue. It's fine to be vigilant and protective about our country and its foundations, as long as that doesn't slip into hyperbolic paranoia.

I skimmed your homily.

The threat is a combination of rulings and events that already happened as well as where they can lead and future power grabs they enable.

This clip, made by former Republicans who are far more experienced and aware of the possibilities than you and I is specifically intended for you. It’s based literally on public statements and platforms.

If you want to argue in good faith about degrees of threat, fine. I’ll enjoy your optimism. But to be dismissive of previous events as you’ve tended to do or, the currant threat, is obtuse.

I skipped your drama video - if you don't have the time to process what people write but then still robotically offer up rebuttals without thought then I don't have time for those rebuttals.

Basic premise, sometimes people who are supposed "experts" in political things can be wrong. In this case, they are. The country isn't ending, and isn't close to ending. If anything can be learned from Jan 6th it's exactly that. A deranged President and 500 whackos, most of whom are serving some type of prison time, of his weren't even close to tipping this county over. 350 million other Americans didn't side with them, 2 million armed service members didn't side with them, and the business of the federal government was merely delayed for a few hours. No amount of fear-mongering and hyperbole can change those facts.

[kalm]

I skimmed your homily.

The threat is a combination of rulings and events that already happened as well as where they can lead and future power grabs they enable.

This clip, made by former Republicans who are far more experienced and aware of the possibilities than you and I is specifically intended for you. It’s based literally on public statements and platforms.

If you want to argue in good faith about degrees of threat, fine. I’ll enjoy your optimism. But to be dismissive of previous events as you’ve tended to do or, the currant threat, is obtuse.

I skipped your drama video - if you don't have the time to process what people write but then still robotically offer up rebuttals without thought then I don't have time for those rebuttals.

Basic premise, sometimes people who are supposed "experts" in political things can be wrong. In this case, they are. The country isn't ending, and isn't close to ending. If anything can be learned from Jan 6th it's exactly that. A deranged President and 500 whackos, most of whom are serving some type of prison time, of his weren't even close to tipping this county over. 350 million other Americans didn't side with them, 2 million armed service members didn't side with them, and the business of the federal government was merely delayed for a few hours. No amount of fear-mongering and hyperbole can change those facts.

Flooding the zone with smarmy long winded responses is a polite means of arguing in bad faith.

You won’t watch the video because you know it’s going accurately describe the possibilities to its intended audience which is precisely you.

Just because it didn’t happen doesn’t diminish the attempt and your claim of 350 million Americans not siding with them is exactly what I’m talking about.

But keep telling us Berzelius "Buzz" Windrip is not really a threat.

[houndawg]

We’ve already lost a bit of our democratic republic thanks to recent SCOTUS rulings.

Jan 6th and the fake electors scheme showed a willingness by far too many to subvert the rule of law and the constitution.

Project 2025 takes us further away.

Not just Trump but who he’d pick to administer his desires would increase the threat. And it would be about HIS desires rather than the constitution or will of the people.

The far right has insisted we are not a democracy for years. To them, we are constitutional republic. That’s what Hungary is. People still vote there but the results are baked in through various laws, the courts, and media control. This is literally and transparently the Republican’s very public agenda.

If, as you stated, “policies and the direction for the country are always impacted by the Presidents in charge” those can chip away at the foundations of our democratic republic. I sincerely hope you’re right and that our system of checks and balances holds up but it’s all a little too close for comfort me. And it’s already started in many quarters.

Now you're slipping into hyperbole.

First of all, we haven't lost any of our democratic republic through recent SCOTUS rulings. You can make an argument about Citizen's if you want, but that was 14 years ago now and we're still hanging in there. Chevron was a problematic ruling when it itself overturned even longer precedent and it's been chipped away at almost since it came down. And Chevron was only needed, or thought to be needed, because Congress has been negligent for decades now when it comes to actually legislating and passing/modifying laws. And Roe and abortion are going to be issues no one will agree on until we have a technological breakthrough and can make artificial wombs that can accept fetuses at conception or soon after. So basically, no time soon.

But what this country is, a free democratic republic, hasn't changed and will not change with four years of a lame-duck Trump presidency. There's no time to do that, and he wouldn't have the means to do that, even if he brings in every sycophant he can find. Courts, like they did in Trump's first round and they've done to Biden as well, will tie up a lot of things. Trump couldn't do a fraction of what he wanted to do on immigration thanks to multiple injunctions, just like Biden hasn't been able to eradicate student debt with a flick of his pen. And if anything, the most current SCOTUS rulings further emphasize that - the Executive branch can't do the work of other branches, most especially the legislative branch. If Congress wants something done they need to pass laws to get those things done. The system of checks and balances are very much in place.

So if the laws and the courts aren't rigged and baking the results of elections, as you contend, then the last thing on your list is media control. No one anywhere could possibly contend that Trump has any control of the media. Fox is one media outlet, and it's always been right of center, and even they weren't lockstep with everything Trump did in his first term. But the wide swath of other media is nowhere close to being able to be controlled by Trump. Heck, given the current controversy with a compliant media hiding much of Biden's infirmities for the past two years, if not longer, all in the hope of keeping him a strong enough candidate to beat Trump in the next election, I would be far more worried about a left-wing takeover of the media than anything Trump could do.

Come 2028, we'll have an election that won't involve Trump or Biden, and we'll have that election, and then one after it every four years, and the democratic republic we have now will endure for years to come. Sometimes Democrats will win, sometimes Republicans will win, and the country will continue. It's fine to be vigilant and protective about our country and its foundations, as long as that doesn't slip into hyperbolic paranoia.

..and steadily losing ground ever since; sea level doesn't rise overnight.

[houndawg]

I skipped your drama video - if you don't have the time to process what people write but then still robotically offer up rebuttals without thought then I don't have time for those rebuttals.

Basic premise, sometimes people who are supposed "experts" in political things can be wrong. In this case, they are. The country isn't ending, and isn't close to ending. If anything can be learned from Jan 6th it's exactly that. A deranged President and 500 whackos, most of whom are serving some type of prison time, of his weren't even close to tipping this county over. 350 million other Americans didn't side with them, 2 million armed service members didn't side with them, and the business of the federal government was merely delayed for a few hours. No amount of fear-mongering and hyperbole can change those facts.

Flooding the zone with smarmy long winded responses is a polite means of arguing in bad faith.

You won’t watch the video because you know it’s going accurately describe the possibilities to its intended audience which is precisely you.

Just because it didn’t happen doesn’t diminish the attempt and your claim of 350 million Americans not siding with them is exactly what I’m talking about.

But keep telling us Berzelius "Buzz" Windrip is not really a threat.

spot on description, nicely done

[Caribbean Hen]

Oh my, the self appointed geniuses are flooding CS with back handed insults

[GannonFan]

I skipped your drama video - if you don't have the time to process what people write but then still robotically offer up rebuttals without thought then I don't have time for those rebuttals.

Basic premise, sometimes people who are supposed "experts" in political things can be wrong. In this case, they are. The country isn't ending, and isn't close to ending. If anything can be learned from Jan 6th it's exactly that. A deranged President and 500 whackos, most of whom are serving some type of prison time, of his weren't even close to tipping this county over. 350 million other Americans didn't side with them, 2 million armed service members didn't side with them, and the business of the federal government was merely delayed for a few hours. No amount of fear-mongering and hyperbole can change those facts.

Flooding the zone with smarmy long winded responses is a polite means of arguing in bad faith.

You won’t watch the video because you know it’s going accurately describe the possibilities to its intended audience which is precisely you.

Just because it didn’t happen doesn’t diminish the attempt and your claim of 350 million Americans not siding with them is exactly what I’m talking about.

But keep telling us Berzelius "Buzz" Windrip is not really a threat.

It's a discussion - if you can't bother to read a post in the discussion because it's, in your opinion, too long, that has nothing to do with bad faith on the author's part, rather more so on your part. And really, it's a couple of paragraphs, when did you become so lazy that you can't read a well thought out argument because it uses too many words? Be better than that.

I don't need to see the video - I've read a lot of what that group puts out and frankly, I think they're wrong. And it's ironic that you have so much faith in them. They're pretty much establishment people that you rail against all the time who are upset they aren't in power any longer. Normally you would laugh off those folks as hacks, but because they fit your hyperbole you pass along their opinions as gospel. Again, be better than that.

And as for smarmy, heck, that's a prerequisite on this site, I'm pretty sure we founded this board with that in mind.

[GannonFan]

Flooding the zone with smarmy long winded responses is a polite means of arguing in bad faith.

You won’t watch the video because you know it’s going accurately describe the possibilities to its intended audience which is precisely you.

Just because it didn’t happen doesn’t diminish the attempt and your claim of 350 million Americans not siding with them is exactly what I’m talking about.

But keep telling us Berzelius "Buzz" Windrip is not really a threat.

spot on description, nicely done

Oh stop, you can't read more than two sentences an hour, that's your only complaint. We'll have a day when everyone just posts in pictograms so that you can part of the discussion again. We'll keep you posted.