Hacker News Reader

Comment by Jensson | Hacker News Reader

But in the end he didn't end Democracy, he let the democratic procedures take place, a fascist wouldn't do that.

> He literally tried to overthrow the election 4 years ago

Not openly, the people who went to the white house weren't under Trumps command. He argued against the election result using the proper tools of the democracy, you are allowed to do that.

I'm not sure why worry now when we already know he handed over the power once. Maybe it wasn't willingly but he will be forced to step down in 4 years as well.

View on HN

The call to Brad Raffensperger asking him to "find" votes has been public for years. I'm in disbelief that anyone could listen to that conversation and conclude it was anything but an attempt to steal the election.

Trying to cheat a few votes isn't more fascist than gerrymandering, it is corrupt but it isn't fascism.

If he had rigged the whole election I'd say it is fascism, but rigging a whole election is on such a different scale and planning and conspiracy level that it isn't the same thing, he didn't even try to rig the election. If he tried to rig it then it wouldn't be one such call, it would be hundreds with many accomplices.

Trump also made calls to officials in other swing states he lost attempting to change the result. They weren't as public and damning, but had several of them been successful after all was said and done, it would have rigged the whole election.

Trying to cheat a few votes

This is some pretty hardcore rationalization even by modern standards. Trying to "cheat a few (10s of thousands of votes so you win a swing state)" is called trying to steal an election.

but rigging a whole election is on such a different scale and planning and conspiracy level that it isn't the same thing, he didn't even try to rig the election.

He literally did from many different angles. Asking for changed vote counts, fake electors, 60 court cases with no evidence, planning violence to stop the certification of the election.

How do you square what you are saying with these facts?

> 60 court cases with no evidence

That's the one thing in the list I'm OK with. Determining whether a claim has legal merit and factual basis is what courts are for.

> he let the democratic procedures take place, a fascist wouldn't do that.

He did so because he had no other choice. Mike Pence, of all people, rescued democracy. If it hadn't been for him, Donald Trump would not accepted the transfer of power.

And this is what the difference boils down to. You and I both know that Trump would have declared himself the winner no matter what the vote count had been. And we also both know that Harris is going to concede to Trump because the vote count says so.

Luckily it isn't the presidential candidates who decides the winner, so it doesn't matter who Trump or Harris thinks the winner is.

True, but it still negates your claim that "He hasn't run on a platform of eliminating democracy".

>But in the end he didn't end Democracy, he let the democratic procedures take place, a fascist wouldn't do that.

Fascist wouldn't fail?

Again, You know Hitler literally tried a coup, failed and then switched to 'democratic' means?

> Again, You know Hitler literally tried a coup, failed and then switched to 'democratic' means?

Hitler never left the seat of power once he got it. Trump did. They are not the same. Hitler did a coup to try to get power, he failed at that, Trump already succeeded grabbing power (he got elected) and then left it.

Which he said he regrets doing.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/03/us/politics/trump-pa-rall...

He didn’t or he couldn’t pull it off?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com