Anyone else think it’s likely America ends up without being a meaningful democracy by the end of this? I am skeptical the stated goal is efficiency it’s loyalty to MAGA. Imagine how extreme they will get if you can never vote them out.
As ever, the problem is compounded by the chunk of population who enable it, and the typically larger chunk of population who are unable or unwilling to recognize clear and present danger.
The first part is true, the second is not. Yes, it's run by the ultra wealthy. But the people wanted this. The election wasn't in debate, and this wasn't a case of a popular vote/electoral college split. Also, for all of Trump's faults, hidden agendas really aren't one of them. People know exactly who he is, he said pretty much exactly what he would do, and a majority voted for this.
I think that's why so many "on the left" are resigned. Y'all voted for this shit, so knock yourself out. We may be looking at some massive cases of "But I never thought the leopard would eat MY face!" in the future, but at this point IDGAF, people voted for this.
The Dems are part of the path that lead us to this moment and aren't doing much of anything to reverse things. To me, it felt at the time like I was either making my last fair vote now, or they kick the can another 4 years with a do-nothing presidency where inequality keeps getting worse, and we lose to fascists next time.
There isn't a real opposition big enough and popular enough to oppose this , and tbh I doubt one can be built in time
If no one considering themselves part of "the left" would've gone out and voted for HRC and the dems got sent home with 40% of the vote back then, the path may have changed. They voted for her, and for Biden, meaning the path never changed. There were zero punishments for the DNC's despicable behaviour.
I have a lot of sympathy for those who did the opposite and did not vote for these candidates. You did the right thing.
I’m on the left and I’m not resigned to this. I still have some fight left in me.
He won the popular vote though, unless I'm misunderstanding your point.
> He also spent the bulk of his campaign — aided by the press — distancing himself from project 2025.
What specific media companies did this?
I heard nothing but negative things about Trump and constant pointing out ties to project 2025 by all major news networks, cable and textual.
Except maybe Fox, but I don't watch it nor know anyone that does. (Well, not that many people I know even watch or read mainstream news in the first place anymore...)
I think the distinction here is that only about 1/2 the population even voted.
It’s particularly suspect with Trump, because of his strength among infrequent voters. https://abcnews.go.com/538/vote-back-trump/story?id=10909062...
“But among respondents who were old enough to vote but voted in none of those three elections, Trump crushed Biden 44 percent to 26 percent.”
If you want talk about people who didn't vote and how they would vote, young people (over 18 but under 30) are less likely to vote and participate in polling services like KnowledgePanel. But they didn't vote so whatever.
This is a good question. Aside from the most popular cable news network for the past 20+ years in a row[1] that’s considered trusted by 40% of Americans[2], where did we hear that stuff?
1
https://www.forbes.com/sites/markjoyella/2024/01/30/fox-news...
2
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/04/08/five-fact...
People wanted this because news and social media have told them to want – both which are functionally mouth-pieces of the ultra-wealthy. News has been consolidating into fewer hands for decades; it’s only getting worse, and their owners more emboldened. The popular social media sites, when not owned and manipulated directly by their owning oligarchs, are subject to a massive amount of astroturfing bankrolled by other ultra-wealthy folks. The wealthy chose Trump, and so it is.
We aren’t completely bystanders, but the cards are unimaginably stacked against us. We need to break up massive media companies, get rid of manipulative algorithms, and fight tooth and nail to get money out of politics – as much as we can.
> are subject to a massive amount of astroturfing ... The wealthy chose Trump, and so it is
People refuse to believe this can happen to them. Just as people do not believe they can be influenced by TikTok algos or advertising. They would know if it were happening to them; doesn't matter if they are left right east west up down or sideways, they are special snowflakes and it's those "others" that are the sheep that fall for it.
I did a stint in door-to-door sales (during a period of burn-out); as much as I didn't want to believe the shifty sales consultant that would come in and give sales training clinics, it's the people that absolutely know for sure they are not buying that were the ones I liked best--they won't be "tricked" or persuaded. No tricks needed, my personal ethics would not allow it even though there were "tips & suggestions" other sales people gave out; those that claim to be unsellable were almost always the sales I got the most commission from.
So you either believe that people have agency and actually decide for themselves, or that they are puppets and democracy is a sham.
> So you either believe that people have agency and actually decide for themselves, or that they are puppets and democracy is a sham.
Do you always think in such binary terms? Life is nuanced, there very few absolute binaries, but as I originally pointed out, those that hold on to that "either or" absolute type of thinking were my easiest, most profitable sales.
Like, you can say his policies are bad and you don’t like them for whatever reason. But the “false consciousness” argument applies to Trump the least of any president in my lifetime. He won spending less money both times, with the uniform hostility of big, centralized media. Trump’s big thing this campaign was in person rallies and podcasts.
I don’t watch mainstream media. I listen to some podcasts twice a week driving to work, and follow some people on X. Nothing Trump has done came as any surprise at all to me.
honestly its shocking that any of this is a surprise. dude was President once, and was consistently making attempts at this before, only to be hamstrung by Congress.
his entire 2nd run was pretty blunt about ties to Project 2025 and their aims. Even Drudge and Fox News covered this stuff.
Obviously there’s a lot of overlap between what Trump campaigned on and Project 2025. But Trump hasn’t issued any EOs banning abortion or similar issues that were in Project 2025 but not his own platform.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-i-have-nothing-t...
> Former President Donald Trump denied any connection to Project 2025, the handbook for a new conservative government written by the Heritage Foundation and several right-wing think tanks, in his Sept. 10 debate with Vice President Kamala Harris.
> “I have nothing to do with Project 2025,” Trump said in the ABC News Presidential Debate. “I haven’t read it. I don’t want to read it purposely. I’m not going to read it.”
Then they hired/appointed its people and implemented their policies.
Also, much of the energy behind Trump and MAGA is rejecting the dominant conservative think tank culture that's existed since the Reagan administration. This is seen by them as only fighting for the interests of large corporations - notably including completely selling out American workers in favor of immigration and offshoring - while losing every cultural battle in the last few decades from being too conciliatory to the liberal establishment that dominates the cities where these think tanks are based.
Many of these think tanks (including the Heritage Foundation, which is why Project 2025 takes the tone that it does) are in the process of being replaced by younger right-wingers more aligned by MAGA - they often reject the label of "conservative" as denoting a failed movement, preferring "dissident right" or similar terms. They want a counterrevolution - "what is there left to conserve", they say. But until their takeover is complete (which will probably happen in Trump's term, and will definitely be complete if Republicans win in 2028), it's understandable why younger Republicans would reject any explicit association with the old conservative think tanks.
The “Project 2025” thing was an effort to pin him to Heritage Foundation policies on abortion. He correctly pointed out that Heritage didn’t speak for him. You can’t say that Biden’s platform is the same as Sunrise’s platform just because they agree on some things.
“I think that four years is OK,” Obama said. “Take on some water, but we can kind of bail fast enough to be OK. Eight years would be a problem. I would be concerned about a sustained period in which some of these norms have broken down and started to corrode.”
We're already far beyond some norms breaking down...
Sadly I can't find a great source for that quote. just found it on scmp and jp. weird. I swear I have this memory of that being in politico or nytimes at the time. iirc was from an 'otr' towards the end of his term.
https://www.benzinga.com/government/22/10/29111070/obamas-ta...
That's too high of a chance, IMHO.
The Democrats in Congress? Massive public demonstration?
It feels all but inevitable to me
https://www.sos.ca.gov/administration/news-releases-and-advi...
Last time a state tried to leave there were words though. I doubt this will go smoothly
"""
“People think if you’re a secessionist, you’re crazy,” Ruiz Evans said on Saturday. “I hate Donald Trump,” he added. “I am full-blooded Mexican. The day he went on TV and said all Mexicans are rapists, I said, ‘He can go f** himself.’ “
He added: “When I see Trump pick on women, on LGBTQ people … my family left Texas for California to escape that. And when I look at Trump, it reminds me of all the horror stories my mom and my grandma told me from [the time] before they left.”
"""
Sign me up.
(original below)
I am absolutely in favor of an independent California, but in the past at least the backing for this has had ties to Putin (which makes sense, I suppose, it would cripple the US)
If it hypothetically exits to prevent other states from making it more like them and less like itself, that would presumably accelerate.
Did you budget for a DMZ or a Berlin wall to keep newly minted California citizens in? Especially those that pay all the taxes, like e.g. myself (I bailed in 2015)
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/how-...
But if we can hold out for 2 years (big if) there's a very strong chance we'll retake the house.
And if things continue down this path (i think it will get worse) we could maybe take back the senate. but the map is very hard.
That would give power to fight back.
If we get a once in a generation swing of seats we could think about getting rid of the filibuster / few remaining norms. Then we could rebalance judicial. But that's a big risk if not sure the power will endure beyond a handful of cycles.
a big swing requires the dems to seem credibly like a real opposition, for people to want an opposition, and for that election result to be untampered.
given how little they've done to stop this so far and how little they're promising to do now, and how shaky the foundations for the elections are in the first place ..
idk, it seems unlikely
Trump is itching to trigger provisions of the Insurrection Act as far ahead of the mid-term elections as possible. Public demonstrations by anyone associated with the left will achieve nothing right now given the composition of Congress. The best bet is to stand down, and stand by. The ground will probably be fertile for local organizing though.
Barring that, the American people in 2 years, assuming a politicized FBI run by Kash Patel doesn't intervene in particular elections.
I don't understand why the people behind January 6 would then go on to allow free and fair elections and politely hand back power when they lose.
This narrative is pure bs.
If you mean something other than “democracy” then say it.
What general point are you trying to make? That there is no democratic process in the USA? Because we have federal and state level democratic processes.
why would you expect future elections to be free and fair?