Does the US really have no instruments in case a newly elected president immediatelly and openly exposes he's a nazi?
Does the US really have no instruments in case a newly elected president immediatelly and openly exposes he's a nazi?
You'd think a hegemony with a 100-years tradition of upkeeping democracy against major non-democratic players, would have some mechanism that would prevent itself from throwing down it's key ideology.
Is it really that the president is all that decides about the future of democracy itself? Is 53 out of 100 senate seats really enough to make country fall into authoritarian regime? Is the army really not constitutionally obliged to step in and save the day?
I'd never think that, of all places, American democracy would be the most volatile.
You're viewing a single thread.
The mechanism is the three branches of power providing checks and balances and voting. But when the people elect them to all three branches. It kinda defeats the purpose
Also Benjamin Franklin said that he believed constitution should torn up and redone every 30 years. We shouldn't even be using it 200 years later.
Are you ready for some tearing up and redoing of constitution now?
No, I'm ready for something else though are you?
I'm flattered, but I'm not in the mood right now. I'll be in my corner worrying about constitution redoings...
Sure, you'd end up with at least two countries because many states would just refuse to join the new republic.
Let's go crowd sourced, a la Iceland. That truly opened my eyes to the political possibilities in the Internet age... If only big corps didn't make all the decisions.
Do you really want to do that now knowing who would put an autograph there?
Exactly, that was my point.
I know about Jefferson and his 20 year automatic sunset phase for laws at all levels, except for Constitutions, charters, and other founding documents that can be amended. Hadn't heard that Franklin wanted to sunset the Constitution itself as well. Not sure that we would have lasted this long if Franklin had gotten his way there. I do think that Jefferson and Madison were on the right track with the federal, state, and local laws though. Tyranny of the dead and all that.
Trump has admitted he rigged the election
Trump has said that Elon "knows those computers better than anybody ... And we ended up winning Pennsylvania like in a landslide".
First of all, we know that to be false because we know Elon doesn't know shit about computers. But, aside from that, there are multiple possible interpretations of what he meant, anything from "Elon rigged the election" to "Elon ensured the integrity of the election".
My policy is "Don't believe anything Trump says about anything". I don't change that policy when he says something that I want to believe is true.
Wanna see a letter from several computer science PhDs to Kamala Harris presenting plausible evidence that MAGA hacked the voting machines?
https://freespeechforpeople.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/letter-to-vp-harris-111324.pdf
That's not what that letter says. It says that operatives may have gained access to the software used to count votes, and if that happened they may have been able to probe that software for weaknesses.
What it doesn't say is that there was a subsequent, second breach of the voting machines in which doctored software was then installed.
It's like someone gaining access to blueprints for a bank vault. Yes, that theoretically lowers the security of the vault, but it doesn't prove that a bank heist has taken place, just that a heist is more likely to be possible now.
Okay so what do you do when the mob gets the blueprints for the bank vault, and then a few weeks later the Don brags about all the money he stole?
The Don who lies constantly about everything? Who didn't even say "we stole the money" but more, "Elmo is good with bank stuff, and we have lots of money"? The same guy who wouldn't know how to read a blueprint, and would probably just post a picture of the blueprint on social media to generate controversy and traffic? The Don who, if he actually had broken into the bank, wouldn't be able to shut up about it, and would be bragging about it non-stop, probably by doing live-streams from within the bank vault?
You don't assume that he hit the bank. You follow your normal security procedures, and check that what you expect to see in the vault is what you actually see in the vault. Then you just ignore the blowhard.
But the people in charge didn't check. Harris was told to ask for a recount, and she didn't.
If the people responsible for security won't do their due diligence, drag is going to play it safe and assume they fucked up.
How do you know that the people in charge didn't check? Just because there wasn't a big announcement doesn't mean that there weren't sanity checks done on the process. It's likely that was done and that the results seemed to be legit, so there was no need to do more.
How do you know that the people in charge didn’t check?
Because the letter we both read says so:
Audits will be conducted in some of the most scrutinized states, but in key states they will not be conducted in a timely way that could reveal any concerns with the vote count. In addition, in most states the audits are insufficiently rigorous to ensure any potential errors in tabulation will be caught and corrected, and they cannot be considered a safeguard against the security breaches that have occurred.
Given these facts, the only guarantee for rigorous, effective audits of the vote in the swing states will be through candidate-requested statewide hand recounts.
There's a difference between an "audit" and a basic sanity check. You wouldn't do an audit unless there was strong evidence there is something worth auditing.
Where did you hear that?
This is insane... But also his discourse is so incoherent that one could argue he was being sarcastic or something.
Don’t join the felon’s defenders. We’re in this deep in part because people dismiss what they don’t want to believe from him as jokes.
The insurrectionist is telling us his crimes. Bragging about them even. He’s proud of them.