Originally Posted by James Brown
Yep, I think this is a good point. I think it is admirable and appropriate when lefties acknowledge that there was no significant Russian collusion. I also think that those who still think the 2020 election was stolen are dupes.
Going beyond this example though, I have low regard for wing nuts in both parties and I do not think there are more nuts on the right than the left. Consider the current and absolutely pervasive story line, that Trump will end democracy, cancel all future elections and be an "existential threat" to the union. Every single one of the talking heads on the left, plus all of the politicians on the left up to and including Biden have spouted out one variation or another of this canard. "Existential threat" is without doubt the Democrat's main talking point this cycle.
I think the "existential threat" story line is hoqwash, and I don't think the pundits and politicians believe their own rhetoric at all. This makes "Existential threat" a big lie I suppose, but it is clearly opinion, and probably not intended to be believed literally, so I don't put it up there with collusion or stolen election lies. Either way, I think that those who truly fear Trump is an existential threat to democracy lack any understanding of how our government works and how robust the checks and balances inherent in the system are.
That said, I think Trump's actions, demeanor, personality, and ego are disqualifying for high office. Why do the D's insist on going the "existential threat" route rather than relying on Trump's glaring character flaws? Like the criminal prosecutions, this line of attack is ineffective at best and maybe has backfired. Of course it is too early to tell how Harris is going to approach these issues.
I'm both with you and not with you on this, James.
Consider Trump's 'you won't have to vote ever again' comments (I started a thread on this but it went nowhere) This is an example of saying the quiet part out loud and demonstrates that there are two phenomena in play: There is the list of changes the conservative side would like to happen, either soon or down the trail a few years as shown in Agenda 47, project 2025 and even the policies of the PNAC from a couple of decades ago and there is what they are actually going to have to settle for, again, either soon or further down the trail.
As you have said, there is a robustness to the American political system which will tone down or outright prevent the most radical ideas but, I fear, the protections built into the Constitution etc. are not
perfectly robust and some of the anti-democratic ideas will slip through..
To be brief, if the Republicans win in November, American democracy will still be mostly ok but it will be less robust than it is now.
Dave
