Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Skoo

Are we already living in a dictatorship?

Recommended Posts

A few years ago this would've sounded insane, today not so much. Some of you may have seen Bill Maher's closing remarks on Friday, they were chilling to say the least.

Basically what he said is that when you switch over to a dictatorship, it still has the appearance of a democracy. Showed pictures of Russia and North Korea, how they still technically had a "parliament" but obviously they're just for show.

I realize some people here indeed still think this is a crazy thought. But how far have we already gone?

The checks and balances of our 3 branches no longer exist. The President is impeached and witnesses aren't even allowed at the "trial".

The President is instructing the DOJ to do his bidding, whether it's sending Guiliani to dig up dirt on Biden or trying to lessen Roger Stone's sentence.

Say Trump loses the election but refuses to leave office, siting voting "irregularities".

What happens next? What do we have in place to stop him?

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Less snarky answer. We live in a country where the executive branch has way too much power. This didn't start on January 20 2017. It won't end on January 20 2021/2025. Framing the problem as living in a dictatorship is not helpful. What we need is sustained pressure by the citizens on their Senators and Representatives to re-assert legislative power. We need a new Church Committee but bigger and bolder.

Edited by Murph
  • Like 6
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Max Power said:

We live in a propaganda state for sure.  

We always have.  Just more pronounced now with cable news and social media.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Skoo said:

A few years ago this would've sounded insane, today not so much. Some of you may have seen Bill Maher's closing remarks on Friday, they were chilling to say the least.

Basically what he said is that when you switch over to a dictatorship, it still has the appearance of a democracy. Showed pictures of Russia and North Korea, how they still technically had a "parliament" but obviously they're just for show.

I realize some people here indeed still think this is a crazy thought. But how far have we already gone?

The checks and balances of our 3 branches no longer exist. The President is impeached and witnesses aren't even allowed at the "trial".

The President is instructing the DOJ to do his bidding, whether it's sending Guiliani to dig up dirt on Biden or trying to lessen Roger Stone's sentence.

Say Trump loses the election but refuses to leave office, siting voting "irregularities".

What happens next? What do we have in place to stop him?

Maybe I am wrong on this, like I was in 2016 about Republicans being a stop to Trump's deplorable actions, but I really think Trump loses some of his base if he tries to do this.  Granted not all, which is a scary proposition, but enough where he wouldn't have much power.

Edited by toshiba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Summer Wheat said:

We always have.  Just more pronounced now with cable news and social media.

The quality has also dipped.  It is interesting to watch Facebook and Twitter try to control messaging too.  Sad really.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm gonna say no, but we're certainly closer to it than we've been in my lifetime, and seemingly get closer with each passing day.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump has the same power Obama did ... I think the POTUS has more power after GW years because of 9-11 fallout but no, Congress still has real power

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

Trump has the same power Obama did ... I think the POTUS has more power after GW years because of 9-11 fallout but no, Congress still has real power

How so?

With a GOP-controlled Senate, what power does Congress have?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were a dictatorship, there would have been no possibility of impeachment. The Separation of Powers remain alive and well as long as there is a divided, hyper partisan Congress.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Skoo said:

How so?

With a GOP-controlled Senate, what power does Congress have?

I don't know... the power of impeachment, perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Skoo said:

How so?

With a GOP-controlled Senate, what power does Congress have?

The GOP has the power 🤷🏻‍♂️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skoo said:

A few years ago this would've sounded insane, today not so much. Some of you may have seen Bill Maher's closing remarks on Friday, they were chilling to say the least.

Basically what he said is that when you switch over to a dictatorship, it still has the appearance of a democracy. Showed pictures of Russia and North Korea, how they still technically had a "parliament" but obviously they're just for show.

I realize some people here indeed still think this is a crazy thought. But how far have we already gone?

The checks and balances of our 3 branches no longer exist. The President is impeached and witnesses aren't even allowed at the "trial".

The President is instructing the DOJ to do his bidding, whether it's sending Guiliani to dig up dirt on Biden or trying to lessen Roger Stone's sentence.

Say Trump loses the election but refuses to leave office, siting voting "irregularities".

What happens next? What do we have in place to stop him?

I'll let ya know when we change the rules and Trump can run for his 3rd term.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dickey moe said:

If it were a dictatorship, there would have been no possibility of impeachment. The Separation of Powers remain alive and well as long as there is a divided, hyper partisan Congress.

there is no possibility of removal from office.  Impeachment without removal is toothless.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We may find out if a Democrat defeats Trump in a very close election. 

If that happens my guess is that Trump would declare there was fraud and claim he was the rightful winner.  Fox news would of course run with it and the GOP leaders would go along for the ride so as not to risk alienation in the party.  I think there is a good chance he would remain in power until the inevitable countless lawsuits are filed and decided by the courts which could take years

Edited by Godsbrother
  • Like 4
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, moleculo said:

there is no possibility of removal from office.  Impeachment without removal is toothless.

 

There is a possibility.  They just have to bring a real case.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the senate is controlled by the same party as the executive, and if the majority party of the senate is not willing to use checks and balances, there effectively are no checks and balances. 

An unchecked executive branch is a defacto dictator, so I would have to say we are in a dictatorship.

Now, that term is a bit loaded.  Dictatorship can cover a broad range of styles, from full oppression to benevolence.  When I argue we are in a dictatorship, I don't mean executive for lifetime, rip up the constitution, elections are shams, imprison political enemies and all of that - we aren't there.  But, we clearly have a president who can bend the law to his will, skirt traditional norms, punish political enemies, and push his agenda without bipartisan support.  It's a soft dictatorship.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Max Power said:

There is a possibility.  They just have to bring a real case.  

removal has never happened.  This case was as strong as any presidential impeachment case ever tried, and came up far short of 2/3. 

Within the confines of a 2 party system, and acknowledging the fealty of senators towards the party,  removal by means of impeachment is not possible.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Skoo said:

A few years ago this would've sounded insane, today not so much. Some of you may have seen Bill Maher's closing remarks on Friday, they were chilling to say the least.

Basically what he said is that when you switch over to a dictatorship, it still has the appearance of a democracy. Showed pictures of Russia and North Korea, how they still technically had a "parliament" but obviously they're just for show.

I realize some people here indeed still think this is a crazy thought. But how far have we already gone?

The checks and balances of our 3 branches no longer exist. The President is impeached and witnesses aren't even allowed at the "trial".

The President is instructing the DOJ to do his bidding, whether it's sending Guiliani to dig up dirt on Biden or trying to lessen Roger Stone's sentence.

Say Trump loses the election but refuses to leave office, siting voting "irregularities".

What happens next? What do we have in place to stop him?

re: bolded above - I don't think this happens.  I think when Trump loses, he will for sure question results.  He will be granted a recount.  If that is questioned further, it goes to the SC.  After they make their determination, it's over.  Jan 20, 2021 the new president is sworn in by CJ Roberts, and Trump is no longer president.  If he is still in the WH at that time, he will be arrested for trespassing.

The real problem, as I see it, is we have absolutely no means to prevent or detect election interference from outside countries, internal partisan manipulation, or the government itself.  What happens if Trump wins under voting "irregularities"?

Edited by moleculo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would have happened if the GOP held congress and dems the senate.   Then the GOP congress dismissed the whistle blower as a non-issue and never held an impeachment inquiry?  Would it have just gone away?

Edited by Summer Wheat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, moleculo said:

removal has never happened.  This case was as strong as any presidential impeachment case ever tried, and came up far short of 2/3. 

Within the confines of a 2 party system, and acknowledging the fealty of senators towards the party,  removal by means of impeachment is not possible.

I believe it still is possible.  There just has to be a case where 66% of American's think it warrants removal.  The system is working how it was set up.

A president shouldn't be removed for something that is a 50/50 judgement call.  

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Summer Wheat said:

What would have happened in the GOP held congress and dems the senate.   Then the GOP congress dismissed the whistle blower as a non-issue and never held an impeachment inquiry?  Would it have just gone away?

The whistleblower would have to go public himself and see how the public responds.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Senate is wholly undemocratic. It kind of made sense when the states were a looser collection of entities 200 years ago, but it does not really have much purpose now, also with the significant widening of differences in population between states now vs then. Abolish the senate, give their roles to the house, expand the house to 4000 people or something. Now we have a much better local representation in the government, without being held hostage by some small % of the population.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Max Power said:

The whistleblower would have to go public himself and see how the public responds.  

Even so congress has to initiate the process and if they said they listened to the tape and is not worth pursuing then what? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steve Tasker said:

I'm gonna say no, but we're certainly closer to it than we've been in my lifetime, and seemingly get closer with each passing day.

That’s what I was going to post. We are teetering and how this next election plays out will be very important.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Max Power said:

I believe it still is possible.  There just has to be a case where 66% of American's think it warrants removal.  The system is working how it was set up.

A president shouldn't be removed for something that is a 50/50 judgement call.  

This.  The founders wanted Removal to happen for something egregious and unquestionably removable.  Selling military secrets to China/Russia, for example. 

People rush to assert "If this isn't impeachable, then nothing is."  That would imply that there is NOTHING worse that Trump or any other President could ever do.  And that's ludicrous.  There are several levels of "worse" beyond what Trump did. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Max Power said:

I believe it still is possible.  There just has to be a case where 66% of American's think it warrants removal.  The system is working how it was set up.

A president shouldn't be removed for something that is a 50/50 judgement call.  

Are you suggesting removal by popular vote?  And after seeing how this went for the Vinmans, Yovanovich, Sondland and others, how do you think that's going to work out for the whistleblower?  Should people who come forward to report or testify to wrongdoing be subject to retribution because of a "judgment call" made along party lines?

We want to encourage people to come forward when they observe governmental misconduct.  What has happened in the aftermath of the Trump impeachment is much closer to a dictatorship than a democracy.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Max Power said:

I believe it still is possible.  There just has to be a case where 66% of American's think it warrants removal.  The system is working how it was set up.

A president shouldn't be removed for something that is a 50/50 judgement call.  

not even close.  A coalition of senators from Arkansas, Mississippi, Kansas, New Mexico, Nebraska, Idaho, West Virginia, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Maine, Montana, Rhode Island, Delaware, both Dakotas, Alaska, Vermont, and Wyoming would have 36 senators - enough to block impeachment.  The senators from these states represent 26M people - roughly 9% of the US population.

9% of the population has the ability to halt removal.  if 91% of the population instructs their senators to remove the president, and the 9% from the above states disagree, there is no removal.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2016 Election Strategy:  "If you don't agree with everything we say, and vote how you want us to vote, then you're racist/sexist/homophobic/xenophobic/etc.  And you hate poor people.

2020 Election Strategy:  "If you don't vote how we want you to vote, we're going to have a dictator.  And you're enabling it."

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Summer Wheat said:

Even so congress has to initiate the process and if they said they listened to the tape and is not worth pursuing then what? 

I'd assume it would be over at that point.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mookie said:
10 minutes ago, Max Power said:

I believe it still is possible.  There just has to be a case where 66% of American's think it warrants removal.  The system is working how it was set up.

A president shouldn't be removed for something that is a 50/50 judgement call.  

Are you suggesting removal by popular vote?  And after seeing how this went for the Vinmans, Yovanovich, Sondland and others, how do you think that's going to work out for the whistleblower?  Should people who come forward to report or testify to wrongdoing be subject to retribution because of a "judgment call" made along party lines?

We want to encourage people to come forward when they observe governmental misconduct.  What has happened in the aftermath of the Trump impeachment is much closer to a dictatorship than a democracy.  

I disagree with this.  The Senators are beholden to their constituents.  If enough people wanted removal, removal would have happened.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jm192 said:

This.  The founders wanted Removal to happen for something egregious and unquestionably removable.  Selling military secrets to China/Russia, for example. 

People rush to assert "If this isn't impeachable, then nothing is."  That would imply that there is NOTHING worse that Trump or any other President could ever do.  And that's ludicrous.  There are several levels of "worse" beyond what Trump did. 

The concerning part imo is that this gives Trump the go ahead to push the envelope more. He’s not going to get impeached and tried now so I don’t see any real limitations on what he can do now. If he retains the Presidency and Senate, he will likely get another SC nomination as well. There’s a chance he can totally consolidate the government. Small chance but a lot of pieces have been put in place. He’s put the loyalty test on the GOP and they have passed swimmingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Max Power said:

There is a possibility.  They just have to bring a real case.  

If Joe Biden steps away from his pursuit of the Democratic nomination and no investigation of Hunter is ever initiated, will you re-evaluate your conclusions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jm192 said:

2016 Election Strategy:  "If you don't agree with everything we say, and vote how you want us to vote, then you're racist/sexist/homophobic/xenophobic/etc.  And you hate poor people.

2020 Election Strategy:  "If you don't vote how we want you to vote, we're going to have a dictator.  And you're enabling it."

 

well, if we vote for a man with dictator tendencies, yeah...we will have a dictator.  And people who vote for him enable it.  It is what it is.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mookie said:

Are you suggesting removal by popular vote?  And after seeing how this went for the Vinmans, Yovanovich, Sondland and others, how do you think that's going to work out for the whistleblower?  Should people who come forward to report or testify to wrongdoing be subject to retribution because of a "judgment call" made along party lines?

We want to encourage people to come forward when they observe governmental misconduct.  What has happened in the aftermath of the Trump impeachment is much closer to a dictatorship than a democracy.  

I'm more saying that if 2/3 of population make it known to their senators that they support removal, I'd hope the Senate would strongly consider that when voting.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, toshiba said:

I disagree with this.  The Senators are beholden to their constituents.  If enough people wanted removal, removal would have happened.

Not necessarily. Some Congressmen vote based on party line, some as representatives of their district and some based on their own personal beliefs. It’s not 1 for 1. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ilov80s said:
5 minutes ago, toshiba said:

I disagree with this.  The Senators are beholden to their constituents.  If enough people wanted removal, removal would have happened.

Not necessarily. Some Congressmen vote based on party line, some as representatives of their district and some based on their own personal beliefs. It’s not 1 for 1. 

You just need enough people to support removal to get them to vote for it.  That might be 51%, 67% or 80%.  But there is a number that would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, toshiba said:

You just need enough people to support removal to get them to vote for it.  That might be 51%, 67% or 80%.  But there is a number that would work.

Sure there is some number I suppose. Senators are pretty free though to vote how they want. The incumbents in the Senate win re-election about 90% of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, moleculo said:

not even close.  A coalition of senators from Arkansas, Mississippi, Kansas, New Mexico, Nebraska, Idaho, West Virginia, Hawaii, New Hampshire, Maine, Montana, Rhode Island, Delaware, both Dakotas, Alaska, Vermont, and Wyoming would have 36 senators - enough to block impeachment.  The senators from these states represent 26M people - roughly 9% of the US population.

9% of the population has the ability to halt removal.  if 91% of the population instructs their senators to remove the president, and the 9% from the above states disagree, there is no removal.

You're making an extreme example there, but point taken.  It's not the perfect system, but it works.  Someone in Maine should have the same representation as someone in NY.  

The house is where population comes into play and I'm sure smaller states aren't thrilled with that.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Max Power said:

You're making an extreme example there, but point taken.  It's not the perfect system, but it works.  Someone in Maine should have the same representation as someone in NY.  

The house is where population comes into play and I'm sure smaller states aren't thrilled with that.  

Speaking of which, a bill calling for statehood for DC has passed committee and been sent to the House floor. All of us champions for the small states should be in favor of this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Someone in Maine should have the same representation as someone in NY.  

Strongly disagree.  All citizens should have an equal vote.  Today they don’t.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wherever you draw the line, no matter how close to it you think we are currently, things are WAY different now from how they were four years ago. Explicitly politicizing the DOJ is just one example among many that would have been unheard of four years ago.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we were reading about some of this stuff happening in any other country what would we think?

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Alex P Keaton said:

Strongly disagree.  All citizens should have an equal vote.  Today they don’t.  

So I'm clear...  This thread started about how we might already be living in dictatorship and we're already talking representation and possibly the electoral college.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Max Power said:

So I'm clear...  This thread started about how we might already be living in dictatorship and we're already talking representation and possibly the electoral college.

 

We're getting too far away from the Constitution!  So let's change something in the constitution!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Max Power said:

So I'm clear...  This thread started about how we might already be living in dictatorship and we're already talking representation and possibly the electoral college.

 

I just replied to your post.  Own the tangent.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.