SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
The way to determine shams is to rely on independent processes, the facts that emerge from them, and how individuals participate in them.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Are we already living in a dictatorship? (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Skoo
- Start date
This has got to be the greatest dictatorship in world history. I mean who is not doing better than ever? If you are not, its time to look in the mirror to see the problem. Dictator Trump has been able to raise the USA to never before seen heights. Hopefully we can change the 22nd amendment and keep this greatness rolling.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Farmers... and actually quite a lot if people aren’t doing better than ever. People not invested in the market. People still struggling to afford healthcare.
All the bogus claims and hyperbole about the economy wont change that.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Well said. So then there is no doubt the House was a sham. I'm glad we're finally able to agree on something.SaintsInDome2006 said:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
BladeRunner
Footballguy
-OZ-
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
In some aspects yes. In others no...and not for all either. Also at the expense of increasing the deficit.
-OZ-
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
Im not the one who asked who is not doing netter and then said if you aren't its your own fault. I responded to that.
Last edited by a moderator:
JAA
Footballguy
roadkill1292
Footballguy
I'm pretty critical of the lack of attention Dems have been paying to election reform, too. And primaries in this country are indeed a terrible mess. But the only movements at getting substantive election reform lie in the Democratic Party these days so that's where those of us interested in better elections have to look. It's a pretty rare day when we can entice a conservative FBG into one of the discussions about making our elections better.jm192 said:
You may have missed it but we're not debating the EC much any more; even though a majority of voters are in favor of ending it, the reality is that 13 small states will always block the necessary constitutional amendment. So why discuss it? The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact has a better chance of passing (and surviving court challenges) than an amendment abolishing the EC. But there're still lots of other cool subjects to talk about, like approval voting and multi-member super districts. I don't know why those aren't of interest to our conservative posters.
jm192
Footballguy
I was responding to a post about how "Fair elections would favor Democrats, imagine that."
When the Democrats can't even abide by their own rules.
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
There's usually cocaine involved.....-OZ- said:
jonessed
Footballguy
Executive branch subpoenas will always bring executive privilege issues. This is not administration or party specific. These are constitutionally gray areas.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Well I disagree on the distinction that Trump has claimed executive immunity, for all matters, and for all personnel. That’s wholly new and not constitutionally defensible.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Though really my point was about the witnesses who *did comply, not the ones who did not. That sworn testimony can be relied upon.
jonessed
Footballguy
Then the courts will compel the administration to comply. Same as it ever was.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
My point further up was in response to what could or should be relied upon when evaluating different political claims. My point wasn't about the rightness of Trump's blocking evidence and witnesses, my point was in resting on the testimony that was gotten.
Skoo
Footballguy
I assume you're also really upset that Trump is doing the same thing within the federal government, trying to force out anyone they don't deem "loyal"?
RedmondLonghorn
Footballguy
So we're all in agreement now that people should be condemned for the crazy s##t they say on Twitter? It's no longer acceptable to simply turn our nose up and say, "I wish he wouldn't tweet so much"?
I'll make you a deal: When this guy wins the Democratic nomination for president, I will officially join the Never Judson resistance and work to elect his Republican opponent. In return, you promise to do the same if the Republicans ever nominate some Twitter crazy as their candidate (I know, what are the odds of that happening?)
Trump never raised executive privilege, as far as I know. He just said the proceedings were a sham, which is not a formally recognized privilege, at least traditionally.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
That's a little complicated for me to address in the middle of a work day but both are good and an improvement over first past the post. There's a couple of different ranked choice methods, too, all of which have their advantages.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
A short answer: Both have positive attributes. One advantage of approval voting is the simplicity of the ballot and of the counting. There is no strategic or tactical voting, you just vote for everyone that you think is worthy of filling the office.
I think approval voting works best in crowded fields like small town city races or major party primaries. RCV or instant runoff may be better for a single seat race with three candidates but I haven't thought this through yet.
Approval voting might also make it easier for third parties to grow in influence. There's no penalty or risk for voting for the third party candidate. Just do it if you think he or she is good enough.
Been thinking about this question some more. I think regarding them problem as being whether Trump has flipped the switch from "democracy" to "dictatorship" may be the wrong way to look at it. The bigger problem is that he's destroying institutions and norms (to be fair, he's part of a larger trend where this has been going on for awhile, but he has definitely accelerated it).
With the obligatory disclaimer that I'm not comparing any contemporary American to Hitler, one thing that always struck me when I studied the rise of the Third Reich was that the Nazis did not dismantle a functioning democracy. Instead, Weimar Germany had basically become ungovernable. The two biggest parties were the Nazis and the Communists, both committed to overthrowing the democratic system that was still nominally in place, but neither of whom could command a majority. Hindenberg kept appointing as chancellor "centrists" who commanded miniscule electoral support and who basically ruled by fiat. Meanwhile, public faith in institutions had been destroyed, first by the hyperinflation crisis of the mid-20s, then by the Great Depression a few years later. When Hitler finally did come to power, over the course of a few years he gradually swept away the few remaining democratic institutions and implemented a full dictatorship.
My point is not that we are in a dictatorship now, or even that we're in the equivalent of Weimar Germany. It's that every erosion of norms, and weakening of institutions, makes a future dictatorship more likely. As I said, I think that Trump is vastly accelerating that trend, and would do so even more in a second term, but even if you don't believe that, even if you support him, it's something you should worry about a future leader who you don't agree with taking advantage of.
With the obligatory disclaimer that I'm not comparing any contemporary American to Hitler, one thing that always struck me when I studied the rise of the Third Reich was that the Nazis did not dismantle a functioning democracy. Instead, Weimar Germany had basically become ungovernable. The two biggest parties were the Nazis and the Communists, both committed to overthrowing the democratic system that was still nominally in place, but neither of whom could command a majority. Hindenberg kept appointing as chancellor "centrists" who commanded miniscule electoral support and who basically ruled by fiat. Meanwhile, public faith in institutions had been destroyed, first by the hyperinflation crisis of the mid-20s, then by the Great Depression a few years later. When Hitler finally did come to power, over the course of a few years he gradually swept away the few remaining democratic institutions and implemented a full dictatorship.
My point is not that we are in a dictatorship now, or even that we're in the equivalent of Weimar Germany. It's that every erosion of norms, and weakening of institutions, makes a future dictatorship more likely. As I said, I think that Trump is vastly accelerating that trend, and would do so even more in a second term, but even if you don't believe that, even if you support him, it's something you should worry about a future leader who you don't agree with taking advantage of.
moleculo
Footballguy
here's an idea I've been kicking around: an anti-vote. As in, I don't care who wins, as long as it isn't __________. each anti-vote would cancel out an actual vote.
RedmondLonghorn
Footballguy
This is great analysis.
And the other thing that goes hand in hand with this is that many authoritarian leaders who could ultimately be described as dictators came to power, initially, in democratic elections that were at least ostensibly fair.
Without even thinking too hard, Putin, Chavez, and Erdogan all fit this model. Once they were elected, they didn't immediately roll tanks into the downtown of the capital and declare that they were leaders for life. They chipped away at norms and institutions, installed loyalists in key positions, and accumulated power (and ultimately full control) somewhat gradually.
rockaction
Footballguy
The centralization of information worries me. Data, big data, too much data for the more authoritarian among us to exploit.
One weird thing: The Executive almost seemed to function as its own shadow government by appointment. Once that government has been eliminated -- and it seems to be that it has -- what steps into its vacuum?
This is why the next election is so important. We need a moderate Democrat to come and and appoint people to head positions that are qualified and willing to work within an administration based in sensibility.
One weird thing: The Executive almost seemed to function as its own shadow government by appointment. Once that government has been eliminated -- and it seems to be that it has -- what steps into its vacuum?
This is why the next election is so important. We need a moderate Democrat to come and and appoint people to head positions that are qualified and willing to work within an administration based in sensibility.
RedmondLonghorn
Footballguy
Any non-authoritarian who respects the rule of law and democratic norms and institutions would do. No political litmus test necessary.
jonessed
Footballguy
He only did so officially with the full Mueller report. I don’t believe it’s actually used that often. Generally Presidents just delay and pull it out at the end if need be.
The House could have held the witnesses in contempt and gone to the courts. I suspect at some point along the way Trump would have claimed executive privilege. I doubt it would have held up in an impeachment, but I’m not really sure. Unfortunately, the House was in a bit of a hurry so we won’t know.
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
Dang it man, for the hundredth time, by the time it goes through the courts Trump might not even be POTUS. The whole point of this was election interference by asking Ukraine to smear Trump's most likely opponent that would defeat him. It didn't work out exactly as he (the royal he) wanted but all of the baseless accusations has knocked Biden out of contention.
sho nuff
Footballguy
4/7 apply? There are only 6...and you are claiming mods have been replaced with communists?
Im guessing it goes beyond what you are claiming as to what was happening.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
mcintyre1
Footballguy
JAA
Footballguy
I dont think we should get rid of EC. The reform I am looking for is removing corp money from politics and stopping of all gerrymandering
JAA
Footballguy
Wow - I feel so sorry for you. I'm imagining you hating so much, so many, when you live such a privileged and exceptional life.
JbizzleMan
Footballguy
Nugget
Footballguy
RedmondLonghorn
Footballguy
I mean...wow. This short post alone would produce multiple winners in a Conspiracy Theory/disinformation bingo game.Bozeman Bruiser said:
Similar threads
