And that when you have somebody as powerful as a president who has no regard for the right thing, the law and the separation of powers are less effective than we might have thought at reining them in.” —
Isn't the verdict clear? There is only one outlet now for our democracy, an Article V convention.
Clearly DJT has shown our present system fatally flawed in it's ability to restrain executive power.
We need a different system, with a weaker executive, most likely a parliamentary one.
Haven't we already come close to the 34 state threshold for an Article V convention already?
In any event our constitution has already shown it's weaknesses. It was not designed for a sustained and determined assault by the elected President. It probably cannot be saved in it's present form.
Why not use the one internal capability the founders inserted in it for this eventually Article V?
I am growing suspicious of all the pundit constantly wailing about DJT. Clearly at this point saving the existing Constitution is a losing battle. I suspect the pundit has a vested interest in enlisting all our remaining patriotic sentiment in this losing battle, constantly moaning about the daily Constitutional outrages of DJT, but not finding in efficacious way to deal with the situation. And there clearly is none besides Article V, other than civil war.
Well. the point is that the issue is the virtue and engagement of the American people. I mean, Trump is making himself a dictator, and he still has support in the mid-40s in the polls, a (bare) majority in Congress that unswervingly supports him, a Supreme Court fascinated with expanded executive power, and so on. I am very open to the idea of reforming the Constitution and weakening the power of the executive. But we're a long way from achieving a public consensus for the need to do that.
I really appreciate this article, especially the section on how people will tolerate appalling corruption and unconscionable oppression towards others so long as they are doing well themselves. I have seen this in action with numerous “otherwise” upstanding people whom I would expect to be disgusted and repelled by Trump — people who would normally express their devotion to law and order and constitutional principles. But it seems this tolerance only extends to the borders of their ingroup, cuz even when they are fat and happy there’s zero tolerance on the MAGA right for Hunter’s laptop.
I’m thinking Right-Wing Authoritarianism must play into this picture somehow: the attraction and subservience to strongmen (even by Trump), the reverence for the police even when they abuse their power, the hostility and violence against those who stand in their favorite strongmen’s way (like the irrational loathing of Romney and Zelensky— and all normie conservatives).
I can’t forget how Trump praises murderous dictators for their atrocities — especially his praise for China’s massacre of students who were demonstrating for more freedom. He infamously stated: “China almost blew it. Then they showed strength…”. Which show of strength was clearly the important thing…
So my question is: are people who fit the profile of the Right Wing Authoritarian, which MAGAs fit like they emerged from a psych textbook, likely to turn against Trump when they start lining up for goods before they even know what is being sold at the end of the line, Soviet style…? Russians have long been able to deal with a great deal of economic hardship since that has long been the historical norm. It’s prosperity that’s always been fleeting. Americans have comparatively less experience with this.
Anyways, if 2 dolls for Christmas will launch a Trump backlash, sign me up.
Not likely in my opinion. It will always be someone else's fault, like those who wrote to Stalin, pleading for help because their local officials were oppressing them. Insufficiently loyal advisors. The (((Deep State))) sabatoging the economy to make him look bad.
The question is what they do without him, eventually. Does anyone else have the ability, opportunity, and lack of ethics to activate the parts of the brain he activates?
You are probably right. Maybe MAGA wont’t die until this generation dies off.
Well, there’s no Stalin to appeal to but there’s Putin, who is a Stalin fanboy, and he too has the knack for stirring up reptilian impulses. As for a repulsive demagogue closer to home the anti-American Tucker Carlson has built up substantial influence amongst folks who fear the (((globalists))).
I can't say I agree with every word of this, and I think a couple points are hopelessly naive, but I think the point here is exactly right. While Ds are engaging in some introspection, what they're not reaching yet is that reelecting Trump is a moral failing more than a political failing. And because they don't see that, they are responding to Trump with political tools, in a morally unserious manner.
That's deadly. Even if it were to work, losing an election can't teach them a lesson, because they will never believe they lost an election. And the message it sends to the American public, that when we talk about threats to American democracy and the rule of law, we're actually just playing politics, both hides the threat and makes the politics harder anyway. You can't maintain a buddy-buddy backslapping attitude while giving speeches that he's going to end the American experiment and establish an autocracy.
I fully agree that, so long as we have a sizeable, serious MAGA faction, we can't really fix things. If Harris had won by running on anything other than the threat Trump represents, that wouldn't have been enough. What we need, the only way out of hthis, is a massive win with voters specifically showing up - and demanding elections and that their votes count - on the issue of getting our republic back. It's not enough to somehow throw him out of office because eggs went up again. That will give us a few years of unease detante at most.
It's going to take several election cycles to even make that possible, because step one is a clean sweep of local election officials on this very issue, then you need to use that to proceed up the chain, so that eventually you're holding free and fair elections. And that first step will be hard. We'll need to be in the streets demanding third parties to count the votes. They will proclaim victory before the votes are counted. But it's what we must do, or else we're done here.
I dunno. In my circles at least, Dems have been asking MAGAs for years how they can be such immoral hypocrites. Trump embodies exactly zero of what his largely Christian supporters claim to value and believe. The typical retort (1st term anyway) was “I'm not electing a pastor,” but my follow-up has always been, “Why not..? Aren’t you the Christian Nationalist crowd…?” They had 17 choices in 2016 and chose the most reprehensible sewer rat they could find. In 2024 they again had at least a few reasonable choices but were enthusiastic about the lawless, low information sewer rat.
I think it is Trump’s authoritarianism that is the draw. Truly, I do. Denouncing Trump’s authoritarianism and lawlessness is not likely to make them bat an eye. For them, this is a feature, not a bug. Lawlessness means Trump has no gods before him…
(I say more about this in my earlier post.)
Oh, I should perhaps add that as someone who is ideologically libertarian (but without a political party) I do regard the issue of liberty vs authoritarianism as a moral issue.
And that when you have somebody as powerful as a president who has no regard for the right thing, the law and the separation of powers are less effective than we might have thought at reining them in.” —
Isn't the verdict clear? There is only one outlet now for our democracy, an Article V convention.
Clearly DJT has shown our present system fatally flawed in it's ability to restrain executive power.
We need a different system, with a weaker executive, most likely a parliamentary one.
Haven't we already come close to the 34 state threshold for an Article V convention already?
In any event our constitution has already shown it's weaknesses. It was not designed for a sustained and determined assault by the elected President. It probably cannot be saved in it's present form.
Why not use the one internal capability the founders inserted in it for this eventually Article V?
I am growing suspicious of all the pundit constantly wailing about DJT. Clearly at this point saving the existing Constitution is a losing battle. I suspect the pundit has a vested interest in enlisting all our remaining patriotic sentiment in this losing battle, constantly moaning about the daily Constitutional outrages of DJT, but not finding in efficacious way to deal with the situation. And there clearly is none besides Article V, other than civil war.
Well. the point is that the issue is the virtue and engagement of the American people. I mean, Trump is making himself a dictator, and he still has support in the mid-40s in the polls, a (bare) majority in Congress that unswervingly supports him, a Supreme Court fascinated with expanded executive power, and so on. I am very open to the idea of reforming the Constitution and weakening the power of the executive. But we're a long way from achieving a public consensus for the need to do that.
How can one find moral leadership in a nation of moral midgets?
Look at the Old Testament prophets. Most of them were ignored and even abused untIl after their predicated calamities struck.
Our moral universe is defined by the antisocial media. What kind of morality can be found in corrupt and decadent society like ours?
I really appreciate this article, especially the section on how people will tolerate appalling corruption and unconscionable oppression towards others so long as they are doing well themselves. I have seen this in action with numerous “otherwise” upstanding people whom I would expect to be disgusted and repelled by Trump — people who would normally express their devotion to law and order and constitutional principles. But it seems this tolerance only extends to the borders of their ingroup, cuz even when they are fat and happy there’s zero tolerance on the MAGA right for Hunter’s laptop.
I’m thinking Right-Wing Authoritarianism must play into this picture somehow: the attraction and subservience to strongmen (even by Trump), the reverence for the police even when they abuse their power, the hostility and violence against those who stand in their favorite strongmen’s way (like the irrational loathing of Romney and Zelensky— and all normie conservatives).
I can’t forget how Trump praises murderous dictators for their atrocities — especially his praise for China’s massacre of students who were demonstrating for more freedom. He infamously stated: “China almost blew it. Then they showed strength…”. Which show of strength was clearly the important thing…
So my question is: are people who fit the profile of the Right Wing Authoritarian, which MAGAs fit like they emerged from a psych textbook, likely to turn against Trump when they start lining up for goods before they even know what is being sold at the end of the line, Soviet style…? Russians have long been able to deal with a great deal of economic hardship since that has long been the historical norm. It’s prosperity that’s always been fleeting. Americans have comparatively less experience with this.
Anyways, if 2 dolls for Christmas will launch a Trump backlash, sign me up.
Not likely in my opinion. It will always be someone else's fault, like those who wrote to Stalin, pleading for help because their local officials were oppressing them. Insufficiently loyal advisors. The (((Deep State))) sabatoging the economy to make him look bad.
The question is what they do without him, eventually. Does anyone else have the ability, opportunity, and lack of ethics to activate the parts of the brain he activates?
You are probably right. Maybe MAGA wont’t die until this generation dies off.
Well, there’s no Stalin to appeal to but there’s Putin, who is a Stalin fanboy, and he too has the knack for stirring up reptilian impulses. As for a repulsive demagogue closer to home the anti-American Tucker Carlson has built up substantial influence amongst folks who fear the (((globalists))).
Yea, Tucker is the best answer to my question. Hopefully he can't pull it off.
I can't say I agree with every word of this, and I think a couple points are hopelessly naive, but I think the point here is exactly right. While Ds are engaging in some introspection, what they're not reaching yet is that reelecting Trump is a moral failing more than a political failing. And because they don't see that, they are responding to Trump with political tools, in a morally unserious manner.
That's deadly. Even if it were to work, losing an election can't teach them a lesson, because they will never believe they lost an election. And the message it sends to the American public, that when we talk about threats to American democracy and the rule of law, we're actually just playing politics, both hides the threat and makes the politics harder anyway. You can't maintain a buddy-buddy backslapping attitude while giving speeches that he's going to end the American experiment and establish an autocracy.
I fully agree that, so long as we have a sizeable, serious MAGA faction, we can't really fix things. If Harris had won by running on anything other than the threat Trump represents, that wouldn't have been enough. What we need, the only way out of hthis, is a massive win with voters specifically showing up - and demanding elections and that their votes count - on the issue of getting our republic back. It's not enough to somehow throw him out of office because eggs went up again. That will give us a few years of unease detante at most.
It's going to take several election cycles to even make that possible, because step one is a clean sweep of local election officials on this very issue, then you need to use that to proceed up the chain, so that eventually you're holding free and fair elections. And that first step will be hard. We'll need to be in the streets demanding third parties to count the votes. They will proclaim victory before the votes are counted. But it's what we must do, or else we're done here.
I dunno. In my circles at least, Dems have been asking MAGAs for years how they can be such immoral hypocrites. Trump embodies exactly zero of what his largely Christian supporters claim to value and believe. The typical retort (1st term anyway) was “I'm not electing a pastor,” but my follow-up has always been, “Why not..? Aren’t you the Christian Nationalist crowd…?” They had 17 choices in 2016 and chose the most reprehensible sewer rat they could find. In 2024 they again had at least a few reasonable choices but were enthusiastic about the lawless, low information sewer rat.
I think it is Trump’s authoritarianism that is the draw. Truly, I do. Denouncing Trump’s authoritarianism and lawlessness is not likely to make them bat an eye. For them, this is a feature, not a bug. Lawlessness means Trump has no gods before him…
(I say more about this in my earlier post.)
Oh, I should perhaps add that as someone who is ideologically libertarian (but without a political party) I do regard the issue of liberty vs authoritarianism as a moral issue.