Washington Post Editorial About Trump

[Tiny]

This piece had me spell bound until I got through about 75% of it. Then I determined the writer was paranoid. The remedies he proposes for the Republican Party are laughable, as is his disappointment in Romney and Sasse for continuing to support the filibuster.

Regardless of whether you love or hate Trump, I think you'll find this entertaining and thought provoking. It's being called one of the best editorials of the year.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...tional-crisis/

An excerpt, to whet your appetite,

The stage is thus being set for chaos (after the 2024 election). Imagine weeks of competing mass protests across multiple states as lawmakers from both parties claim victory and charge the other with unconstitutional efforts to take power. Partisans on both sides are likely to be better armed and more willing to inflict harm than they were in 2020. Would governors call out the National Guard? Would President Biden nationalize the Guard and place it under his control, invoke the Insurrection Act, and send troops into Pennsylvania or Texas or Wisconsin to quell violent protests? Deploying federal power in the states would be decried as tyranny. Biden would find himself where other presidents have been — where Andrew Jackson was during the nullification crisis, or where Abraham Lincoln was after the South seceded — navigating without rules or precedents, making his own judgments about what constitutional powers he does and doesn’t have.

Today’s arguments over the filibuster will seem quaint in three years if the American political system enters a crisis for which the Constitution offers no remedy.

[bambino]

This excites you? Really? He actually thinks Biden is making important decisions? How asinine.

[offshoredrilling]

Originally Posted by bambino

This excites you? Really? He actually thinks Biden is making important decisions? How asinine.

but but but he is Sir

mmm or is it the handles making all the WRONG choices ????

[oeb11]

teh LSM does love its marxist revolutionary VIOLENT Terrorists Antifa and OBLM
they are official terrorist arms of teh marxist DPST criminal cabal.

[rexdutchman]

Puddening pop is just a vessel for whichever Marxist is trying to destroy this country

[GaGambler]

Originally Posted by Tiny

This piece had me spell bound until I got through about 75% of it. Then I determined the writer was paranoid. The remedies he proposes for the Republican Party are laughable, as is his disappointment in Romney and Sasse for continuing to support the filibuster.

Regardless of whether you love or hate Trump, I think you'll find this entertaining and thought provoking. It's being called one of the best editorials of the year.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...tional-crisis/

An excerpt, to whet your appetite,

The stage is thus being set for chaos (after the 2024 election). Imagine weeks of competing mass protests across multiple states as lawmakers from both parties claim victory and charge the other with unconstitutional efforts to take power. Partisans on both sides are likely to be better armed and more willing to inflict harm than they were in 2020. Would governors call out the National Guard? Would President Biden nationalize the Guard and place it under his control, invoke the Insurrection Act, and send troops into Pennsylvania or Texas or Wisconsin to quell violent protests? Deploying federal power in the states would be decried as tyranny. Biden would find himself where other presidents have been — where Andrew Jackson was during the nullification crisis, or where Abraham Lincoln was after the South seceded — navigating without rules or precedents, making his own judgments about what constitutional powers he does and doesn’t have.

Today’s arguments over the filibuster will seem quaint in three years if the American political system enters a crisis for which the Constitution offers no remedy.

You disappoint me Tiny, did it really take reading through 75% of this anti Trump drivel to conclude that the author was paranoid.

Personally I didn't even get half as far as you did before I got completely bored and quit reading. This "could" have been thought provoking if it wasn't written in such a partisan, "Trump is the root of all evil" manner, but that is the way it was written, so any good points the author intended to make got swept away in the flood of TDS so obvious on his part.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by GaGambler

You disappoint me Tiny, did it really take reading through 75% of this anti Trump drivel to conclude that the author was paranoid.

Personally I didn't even get half as far as you did before I got completely bored and quit reading. This "could" have been thought provoking if it wasn't written in such a partisan, "Trump is the root of all evil" manner, but that is the way it was written, so any good points the author intended to make got swept away in the flood of TDS so obvious on his part.

Kagan who wrote the piece is a neocon who served in the Reagan administration (good) and who advocated for George W Bush’s invasion of Iraq (bad.) Anyway just as he vastly overstated the risk of leaving Saddam Hussein in power, he’s overstating the risk of the US falling into another civil war. It still made for entertaining reading, for me anyway. What he fails to realize is that democratic institutions in the USA would never allow Trump or some other politician to get away with what he described. I don’t think Trump would push it that far either. When people started killing each other in the streets he’d back down.

Many Democrats and probably some Republicans like Liz Cheney would take this seriously.

[Yssup Rider]

Liz Cheney?

I wonder if the dyed-in-the-polyester Trumpists would vote for HER.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Liz Cheney?

I wonder if the dyed-in-the-polyester Trumpists would vote for HER.

No they would not. She'll probably get primaried. I'd be tempted to contribute to her campaign except that she's a Neocon and she'll probably drop out before the primaries. Also she's starting to come across as condescending to our brethren who believe in Trump. As Kagan said, condescension from elites caused the resentment that made Trump so popular.

[billthecat46]

Originally Posted by Tiny

The remedies he proposes for the Republican Party are laughable, as is his disappointment in Romney and Sasse for continuing to support the filibuster.
[/I]

I wouldn't call his proposal for the Republican party laughable, just unrealistic. You won't find one, much less 7 Republicans in the Senate who have any interest in protecting the right to vote. And the filibuster, it should be eliminated immediately (not that it's going to happen.

[billthecat46]

Originally Posted by Tiny

What he fails to realize is that democratic institutions in the USA would never allow Trump or some other politician to get away with what he described. I don’t think Trump would push it that far either. When people started killing each other in the streets he’d back down.

It's unclear to me what democratic institutions would never allow this. States like Georgia and Arizona that have Republican controlled legislatures but voted for Biden in 2020 decide that the 2024 vote for the Democratic presidential candidate is somehow 'tainted' and instead certify a slate of electors for the Republican candidate - what 'democratic institutions' will stop them?

[rexdutchman]

Liz is insane ,, just saying

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by billthecat46

I wouldn't call his proposal for the Republican party laughable, just unrealistic. You won't find one, much less 7 Republicans in the Senate who have any interest in protecting the right to vote. And the filibuster, it should be eliminated immediately (not that it's going to happen.

I disagree with your last two sentences. Eight Republican Senators objected to counting Biden's electoral votes on January 7. Most Republican Senators confirmed Biden. Or are you referring to the election laws being passed by the states, when you say Republicans aren't interested in protecting the right to vote? These laws for the foreseeable future will work to the benefit of Democrats. If you don't automatically get a ballot in the mail or you don't have 24 hour drop boxes, maybe you need some motivation to go vote. Because of Trump and the "Big Lie", Democrats are more fired up to vote than Republicans. Look what happened in the Georgia Senate runoffs. The election laws look benign to me -- and they do make it harder to stuff the ballot box.

As to the filibuster, if you can't get 60 Senators to agree on legislation, it shouldn't be passed. Reid should have never eliminated the filibuster for judicial appointments, McConnell should have never eliminated it for Supreme Court Justice nominations, and it should apply to budget bills IMHO.

Originally Posted by billthecat46

It's unclear to me what democratic institutions would never allow this. States like Georgia and Arizona that have Republican controlled legislatures but voted for Biden in 2020 decide that the 2024 vote for the Democratic presidential candidate is somehow 'tainted' and instead certify a slate of electors for the Republican candidate - what 'democratic institutions' will stop them?

Look what happened last year and this year. Every former Secretary of Defense signed an Editorial warning Trump not to use the military to stay in power. None of the numerous lawsuits brought by Giuliani et al resulted in any significant changes in the election results. Republican Secretaries of State and Republican controlled state legislatures didn't bend to Trump's will. Nor did Mike Pence.

As to your specific point, I'd imagine if a state legislature did certify a slate of electors contrary to the vote, the judicial system would strike that down. Trump appointed a lot of judges, including Supreme Court Justices, and that didn't help him one iota after the November election.

[billthecat46]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Or are you to the election laws being passed by the states

What I'm referring to is not a single Republican senator has shown any interest in supporting the John Lewis Voting Rights Act or the For the People Act. Bills that would protect the right to vote.

Originally Posted by Tiny

These laws for the foreseeable future will work to the benefit of Democrats.

That may or may not be true (most likely not true) and quite frankly is irrelevant. Making it more difficult to vote and for no good reason is bad.

Originally Posted by Tiny

If you don't automatically get a ballot in the mail or you don't have 24 hour drop boxes, maybe you need some motivation to go vote. ... and they do make it harder to stuff the ballot box.

I'm not sure why you think making it more difficult to vote would motivate people to be more likely to vote and I don't see how shortening the number of early voting days or limiting locations for dropping off one's ballot has any impact of 'stuffing the ballot box'. Something that has yet to be shown as a real problem.

Originally Posted by Tiny

As to the filibuster, if you can't get 60 Senators to agree on legislation

Nothing in the constitution requires legislation have a super majority to pass. And most definitely nothing that allows a minority in the senate to force the government into default.

Originally Posted by Tiny

Look what happened last year and this year.

I have and what I see is a group of incompetents came very close to overthrowing an election. The only thing that stopped them were a handful of Republican officials who are now having their power to stop a future coup being stripped from them by Republican legislatures. In four years it will be canon in the Republican party that the 2020 election was stolen. And in 2024 the strategy for overturning the election will be much more sophisticated than the clown show we saw for this election.
Since they believe that the 2020 election was stolen then it follows that they will feel any action is justified to steal the election in 2024. If the election is close then we can easily see the chaos suggested by Robert Kagan in his WaPo opinion piece. maybe the courts would intervene but how long would that take? We had an insurrection over the 2020 election what makes you think we wouldn't have another if the courts are the ones who decide that the Republican candidate lost?

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by rexdutchman

Liz is insane ,, just saying

Please explain.