Why I believe America will soon lose its democracy.

[F1fan]

It's the threat of democratic centralism more than any individual politician that has me concerned.

I've never heard of Democratic centralism. What does this mean, and what makes it a threat to America?

Trump is gone and I doubt he will be back in office in spite of the rhetoric of a one man takeover.

Trump is giving speeches and very active in politics all over the USA, namely in endorsing candidates. He is still drawing people, and having some success in swaying voters, so you are incorrect, he is still very present.

Whether he will run for another term is unknown. I suspect he will not want to lose again and will be careful not to have that embarrassment again.

 

[Wildswanderer]

I am fully aware of that.

You need to be consistent. If you are going to claim that the Russian collusion was nonsense, then since there is even less evidence for Hunter cheating you have to deny that too. After all Hunter never openly said that he would cheat given a chance.

How media covered up the Hunter Biden story — until after the election

"Tech companies, spurred on by these censorious journalists, shut down the account of one of America’s most-read newspapers to inhibit users from reading the story. It was completely unprecedented."

 

[Wildswanderer]

Are you trying to prove my point, then?

If you think that you are convincing, you are just setting yourself up for a very rude awakening at some future time.

Prove what point? That you are wrong?

 

[Wildswanderer]

He thinks right wing disinformation is news. And as far as the woman that accused Biden of sexual assault, that went nowhere. Plus it's hypocritical because Trump himself has 26 accusations of sexual assault, and is known to to have paid to have sex with porn stars while cheating on his wife. So, double standard to the extreme.

So it's ok to report dirt on one political figure and refuse to print dirt on the other? That doesn't sound like Fair journalism.

 

[Subduction Zone]

How media covered up the Hunter Biden story — until after the election

"Tech companies, spurred on by these censorious journalists, shut down the account of one of America’s most-read newspapers to inhibit users from reading the story. It was completely unprecedented."

The New York Post! I guess that the Hunter Biden story is still "being covered up". I heard about it before the election. And after the election. It is a huge nothing burger.

You are being inconsistent. There was more evidence for Trump's Russian collusion than there is against Hunter Biden.

 

[KW]

I've said this in many threads, that my observations tell me that the Great American Experiment with democracy is, in the past few years and continuing for the next few, failing -- and that democracy is likely to soon be "in name only," and eventually disappear. But let me tell you why I think this is true. And it really is the simplest reason of all:

When a nation (or a very significant proportion of it) becomes convinced that they can't trust their own elections -- as the Trump "Big Lie" seems to have done for a huge number of people -- that when it doesn't go their way it can only be because it was "stolen" from them, well, what is left except violence to decide who gets to rule?

You're almost there, America. How are you going to find your way back to a real democracy, "a Republic, if you can keep it?"

Will you support Republican efforts to make elections more secure?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Suppose that what is said about the laptop is true: that Hunter arranged a meeting between his dad and a Ukrainian energy executive. Suppose that later dad put pressure to stop an investigation into his son. Suppose that is true.

How does that remotely compare to Trump trying to pressure election officials into changing the results of the election? How does that remotely compare to the blatant nepotism of Trump putting his own family into positions of executive power? How does that remotely compare to cutting off aid to Ukraine when it was under threat by Russia because Trump wanted the Hunter case prosecuted?

And, let's not forget that the claimed meeting between daddy Biden and the executive actually did not take place.

this 'scandal' is a complete non-issue.

Lol, so it's ok to suppress certain stories and not others? I don't think you're concerned about a free democracy at all...

 

[Wildswanderer]

The New York Post! I guess that the Hunter Biden story is still "being covered up". I heard about it before the election. And after the election. It is a huge nothing burger.

You are being inconsistent. There was more evidence for Trump's Russian collusion than there is against Hunter Biden.

So what you are saying is that it's okay to report anything suspicious about Trump but nothing about Biden in order to win the election?

 

[KW]

I've said this in many threads, that my observations tell me that the Great American Experiment with democracy is, in the past few years and continuing for the next few, failing -- and that democracy is likely to soon be "in name only," and eventually disappear. But let me tell you why I think this is true. And it really is the simplest reason of all:

When a nation (or a very significant proportion of it) becomes convinced that they can't trust their own elections -- as the Trump "Big Lie" seems to have done for a huge number of people -- that when it doesn't go their way it can only be because it was "stolen" from them, well, what is left except violence to decide who gets to rule?

You're almost there, America. How are you going to find your way back to a real democracy, "a Republic, if you can keep it?"

Why would Americans think elections are rigged?

 

[Polymath257]

So it's ok to report dirt on one political figure and refuse to print dirt on the other? That doesn't sound like Fair journalism.

Not all dirt is the same, A small speck on the ear is not as relevant as a mud bath covering the whole body.

Not all 'scandals' are worthy of publication. Even *if* the whole Hunter Biden thing was correct, the impact would be small. And there were serious questions whether the story was accurate. For that matter, there still are.

On the other hand, it is hard to deny that Trump is guilty of nepotism. it is hard to deny that he lies as a matter of course. It is hard to deny that he made up the story of election fraud and ignored all demonstrations that he was wrong. It is hard to deny that his lies lead directly to the January 6 riot and takeover of the Capitol and that Trump was encouraging his followers to overthrow the sitting Congress and deny it the ability to act.

Any single one of the stories about Trump should be enough to disqualify him from holding any public office ever again. In contrast, even if the claims against Biden are true (and they are most likely not), they would be a rather insignificant blip.

 

[GardenLady]

So what you are saying is that it's okay to report anything suspicious about Trump but nothing about Biden in order to win the election?

Again... Trump was actually in office. Hunter Biden was/is not. In addition, the whole laptop thing is lacking in pesky little things like chain of evidence.

But if you want to bring in family members who aren't in office.... let's talk about Ginni Thomas advocating the overthrow of an election.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So what you are saying is that it's okay to report anything suspicious about Trump but nothing about Biden in order to win the election?

The collusion accusations came out after the election.

Try again.

 

[F1fan]

So it's ok to report dirt on one political figure and refuse to print dirt on the other? That doesn't sound like Fair journalism.

Not all dirt is the same. And you posted a link to the NY Post, which has a sketchy journalistic ethic, so we take it with a grain of salt.

You have admitted you believe Trump's election fraud claims even though many Trump insiders including White House lawyers and Barr have said there is no evidence of fraud. So you are ignoring the reporting and video testimonies of these lawyers who reveal Trump's corruption. So what difference does it make to you whether there's reputable media reporting facts about the dirt on Trump if you reject it?

The testimonies of election officials, most Republican, are revealing a growing conspiracy against the American people in 2020, and into 2021. Trump's election campaign orchestrated a scheme to create fake electors in seven swing states. New testimonies in recent days report that this was an effort to disrupt the counting of electoral votes on Jan 6, where there would be fake electors from seven states that would vote for Trump, and would at least cause confusion.

WI senator Ron Johnson has admitted his staff was involved in delivering documents of fake electors from WI and MI, but this was dashed because someone on Pence's staff knew it was illegal.

Texts between aides reveal role Sen. Ron Johnson played in pushing 'fake' Trump electors - CNNPolitics

How about that dirt? Any comment about this and what it means to democracy?

This dirt is a deliberate set of crimes by many individuals with the intent to sabotage the election results. This is a conspiracy of unethical and criminal Republicans to help keep Trump in power. Is that democracy to your mind? The democracy was witnessed in the many ethical and honorable Republicans and Democrats who followed their oaths. But as we are seeing the MAGA Republicans are working to sabotage election results, as we saw reported in New Mexico last week.

Is there dirt on Biden and Democrats that rise to this level of corruption and fraud against the people of the United States? Not a shred of evidence. You are obsessed with the Hunter laptop, but that story is rampant with claims and a lack of facts, and frankly has little impact on our lives even if it was true. You are all whipped up about a bush on fire and ignoring a forest on fire as if it is less severe.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Will you support Republican efforts to make elections more secure?

Sorry, can't. I'm Canadian.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why would Americans think elections are rigged?

View attachment 63858

An unsourced image. Well that's convincing

Oh look! It is Trump at a church killing! I guess there goes the Christian vote

One unsourced image deserves another.

 

[F1fan]

Will you support Republican efforts to make elections more secure?

How were elections NOT secure before, and what are Republicans doing to make them MORE secure?

Use facts, not the many claims of fraud in your reply.

 

[Polymath257]

Lol, so it's ok to suppress certain stories and not others? I don't think you're concerned about a free democracy at all...

Not suppression. Simply saying that some stories are not worthy of publication because they are either irrelevant or insignificant or unsubstantiated.

Do you think it is appropriate for Fox News to suppress the story about the Jan 6 committee? Or about his lies concerning voter fraud?

 

[Wildswanderer]

"fact"?

So far you have only bare claims.

It was reported in a news story in a major News source and the social media and MSM bragged about how the they deliberately influenced the election

You have admitted you believe Trump's election fraud claims

No, I didn't. Try to pay attention.

 

[Subduction Zone]

How were elections NOT secure before, and what are Republicans doing to make them MORE secure?

Use facts, not the many claims of fraud in your reply.

They are taking unprecedented steps since the time of Jim Crow to keep the "wrong people" from voting. That is guaranteed to make elections much more secure . . . for Republicans.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It was reported in a news story in a major News source and the social media and MSM bragged about how the they deliberately influenced the election

No, I didn't. Try to pay attention.

Hmm, when and where did MSM, I never heard of that network, brag about deliberately influencing the election.