@spruce112358 saidAll good, and everyone knows it without question.
You keep saying this...
'Small d' democracy means We The People voting to decide what happens; or voting for representatives* who vote on what happens instead of having leaders decide what happens.
*(yes, a republic - a distinction without much of a difference)
'Big d' Democracy is much more than that. 'Big D' Democracy encompasses 'small d' democracy (We the P ...[text shortened]... fferent branches of government; and checks and balances so that no one group gains too much control.
So what is the issue that Trump-house keeps raving about, losing democracy? Nothing would change, as we have voting, and we have the enumerated powers, and we have the constitution etc. etc. etc.
The only literal thing I believe that he has said is that Trump will get rid of the constitution. So is that what he means by ‘losing democracy’,?, Of course, we, would be losing democracy, if Trump discarded the constitution.
I do wish TrumpHouse would write a simple explanation of what he means when he says that all the time.
It is somewhat difficult to read through his emotion when he gets going.
@spruce112358 saidGreat job, now do "fascism".
You keep saying this...
'Small d' democracy means We The People voting to decide what happens; or voting for representatives* who vote on what happens instead of having leaders decide what happens.
*(yes, a republic - a distinction without much of a difference)
'Big d' Democracy is much more than that. 'Big D' Democracy encompasses 'small d' democracy (We the P ...[text shortened]... fferent branches of government; and checks and balances so that no one group gains too much control.
255d
@averagejoe1 saidSo you do not understand the significance of a potential POTUS declaring that he’s going to scrap the constitution?
All good, and everyone knows it without question.
So what is the issue that Trump-house keeps raving about, losing democracy? Nothing would change, as we have voting, and we have the enumerated powers, and we have the constitution etc. etc. etc.
The only literal thing I believe that he has said is that Trump will get rid of the constitution. So is that what he ...[text shortened]... ays that all the time.
It is somewhat difficult to read through his emotion when he gets going.
Is you really this thick or are you merely this disingenuous?
@kevcvs57 saidYeah, the 'significance' would be a bit weighty if he did any such thing. Who are you, Chicken Little? The sky is fallling? TrumpHouse and you?
So you do not understand the significance of a potential POTUS declaring that he’s going to scrap the constitution?
Is you really this thick or are you merely this disingenuous?
Trump will not even imagine such a thing. It protects real Americans, which is his number one priority. Recall Biden actually SWORE to protect Americans ,and is instead protecting non-Americans. He himself is violating the Constitution, his oath, that you are referring to.
The state of confusion of you dependents is becoming a bit of a kerfuffle.
255d
@averagejoe1 saidDemocracy can be lost in a lot of ways. Gerrymandering is a big way. Happened to my district this year. If you have to have districts, they should be drawn more or less at random, with a nod in the direction of 'minimal circumference.' Corrupt judges are another way. The electoral college is yet another. Voting restrictions. Misusing government power by pressuring a foreign government to smear your opponent. So would directing the DOJ or FBI to investigate or jail an opponent on a spurious charge - although I don't think that has happened recently. I think DOJ/FBI has successfully resisted direction (so far). But promising that you WILL so direct DOJ in the future - that's problematic.
All good, and everyone knows it without question.
So what is the issue that Trump-house keeps raving about, losing democracy? Nothing would change, as we have voting, and we have the enumerated powers, and we have the constitution etc. etc. etc.
The only literal thing I believe that he has said is that Trump will get rid of the constitution. So is that what he ...[text shortened]... ays that all the time.
It is somewhat difficult to read through his emotion when he gets going.
And finally - pressuring government officials to rig the election by "finding" 11,780 votes or by "doing the right thing" by not certifying electors so that you can remain in office after having lost.
That last one - that's the biggee. That's actually treason. They've hung people for less.
@spruce112358 saidWhy don't you step up to the plate and admit to the weaponization of the DOJ and FBI by Biden and his administration? If you do not admit to that, then I can not admit to any of the other democracy problems that you list. An easy one is mob rule, which is what you mean when you suggest ending the Electoral College. Pure madness.
Democracy can be lost in a lot of ways. Gerrymandering is a big way. Happened to my district this year. If you have to have districts, they should be drawn more or less at random, with a nod in the direction of 'minimal circumference.' Corrupt judges are another way. The electoral college is yet another. Voting restrictions. Misusing government power by pressuring a fore ...[text shortened]... g lost.
That last one - that's the biggee. That's actually treason. They've hung people for less.
So........weaponization?
@spruce112358 saidOf course not, heh. Oh brother.
- although I don't think that has happened recently
255d
@Sleepyguy
Fascism??? We live under a regime of bureaucratic rule Forcing people to buy EVs. Mocking us. We don't need to be told what we need to buy. Stoves, light bulbs, dishwashers.
Do you know that buying elec vehicles is consumer driven, and free mkt driven,... the administrationn does not understand this. Telling us what we can drive, what we can cook on. It is the work of congress to make laws, not the govt. Brushing off the squatter problem and the border problem are violations of democracy
255d
@averagejoe1 saidMob rule? No. We have plenty of checks and balances against that. What happened is the size of the House was capped in 1929 at 435 members. That meant the EC began to get more unrepresentative from that moment on as state populations grew at different rates. The EC should essentially mirror the popular vote, not go against it, which it would if we had expanded the House right along.
Why don't you step up to the plate and admit to the weaponization of the DOJ and FBI by Biden and his administration? If you do not admit to that, then I can not admit to any of the other democracy problems that you list. An easy one is mob rule, which is what you mean when you suggest ending the Electoral College. Pure madness.
So........weaponization?
Biden has not said one thing to either the DOJ or the FBI. He ignores them completely - as a President should.
255d
@sleepyguy saidI can’t believe Spruce said that. DOJ and FBI have not done bad things recently. Silly me, isn’t Now (more than recently) when they have weaponized themselves?!??
Of course not, heh. Oh brother.
255d
@AverageJoe1
Prove it assshole. Garland wrote a letter to Biden when he was picked as AG, he said he will be independent and don't EVEN try to interfere and Biden stuck with that.
You are desperate, very clear with the first felony case against a former POTUS in US history, but of course that also means nothing to you ultrarightwingnuts.
Now it is the COURTS who are corrupt, your fascist orange anti Christ could NEVER commit crimes since he is an honorable man.
Right? That IS your stance.
255d
@averagejoe1 saidNow, remember boys - I never said the FBI was NEVER weaponized:
I can’t believe Spruce said that. DOJ and FBI have not done bad things recently. Silly me, isn’t Now (more than recently) when they have weaponized themselves?!??
"Five decades after his death, J. Edgar Hoover still haunts the FBI. His nearly 48-year reign as its director, from 1924 to 1972, has come to symbolize the dangers of a stealth domestic police-and-intelligence agency in an open society. Hoover is widely seen today as an autocrat who used secret surveillance and other illegal means to control politicians and infiltrate and disrupt domestic political groups in the service of his conservative worldview. No operation confirms this verdict more vividly than the FBI’s wide-ranging electronic surveillance of Martin Luther King Jr., which culminated in a threatening letter to King accompanied by tape recordings of romantic trysts—an effort designed to drive King from the civil-rights movement or induce him to commit suicide."
"The subsequent reforms of the bureau—which made it independent of political actors, more beholden to law, and more transparent—sought to remove Hoover’s taint and reclaim public confidence. Yet the FBI in the Donald Trump era ... has been denounced as politically biased often enough to fuel worry about a crisis of legitimacy. First came the head-snapping denunciations of the bureau by different halves of the country when its director, James Comey, announced his decisions not to recommend prosecution in the Hillary Clinton email imbroglio, then to reopen the investigation 11 days before the 2016 presidential election, and then to clear Clinton two days before the election. Sharply partisan reactions to the bureau’s investigations of Trump’s many law-skirting and norm-defying activities have followed." [Ed. Comey was in a no-win scenario there.]
"James Comey kept on his desk in the director’s office a copy of the one-page October 1963 memorandum from Hoover to Attorney General Kennedy seeking permission to conduct the initial electronic surveillance of King. The only reasons cited were King’s belief in Marxism and his possible connections to communist influences. Comey made the memo the centerpiece of a seminar for new FBI recruits about the bureau’s cruel campaign against King, and often spoke about it with colleagues. “By remembering and being open and truthful about our mistakes,” Comey explained in his first memoir, “we reduce the chance we will repeat them.”
"Comey’s FBI was a world away from Hoover’s. Reforms over the years have ensured that the FBI follows elaborate rules on investigations and electronic surveillance, and is subject to oversight by federal courts, executive-branch watchdogs, and congressional committees. The director’s term is limited to 10 years. And a powerful norm has been established that the FBI must maintain strict independence from the president, in appearance and reality, to preserve the bureau’s credibility when its investigations affect an administration’s interests."
"The FBI has never been in a tougher spot than in the Trump era. Many Democrats haven’t liked the FBI since at least 2016, when they concluded that the organization was trying to elect Trump, who, just as wrongly, believed that the bureau was out to stop his election. The next five years of Trump’s relentless, unparalleled FBI-bashing drove Republicans in our tribal era into an anti-FBI frenzy. Democrats support the bureau today, but that is unlikely to last should the FBI present evidence of convictable crimes by Hunter Biden.
"The FBI’s half-century effort since Hoover’s death to remove itself from politics was necessary and admirable. America needs a widely trusted, competent, and reliable federal law-enforcement and domestic-intelligence agency to keep us safe from ever-morphing threats at home and abroad. But as the FBI’s longest-serving director knew well, cultivating an apolitical ethos supplements, but can’t replace, having many friends in high places and controlling the secrecy system. The ghost of J. Edgar Hoover likely smiles at the irony that his beloved bureau has become too independent and too open to be trusted in hyper-partisan America."
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/12/j-edgar-hoover-fbi-influence/671900/
255d
1 edit
@spruce112358 saidSpruce says that there would not be mob rule if we got rid of the EC. It is in writing, you may want to print it out.
Mob rule? No. We have plenty of checks and balances against that. What happened is the size of the House was capped in 1929 at 435 members. That meant the EC began to get more unrepresentative from that moment on as state populations grew at different rates. The EC should essentially mirror the popular vote, not go against it, which it would if we had expanded the House ...[text shortened]... d one thing to either the DOJ or the FBI. He ignores them completely - as a President should.
He also says that Biden has not influenced in any way the weaponization of the DOJ and FBI. hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Time for you to leave, man. Didn't you say you were taking a leave of absence?
Some of you may remember this flake from previous years, never heard of him. Watch the drama as he repairs to his batcave.
255d
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidYou appear to have mood swings.
Spruce says that there would not be mob rule if we got rid of the EC. It is in writing, you may want to print it out.
He also says that Biden has not influenced in any way the weaponization of the DOJ and FBI. hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Time for you to leave, man. Didn't you say you were taking a leave of absence?
Some of you ...[text shortened]... r this flake from previous years, never heard of him. Watch the drama as he repairs to his batcave.
No, the EC was created a) to induce small states, to join the union, and b) to prevent The Sturdy But Gullible Electorate from ever electing an unqualified demagogue like Trump. a) Is no longer a concern and b) didn't work. So we might as well get rid of the EC - it serves no further purpose except to give small states more weight than they should have. EC was never about mob rule which involves a majority voting away the rights of a minority.
And no, Biden has not influenced the DOJ or FBI IN ANY WAY. None.
I can't leave yet. The timer isn't done.
