No way. It’s full of Mexicans.
Maybe not after Trump gets done with it. Or as the more RW Texans might say: Liebensraum, Y’All! 
Are they going over the unscaleable wall?
I assume his wall has to have a gate somewhere. You might be able to toss the kids over the wall when you deport them, but the adults are too heavy.
No wonder the wall never worked.
All of you: If you want to start a thread about what Trumpers will do, go ahead. This is supposedly about whether Trump will attempt to declare Martial law and try to hold new elections.
He won’t. It would require too much planning and far too much follow-up. Imagine when he falls asleep during a briefing on the state of his coup.
Which topic are we discussing?
Will Trump and his followers protest and commit various crimes? Very likely.
Will Trump and his followers do anything that will have an actual effect on Trump’s term ending on schedule? Almost certainly not.
The big picture is that on January 21, all of these things will go back to being normal crimes and will be treated as such. And when a few of these people get arrested, most of the rest of them will crawl back under their rocks.
These people have always been out there. They were out there ten years ago and they will be out there ten years from now. The only reason they’re a particular problem now is because we have a president who supports them. And that’s a problem that’s going away in one month.
The mere fact that there has to be the word “almost” as a qualifier is earth shaking, and we can’t know the ramifications of it.
My point is that if Trump is that different from W, then the next Republican leader can be that different from Trump.
I think that side likes to be led by different things, but there are other aspects someone can pick up on that Trump ignored. Sometimes trends continue, sometimes they don’t.
I added that almost because I’m not going to declare certainty about any future event. But let me put it this way: I think it’s more likely that Chuck Schumer will be President on January 21 than Donald Trump will be.
Cite that they “invited”? One deputy said "We appreciate you guys, we really do.” One.
But yeah, the constant attacks on the police by the left makes the police defensive.
We on the left feel like we need to defend ourselves from the police. If an authoritarian body like the nation’s police forces see that as an attack, it makes it no more true.
Anybody that is just a random person showing up to a protest with a gun is making it more likely that someone will get shot, which should not make police officers “appreciative.”
I certainly concede that. That cop was out of line.
If you define “attack” as “you police should stop profiling black people and shooting them at rates far higher than expected” then sure.
Terrible people, those lefties, for not wanting police to shoot unarmed black men.
It’s been talked about how Trump is a populist authoritarian demagogue but that “someone with more skill” could really do damage. What would “someone more skilled” look like?
To follow up on this a little more, I think it would be someone with a military background but with some charisma and who is comfortable enough in front of a camera to the point where he seems to enjoy gladiatorial politics.
Someone with a military background would have the advantage of knowing the levers of power, but that’s not the only advantage or crucial skill they’d have. That kind of political leader would also know a thing or two about mass mobilization and organization of people: such a leader would cleanse the bureaucracy for one thing, but wouldn’t stop there. He’d use police power to spy on, harass, and ultimately drive academics and journalists into retreat. He wouldn’t have to jail or kill them; in fact he’d rather not because it’s messy, takes planning, and could cause a social and political backlash. Rather, he’d just make it clear that they’re not safe and that they and their families will never be in a complete state of personal security unless and until they shut up. Email accounts would get hacked. Dead fish would be left on their doorstep. Vans would be parked outside their apartment at night in plain sight of their window. Wanna call the police? Oh yeah, they are the police.
The populist demagogue needs the administrative and strategic skill that a military leader has; the military commander needs the charisma and political character to attract followers. Once those two ends meet, once a leader like that emerges from the right wing…good night.
I’d sooner believe the bad guy arises from the FBI, ICE, DEA, or some other part of DoJ than DoD.
In a country under assault by an expansionist military enemy somebody from DoD would be a natural. If the USA was located where the EU or Ukraine is, with Russia next door, I could easily see that being the boogieman the populist authoritarian exploits to foment enough fear in the populace to get them to back authoritarianism as “the only hope to save our country”.
With the current US situation, the RW boogieman is … Democrats and criminals and low-lifes and illegal immigrants and civil disorder from … generally non-white non-Christian non-middle-class folks. Who are not scary if you’re a DoD General. But if you’re some flavor of policeman, they’re what you’ve battled since you left the Academy. You know they’re an existential threat to the Republic. There’s a reason the Russian Ministry of Defense has always played second fiddle to the various ministries of police and internal security. They’re the specialists in controlling the population, which is exactly the kore competency of an authoritarian regime.
All of your points about being an Organization Man is spot-on. it won’t be a failed real estate devloper.
I absolutely agree that this hypothetical dictator could come from the federal agencies, and you make a great point about the current time being one in which the focus is increasingly inward or internal rather than outward facing, which naturally points to a “homeland” police agency. To that end, I suspect a super cop type - like a charismatic metropolitan sheriff - might fit that description as well.
You’re quite right, and in some regards, a law enforcement chief is more likely to be the kind of individual who is capable of marrying the administrative and political strands of the job together.
Vladimir Putin deconstructed the fledgling Russian liberal democracy as a national security military guy who became a local level administrator in St Petersburg. He then used his military know-how to scheme the municipal (or was it federal?) governments out of shit tonnes of money before working his way into becoming Yeltsin’s heir apparent. Putin then realized that prosecutors were onto him, and he has been at war with duty-bound civil servants ever since.
Are you familiar with one Benjamin Netanyahu? Because he’s been my Prime Minister for 13 years with no end in sight, and I’ve come to the reluctant conclusion that he’s very much a “smart Trump”. He’s just as corrupt, just as divisive and just as capable of manipulating resentments in certain sectors of the public. His cult of personality is just as steadfast and rabid, and he’s just as willing to do anything to stay in power. He’s not exactly like Trump - for one, he does actually seem to care about his country, albeit not as much as he cares about himself. But he’s also much more competent than Trump, much more polished and “Prime-Ministerial”, and a genius at working the political system to his advantage.
So: a member of a highly-respected political family, brother a dead national hero, military service as a elite special forces officer, Harvard, career diplomat, Ambassador to the UN, and from there vaulting right to the highest level of conservative politics. That’s the kind of guy you should look out for.
Excellent post and observations, Alessan, and you’re correct. Say what one will about his character and agenda, Bibi is a great example of an absolutely cunning, brilliant politician who could seize power. Maybe like an Orban or Duda, though I realize there are differences.