Stacy Abrams claimed her 2018 governor’s race was stolen.
Hilary Clinton spent 4 years calling Trump “an illegitimate president”.
Democracy’s grave has been dug and re-dug since our Nation was founded.
She acknowledged that she lost the election, but she claimed the loss (which was extremely close) occurred because voters that would have likely voted for her had been disenfranchised. She took the issue to court and lost. That’s absolutely different from candidates who refuse to admit they lost and claim it’s due to an implausible or even impossible conspiracy, and don’t actually try to defend it in court. For all of the lies on the right, once in court Trump’s lawyers admitted under oath that there was no fraud, and instead argued the legality of specific voting procedures. You’re comparing apples and oranges, This is a very weak gotcha.
Again, context matters. That was due to a belief that Russia interfered with the election process on Trump’s behalf, and they did. Not by manipulating voting, but by influencing voters through misinformation, trolling, and so on. And in the minds of some on the left, that made the election suspect. A number of them left the election was tainted which gave rise to that rhetoric.
But nobody was claiming that vote fraud occurred. That votes weren’t being counted, that the election system was manipulated. (Except Donald Trump who talked about illegal immigrants being bused in to vote.) Clinton gave a concession speech and acknowledged that Trump won the election. She just felt cheated because of voters being manipulated. Huge difference between that and feeling that votes were manipulated.
Again, apples and oranges. Your “both sides are the same” argument is woefully uninformed.
Whiners like Maher should get off their asses and go knock on doors during an election year or volunteer to be an election worker or something else positive. Instead he sits on his ass and bitches, and we’re supposed to believe him. . .why, again? Because he’s on the TeeVee! It makes those who listen to him no better than those who hang on Tucker Carlson’s every word.
I’m not downplaying the dangers of these intimidation tactics (let alone all the other real, urgent threats to democracy well described in this thread).
But…I am an elections worker in Wisconsin. We had been warned in our training for yesterday to prepare for official vote or voter challenges (and how to handle the procedures).
But none happened, in my district anyway.
One shouldn’t extrapolate from such a small sample, but maybe it suggests that some of these intimidators are too lazy to actually follow through. I’m reminded of a guy in one of those self-appointed armed US-Mexico border vigilantes a decade ago, who got bored and said “this is stupid, I’m going home.”
He wasn’t wrong.
True dat.
And as I understand it, were it not for a few very honest and courageous individuals, it could or would have worked. If the GOP better populates various positions of officialdom in their favour, then what happens?
Democracy is history is what happens.
This is why it is so, so important to hold those responsible to the highest standards of the law. The morons that participated and believed the lies also need their comeuppance. Being stupid, or ignorance of the law is not an excuse.
Just because you did not get your ‘way’ is not a reason or excuse to break the law.
The problem is that the Republicans may very well not do likewise. They no longer need to sell their candidates to the public, when they have taken over the controls of the election system and now can just declare the winners that they want to declare, regardless of how many votes they received.
And this is what I was driving at with my question upthread
[quote=“velomont, post:48, topic:974615”]If the GOP better populates various positions of officialdom in their favour, then what happens?
[/quote]
How close are we to that and will it be game over?
No, it is the fascist who claim that they will never allow another election.
And he’s not the only one by far.
I disagree with that.
It is well informed by the RW pundits who give the talking points out to be repeated mindlessly by their followers. I see people repeat these exact talking points, as verbatim as they can manage to remember, including the talking point about the Democrats being a hive mind.
I just always wonder if they believe that they will be rewarded for their loyalty, or if any of them have realized that they’ve been duped and will be discarded the moment they are no longer useful.
We’ll have to see how yesterday’s election results turn out, but it seems as though we have crossed the Rubicon. I think that democracy is essentially dead at a federal level, and that state and local are soon to follow.
I’d love to be wrong, but I see no evidence to the contrary at this time.
This is rather silly. How big do you think his audience on television is compared to the number of people he would reach by canvassing neighborhoods and knocking on doors? He’s far more effective on television than anyone pounding the pavement. And I’m not concerned about democracy because Mahr is. I’m concerned because I’ve watched the events unfolding these past five years.
Different audiences. There are a lot of people who he would have to knock on their door in order for them to hear what he has to say.
At what though? I’d argue that he’s turned off as many or more Democratic voters as he’s gained.
I’m not sure what the opposite to the canary in the coal mine metaphor is, but he is it. Only now noticing the poison gas the rest of us have been forced to breath for years.
I think it kind of depends on how you define democracy. We’re a lot closer to single-party rule, a-la Mexico for decades under the PRI.
The problem really is gerrymandering. By being allowed to draw boundaries to both concentrate or dilute voter blocs, they can basically ensure that they maintain control, regardless of what the demographics or the views of the population actually look like.
Everything else is secondary in my view. If we had more equitable district drawing rules, the parties would be required to market themselves to a body of voters that represents the people in that particular area, not to essentially play to the hardcore voters, and ignore the rest.
The vast majority of Americans aren’t really on either end of the political spectrum- everything I can find says it’s more or less a normal distribution centered more or less at the center. But with the way primaries work, and the way that the gerrymandering works with them, it amplifies the extremes, and allows the extreme viewpoints to dominate.
The other thing that seriously bothers me is the painting by both sides, albeit started by the Right, of their opposition as enemies. Not fellow countrymen who have a difference of opinion, and who deserve respect and compromise, but as enemies, who need to be crushed and opposed by every means necessary. It makes politics extraordinarily polarized- you have people talk about “fighting” when it’s voting/politics. It shouldn’t be like that- it should be a “you win some, you lose some, but you live to fight another day” (with apologies to the late John Witherspoon) type of situation, where in the interim you fight for what your side wants, and compromise where necessary, etc… But it’s becoming more… adversarial than I think it used to be.
I don’t think democracy is over by a long shot, but I do think that the GOP is actively doing things to set themselves up as the dominant party anywhere and everywhere they can.
Well said, @bump, including the “Mexico under PRI” analogy (ironic that Mexico finally became a multi-party democracy the same year the US presidential electoral system crashed and burned – 2000).
You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.
Differences of opinion are fine. Vigorous debate is great. But that does not happen here. Conservatives have largely decided to just write their own narrative and to hell with facts. They certainly do not welcome debate and find compromise anathema.
Then, they literally storm the US Capitol, have armed vigilantes at ballot boxes, attack Speaker Pelosi’s husband with a hammer and so on. Far right domestic terrorism is soaring in the US now.
I’m tired of the, “We are all good people with some differences of opinion,” kumbaya bullshit. The left has tried that for over 20 years and the right has gleefully ignored it. Obama spent eight years trying to work across the aisle while republicans, literally, had a policy of opposing him at almost every step.
Republicans are the enemy. Simple as that.
In general, I would view the folk on this forum as the people who should be the “elite few” and yet:
- Everyone here cheered when New York tried to gerrymander.
- No one here seems to have noted that the Democrats haven’t offered any solutions to the whole “Democracy is in danger” issue beyond the one solution of " you all not voting for Republicans". From all ways of viewing it, they’re using it as an advertising campaign rather than treating it as a legitimate fear and something that needs to be resolved.
We should all be able to agree that if there’s no purpose in holding or fighting for any particular political position if all that matters is whoever controls the Secretary of State in the most states, then the number one and all-important factor in the election is that we ensure that the politicians are creating rules to ensure that the elections are fair and structured to weed out crazies and crooks, across the nation. And yet, everyone here is failing to notice that no one is proposing an anti-gerrymandering Amendment and they’re quietly shelving the “Congressmen can hold stock investments in companies that they’re legislating over” and so on.
Democracy isn’t dying because people are voting for Republicans. It’s dying because even the elites are failing to truly keep their eyes on the ball. If you elect a crook, it doesn’t matter what letter they have after their name - you’re still going to get screwed.
You’re now getting screwed. All it would have taken to prevent this is for the Democrats to have done their jobs, honestly. They didn’t. Democracy wasn’t protected and all that happened was the Democrats raised more money on the fear of that danger. They now know that you’ll keep shelling out cash for it and that you won’t hold their feet to the fire to deliver.