You say you want a revoluuuution

[MrDibble]

@Darren_Garrison

the choice of the electorate will no longer matter, and our descent into a third-world joke would be complete.

Or, you know, you could choose your president by popular vote like sane people…

[Procrustus]

@Darren_Garrison

The thing you (and a few other posters) on this thread seem to be too stupid to realize is that someone can be opposed to overthrowing an elected leader and still not be a Trump supporter. Like it or not, an electoral majority of Americans voted to make Donald Trump the president of the United States. If people manage to oust him from office by popular uprising, then that will set the new standard for American politics. With every new president, there will be an uprising from the increasingly polarized opposition to overthrow that candidate, and the choice of the electorate will no longer matter, and our descent into a third-world joke would be complete. Are you really too short-sighted and small-minded to figure that out?

I’m an optimist. I don’t think we’ll ever see such a disgustingly unqualified asshole elected again. So, I’m perfectly fine using all non violent means to get him the hell out. That’s not technically “overthrowing” him, so you don’t really need to worry about our “descent into a third-world joke.”

[SteveG1]

@igor_frankensteen

Did you oppose the Republicans repeated attempts to do exactly the same thing to Clinton and Obama? Or were you pleased about THEM trying to overturn a “legal and fairly elected President” as well?

Why weren't the GOP's efforts to defeat democratic processes  "a death knell to American democracy"?

Be cause that was THEIR team doing it.

[SteveG1]

@BigT

And, yes, Lumpy, Trump is fucking evil. He is out for himself and damn anyone else. That’s evil. He is actually fascistic, which does not mean rule by the military but “an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.” Trump is authoritarian, nationalistic, and appeals to the right wing. He is a fascist, even if he has (so far) failed to accomplish his plans. Let’s not forget his attempts to shut down freedom of speech.

And, yes, there were cries that Obama was illegitimate. They came on my Facebook all the time the past 8 years. The fact that these guys are getting more support is simply because Trump is a far, far worse person than Obama. You can’t argue that something is okay when a few people do it but wrong when more people do it.

And, let’s not kid ourselves. Their reasons were racism. They saw a guy who didn’t look like them, and assumed he must be a foreigner.

The reasons to not consider Trump legitimate are many, and none have anything to do with him being white. He was elected by a minority. He has a huge Russia scandal where he actually asked Russia to hack to influence our elections, and possibly more. He should have been in jail for all he’s done in the past and unable to run, but has gotten out of it by being rich. He has a clear personality disorder that makes him incapable of rational action in many situations. He may actually be going senile, given the differences in how he acts now vs. when he was younger.

And, let’s not kid ourselves. He is a wannabe dictator. Nearly all his frustration is in not being able to do what he thought he could do as president. He wanted to be King of America. That’s a dictator, not a president.

This, every word of it.

[Lumpy]

@BigT

Then you are the one against democracy. If there is a big enough popular revolt, then that means that the people have decided he is not fit to be their president, which is exactly what democracy is–the people deciding.

IF there is a big enough popular revolt; and that’s simply not there. Close to half the people in the country voted for Trump; the other half are bitterly disappointed but mostly still believe that it’s necessary to follow the agreed upon rules because the alternative is anarchy and civil war.

@BigT

And, yes, Lumpy, Trump is fucking evil. He is out for himself and damn anyone else. That’s evil. He is actually fascistic, which does not mean rule by the military but “an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.” Trump is authoritarian, nationalistic, and appeals to the right wing. He is a fascist, even if he has (so far) failed to accomplish his plans. Let’s not forget his attempts to shut down freedom of speech.<>
The reasons to not consider Trump legitimate are many, and none have anything to do with him being white. He was elected by a minority. He has a huge Russia scandal where he actually asked Russia to hack to influence our elections, and possibly more. He should have been in jail for all he’s done in the past and unable to run, but has gotten out of it by being rich. He has a clear personality disorder that makes him incapable of rational action in many situations. He may actually be going senile, given the differences in how he acts now vs. when he was younger.

Now you’re getting into out-and-out Trump hysteria. Wipe the spittle from your screen.

And, let’s not kid ourselves. He is a wannabe dictator. Nearly all his frustration is in not being able to do what he thought he could do as president. He wanted to be King of America. That’s a dictator, not a president.

Doubtless Trump is an egomaniac who naively thought that the President is the guy who sits in the Big Chair and calls the shots. Fortunately that’s not the case.

@Darren_Garrison

The thing you (and a few other posters) on this thread seem to be too stupid to realize is that someone can be opposed to overthrowing an elected leader and still not be a Trump supporter. Like it or not, an electoral majority of Americans voted to make Donald Trump the president of the United States. If people manage to oust him from office by popular uprising, then that will set the new standard for American politics. With every new president, there will be an uprising from the increasingly polarized opposition to overthrow that candidate, and the choice of the electorate will no longer matter, and our descent into a third-world joke would be complete. Are you really too short-sighted and small-minded to figure that out?

This.

@MrDibble

Or, you know, you could choose your president by popular vote like sane people…

For a number of historical reasons, our ancestors chose a system that national elections wouldn’t be decided by a vote of 100,000,001 to 100,000,000. But if you really think that’s a good idea, go ahead and lobby to amend the voting system.

[Shodan]

@Captain_Amazing

Hitler was never elected.

Yes he was. It was right after he bombed Pearl Harbor.

Regards,
Shodan

[74westy]

@Shodan

Yes he was. It was right after he bombed Pearl Harbor.

Regards,
Shodan

Forget it; he’s rolling!

[foolsguinea]

@Captain_Amazing

Hitler was never elected.

Yeah, he kind of was. Somebody with legitimate authority made him chancellor. He didn’t just get the job as a prize in a box of Wheaties.

@Darren_Garrison

[snip] If people manage to oust him from office by popular uprising, then that will set the new standard for American politics. With every new president, there will be an uprising from the increasingly polarized opposition to overthrow that candidate, and the choice of the electorate will no longer matter, and our descent into a third-world joke would be complete.

The USA’s political class is already plutocratic and corrupt, and undermining our civil service. A coup might accelerate that process, but it’s happening anyway. I think the main thing keeping us from being a “Third World joke” already is our history as the big strong arm of NATO. Which makes us a First World joke.

[elucidator]

@Lumpy

…Close to half the people in the country voted for Trump…

Ah, no. Close to half the people who voted picked Trump, about three million shy of that mark. Which fact prompted his remark that he would have won that vote had it not been for three to five million illegal voters.

You did not know this, forgot this, or are trying to pull a slow one.

[snoe]

@foolsguinea

Yeah, he kind of was. Somebody with legitimate authority made him chancellor. He didn’t just get the job as a prize in a box of Wheaties.

IMO, saying Hitler was “elected” – or, especially “democratically elected,” which you hear a lot when people talk about electing demagogues or anyone people really dislike – is hugely misleading. On the other hand, it’s not totally off-base: he came awfully close – close enough for it to count when a bunch of the many failure points in Weimar German democracy, um, failed.*

I don’t think Hitler is a great cautionary argument against democratic elections or majority rule. Which is how “Hitler was [democratically] elected” is often rhetorically deployed.

I think his rise is a much better argument for

1. Well-designed government and electoral structures that include strong protections for free and fair elections and individual rights,
2. Pragmatic, converted, and aggressive political alliances against extremism, setting aside small differences (looking at you, Clintonistas and Berniebros),
3. a strong institutional ethic of civilian control of the military.

Point 2 keeps this from being a total thread-derail. However nutty the people in the OP may be, if they’re willing to make common cause with others who oppose Trump and keep getting people out in the streets, then bless 'em.

*Henry Turner’s Hitler’s Thirty Days to Power is a nice shortish book on this topic, by the way.

[snoe]

@elucidator

Ah, no. Close to half the people who voted picked Trump, about three million shy of that mark.

Not even that close, given the largish third-party vote. /nitpick

[BigT]

For the record, I didn’t say what I said about Hitler as an indication of how democracy can fail. I said it to illustrate that being “legitimately elected” has no bearing on whether opposition is merited.

I do think that, if there ever was a popular uprising to overthrow our government, it would mean that the government had failed, and thus the OP’s entire argument is stupid, even if we do pretend these guys are violent revolutionaries rather than protesters who want change, ala the Civil Rights “revolution.”

I used to believe extremists were inherently bad, but I no longer hold that view. There are plenty of issues where the extremes are the correct answer, and where calling something extreme is just a way to maintaining the status quo, no matter how bad it is.

As long as your extreme is actually good, there’s nothing wrong with being an extremist. An extremist non-murderer is a perfectly good person. Someone who is an extremist on anthropomorphic climate change is correct. “Moderation in all things” neglects that there are some things that are absolute. And both sides sometimes don’t have a point.

[Chimera]

Well if someone calls Objective Truth “extremist”, then they are really only labeling themselves as extremists.

[Leaper]

@Darren_Garrison

The thing you (and a few other posters) on this thread seem to be too stupid to realize is that someone can be opposed to overthrowing an elected leader and still not be a Trump supporter. Like it or not, an electoral majority of Americans voted to make Donald Trump the president of the United States. If people manage to oust him from office by popular uprising, then that will set the new standard for American politics. With every new president, there will be an uprising from the increasingly polarized opposition to overthrow that candidate, and the choice of the electorate will no longer matter, and our descent into a third-world joke would be complete. Are you really too short-sighted and small-minded to figure that out?

So if the president is working against people like you, hurting your interests and your quality of life, you should do… What? If, as you say, the mere act of protesting is an attempt at an “overthrow”.

[septimus]

I was gone for a month and am now seeing SDMB with fresh eyes. I am particularly astounded that this place is called a “liberal” board. Of course liberals are in a majority in almost any gathering of intellectuals, but there are plenty of right-wingers here too. (Serious question: Is there anything remotely resembling an intelligent public-access message board with right-wing opinions other than SDMB?)

I’m also astounded with how stupid many of you are, beginning with OP for whom peaceful protest is the death-knell of democracy. (Presumably he condones Trump’s calls for counter-protesters to beat up protesters.)

The following post wasn’t particularly stupid. But it is wrong.

@Captain_Amazing

Hitler was never elected.

The parallels between Hitler and Trump are really rather strong. Trump was elected in a democratic process, though he got a plurality (not a majority) of votes. And Hitler was selected according to his country’s democratic process, after his party received a large plurality (but not a clear majority). Hitler’s rise was eased by suppressing the Communist party of his opponent voters. And Trump’s rise (or the GOP’s rise more generally) derives much strength from the suppression of opponent voters.

There are of course big differences between Hitler and Trump. Hitler had a strong political “vision,” while Trump is a business huckster whose publicity prank went too far. Another difference is that eliminating Hitler would probably have cut off the head of Naziism and let Germany resume a saner course. A Trump resignation will lead to a Pence-Ryan Administration which might be more damaging than Trump’s.

[SteveG1]

@enipla

What’s difficult is that the CIC is not a madman. He’s a moron. etc. etc. etc…

I support those that want him out of office. Protests are great, but I doubt they will do anything more to his base than to lock and load.

But gotta start somewhere.

enipl ~ Armed liberal/moderate.

Protests, making noise, and stacking the Town Halls (that the cowardly Repubs haven’t already cancelled) will do something. The threat of getting replaced in the next election can have results.

nowing that they are ending their own careers if they keep backing this shit for brains Trump and their own “tax breaks for rich folks at any cost” might get their attention.

“Angry gets shit done.”

[Captain_Amazing]

@foolsguinea

Yeah, he kind of was. Somebody with legitimate authority made him chancellor. He didn’t just get the job as a prize in a box of Wheaties.

He didn’t. But what’s “He was appointed chancellor” have to do with “He was elected”?

[MrDibble]

@Lumpy

For a number of historical reasons, our ancestors chose a system

Only 1 historic reason: your Founding Fathers were elitist assholes. Oh, they may have hidden it behind such fancy prose as you can find in Madison’s papers, but ultimately, they didn’t trust the populace as a whole.

[septimus]

@Captain_Amazing

He didn’t. But what’s “He was appointed chancellor” have to do with “He was elected”?

Was Theresa May “elected” Prime Minister of the U.K.?

[SPOILER]No, she was appointed by the Head of State … because she was Leader of Parliament’s plurality party.

Just like the Man with the Moustache.[/SPOILER]

[Lumpy]

@elucidator

Ah, no. Close to half the people who voted picked Trump, about three million shy of that mark.

Meaning what? We can only know what the people who voted chose, but presumably all the people who didn’t follow roughly the same statistical balance. Or are you claiming that an overwhelming “silent majority” (or given the examples in this thread, maybe not so silent) are anti-Trump (but not so anti that they could be bothered to vote against “the tyrant” when it would have made a difference)?

@MrDibble

Only 1 historic reason: your Founding Fathers were elitist assholes. Oh, they may have hidden it behind such fancy prose as you can find in Madison’s papers, but ultimately, they didn’t trust the populace as a whole.

Only to the extent that based on experience and historical examples, the architects of the Federal Constitution thought it wise to avoid a mobocracy, and they presumed that democracy would flow from the states since that was the level at which popular elections took place. As for electoral votes and equal number of senators per state, these slave-owners from Virginia were willing to give a voice to tiny free states that could never have outvoted Virginia based solely on population.

Hatred of rich old white men doesn’t make your case.