Yes, there will be a shitshow, either for two months before Jan 6, or Jan 6 itself.
The sociopaths on Trump’s team are a lot more worrisome. And this time, a Democrat is still in office on Jan 6, so you better believe there will be security.
So, I’ll take the possible fomenting of an insurrection by a private citizen who can now be arrested for treason and hanged, over a “Day 1 dictatorship” that lasts four years – or more – any day.
I wonder if Trump voters feel this way. If he wins will they feel a deep sense of relief, success, hope?
I know they hate Democrats and all, but I have a hard time imagining how they could feel a similar sense of dread.
I suspect for much of the MAGA crowd, a Trump victory will feel like vindication, and a Trump defeat will feel like confirmation of the Deep State at work.
If elected Trump is not the threat, J.D. Vance is. Trump will declare himself Dictator like Michel Scott declares bankruptcy then go on to grift for his benefit and revenge. J.D. Vance will methodically take apart the checks and balances as directed by The Heritage Foundation, etal until he has a nice little fireside chat where he informs the American public that due to “reasons” the constitution is suspended.
Alternatively Trump isn’t elected and we get taxes I guess.
They’ll find a way.
Just like when the world ended during the Biden Administration.
Just remember: Harris is incompetent, AND she will steal the election somehow.
If Trump is elected, I’m going to be VERY tempted to start a betting pool on how soon it is before Trump hands power to Vance for a day, and Vance takes the opportunity to pardon Trump, neatly avoiding the constitutional crisis should Trump attempt to pardon himself.
(I doubt that Trump would pardon himself, as that would come too close to admitting guilt, but perhaps if he spun it as undoing Kamala’s weaponization of the Justice Department…)
I think you’re mis-parsing the alternative reality.
Haris is incompetent and unwell.
“They” will steal the election so “their” puppet can do “their” bidding.
One might wonder why it’s so easy for Trump to believe such a thing…
True, but the people behind her are geniuses who can steal an election. I prefer them to the evil geniuses in the Trump campaign who are actually plotting to steal the election and create an actual and official dictatorship.
I think he’ll just tell the DOJ to drop the prosecutions. Or, he won’t need to, his new AG will do it for him.
If Trump then sues the gov’t for reckless prosecution, I wonder how much he can get in a settlement.
All of the rhetoric is saying “Save America”. I think they literally think that if Trump loses America will die.
Has that sort of mindset ever been normal before? I recall seeing a lot of ads in the past like “for the good of ______”, but this year I’m seeing “the only way to save _______”.
I know that Trump’s AG will seek to do so, but it might not be a slam dunk:
I don’t doubt that an AG could fabricate a reason, and that there are judges (and SCOTUS Justices) that would go along with it, but…
I only recall rhetoric of this nature during the 1964 presidential campaign from Ronald Reagan when he was supporting Barry Goldwater. Didn’t help Goldwater!
It’s not a short watch and most of us here will agree with it, but he does a good job of synthesizing years of information. He specifically notes his endorsement for Harris is not based on her proposed policies. He says he has strong opinions on which policies he wants, but he will not discuss that. He focuses on the preservation of our laws and democracy, and the threat that Trump presents.
Taxes are a reasonable tradeoff for the benefits we get as a society. The concern shouldn’t be taxes, the concern should just be effective use of them.
I don’t think he will do it jusy for a day. I agree there’s a very good chance Vance will be his full pardon.
So . . . taxation without representation should be an acceptable policy . . .
I know that was tongue in cheek cut…It’s not 1775 anymore, everyone gets a vote.
If people limit the taxes, society suffers which directly impacts individuals.
People in Canada don’t go bankrupt from medical bills. That’s a good example. The health system could likely be mildly more efficient, but I’m happy to pay taxes to have the system in place. I’ll complain about the cost, not the system.
Similarly we have a local homeless housing encampment. Costs 2.5mm to run. That’s a burden on our taxes, but there’s 55 people with a roof over their head and some semblance of stability. We could turf it, save 2.5mm and throw another 55 people in the streets. Not a tradeoff I want, in order to have no taxes.
2.5mm? Not sure of units. People in the streets is obviously not good, but how many dollars is that per homeless person?
Um, long time ago, this thing called “math” was discovered…
