US Politics: Losing Appeals

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Eald thread past page 20. That was the thread title I had yn mynd bifore. And yes, it's a playyng on the orange doofus legal yssues and eek on the losyng of appeal to the electorate.

 

[A True Kaniggit]

... Of course I only misbehave at the end of threads, when they are going to be closed.

Way to checkmate my silliness.

Edit: "quack quack"

Edited March 17 by A True Kaniggit

[A Horse Named Stranger]

See, that's why you shouldn't mess with a horse. :') And I accept your concession, gracefully.

Anyway like I said, thread title is play on Drumpf's legal issues and losing of appeal to the electorate.

Anyway, back to today's English instead of that pseudo-middle English, before theda or anybody else who studied English will point out how I butchered the grammar.

[A True Kaniggit]

5 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

See, that's why you shouldn't mess with a horse. :') And I accept your concession, gracefully.

Anyway like I said, thread title is play on Drumpf's legal issues and losing of appeal to the electorate.

Anyway, back to today's English instead of that pseudo-middle English, before theda or anybody else who studied English will point out how I butchered the grammar.

SURPRISE ATTACK!

[A True Kaniggit]

I am sorry everyone had to witness that.

Edited March 17 by A True Kaniggit

[DMC]

So this was something I meant to mention earlier and forgot.  There's a dude on Twitter/X - @ringwiss - that is an incredible expert on congressional/parliamentary procedure.  For a long time, many guessed the person must've been literally a former parliamentarian, part of their staff, maybe a former member of leadership, or some new super AI.

Turns out?  It's a 20-year-old economics student at Durham University in England.  HA!!!  Love it!  This guy can not only school all 535 members of Congress on parliamentary rules, but also the likes of Sarah Binder - one of the most foremost congressional scholars that would be on any top ten list of who knows the most about the US Congress in the world.  

Pretty awesome.  Here's the story.

[A True Kaniggit]

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

So this was something I meant to mention earlier and forgot.  There's a dude on Twitter/X - @ringwiss - that is an incredible expert on congressional/parliamentary procedure.  For a long time, many guessed the person must've been literally a former parliamentarian, part of their staff, maybe a former member of leadership, or some new super AI.

Turns out?  It's a 20-year-old economics student at Durham University in England.  HA!!!  Love it!  This guy can not only school all 535 members of Congress on parliamentary rules, but also the likes of Sarah Binder - one of the most foremost congressional scholars that would be on any top ten list of who knows the most about the US Congress in the world.  

Pretty awesome.  Here's the story.

Human beings still use Twitter/X ?

[DMC]

Apparently students at Durham University.  And good that they do!

[DireWolfSpirit]

Tiktiktiktiktiktiktiktiktiktiktiktiktiktiktiktiktik................

The clock is moving every closer to March 25th, the date by which Donald needs to put up over a half billion to cover a surety bond for any appeal of that NY Fraud judgement.

The suspense is gorgeous.

[DMC]

26 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

The clock is moving every closer to March 25th

It's also my mom's birthday.  Neither here nor there, but you just reminded me I have to have dinner with my mom soon.  I know, I'm an ungrateful son, but ugh.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 hours ago, DMC said:

It's also my mom's birthday.  Neither here nor there, but you just reminded me I have to have dinner with my mom soon.  I know, I'm an ungrateful son, but ugh.

You better get her some nice flowers. If you don't we'll summon a Florida Man on PCP to attack you. 

[LongRider]

Trump calls for "bloodbath" if he doesn't win the election, at a campaign speech in Ohio yesterday.

“Now if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s gonna be the least of it,” he added. “It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. .... Later, he added, “If this election isn’t won, I’m not sure that you’ll ever have another election in this country.”

Trump says there will be a ‘bloodbath’ if he loses the election (nbcnews.com)

[Jaxom 1974]

8 minutes ago, LongRider said:

Trump calls for "bloodbath" if he doesn't win the election, at a campaign speech in Ohio yesterday.

“Now if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s gonna be the least of it,” he added. “It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. .... Later, he added, “If this election isn’t won, I’m not sure that you’ll ever have another election in this country.”

Trump says there will be a ‘bloodbath’ if he loses the election (nbcnews.com)

It's remarkable his "people" tell him anything that is part of the plans knowing of his inability to keep a secret long before the mental rot set in on him. 

I realize there is a chunk of the electorate eating this garbage up, but how anyone else think this guy belongs in power? And honestly, shouldn't there be some kind of Justice Department action over commentary like that? 

I'm truly trying to think of a great excuse to get my family out of the Milwaukee area over the week of the Convention in July...

[Larry of the Lawn]

Not saying Trump isn't making appeals to violence and all, but those blood bath comments do appear to be to hyperbolic and metaphorical language about China vs the US in the auto market.  Not clear if the "no more elections" is about China or something domestic, and I'm sure there is a dogwhistle element to it, but at least read the entire article LR linked.  

[Zorral]

The Strongman Fantasy
And Dictatorship in Real Life
TIMOTHY SNYDER
MAR 17, 2024

https://snyder.substack.com/p/the-strongman-fantasy?

Quote

 

Quite a few Americans like the idea of strongman rule.  Why not a dictator who will get things done? 

I lived in eastern Europe when memories of communism were fresh.  I have visited regions in Ukraine where Russia imposed its occupation regime.  I have spent decades reading testimonies of people who lived under Nazi or Stalinist rule.  I have seen death pits, some old, some freshly dug. And I have friends who have lived under authoritarian regimes, including political prisoners and survivors of torture. Some of the people I trusted most have been assassinated.

So I think that there is an answer to this question. 

Strongman rule is a fantasy.  Essential to it is the idea that a strongman will be your strongman.  He won't.  In a democracy, elected representatives listen to constituents.  We take this for granted, and imagine that a dictator would owe us something. But the vote you cast for him affirms your irrelevance.  The whole point is that the strongman owes us nothing.  We get abused and we get used to it. 

Another pleasant illusion is that the strongman will unite the nation.  But an aspiring dictator will always claim that some belong and others don't.  He will define one group after another as the enemy.  This might feel good, so long as you feel that you are on the right side of the line.  But now fear is the essence of life.  The politics of us-and-them, once begun, never ends. 

We dream that a strongman will let us focus on America.  But dictatorship opens our country to the worst the world has to offer.  An American strongman will measure himself by the wealth and power of other dictators.  He will befriend them and compete with them.  From them he will learn new ways to oppress and to exploit his own people.

At least, the fantasy goes, the strongman will get things done.  But dictatorial power today is not about achieving anything positive.  It is about preventing anyone else from achieving anything.  The strongman is really the weak man: his secret is that he makes everyone else weaker. 

Unaccountable to the law and to voters, the dictator has no reason to consider anything beyond his own personal interests.  In the twenty-first century, those are simple: dying in bed as a billionaire.  To enrich himself and to stay out of prison, the strongman dismantles the justice system and replaces civil servants with loyalists.  ....

Quote

 

.... Once this process begins, it is hard to stop.  At the present stage of the strongman fantasy, people imagine an exciting experiment.  If they don't like strongman rule, they think, they can just elect someone else the next time.  This misses the point.  If you help a strongman come to power, you are eliminating democracy.  You burn that bridge behind you.  The strongman fantasy dissolves, and real dictatorship remains.

Most likely you won’t be killed or be required to kill. But amid the dreariness of life under dictatorship is dark responsibility for others’ death. By the time the killing starts, you will know that it is not about unity, or the nation, or getting things done. The best Americans, betrayed by you when you cast your vote, will be murdered at the whim and for the wealth of a dictator. Your tragedy will be living long enough to understand this.

 

 

Edited March 17 by Zorral

[Zorral]

Not Vietnam and the 1960's, here is what latterly the US wars have accomplished -- only evil for the people we tried to use as justification for aerial warfare and killing them.

The Open-Air Prison for ISIS Supporters—and Victims
Since the Islamic State fell, tens of thousands of people—many of them children—have been herded into Al-Hol, a giant fenced-in camp in Syria, and effectively given life sentences.
By Anand Gopal

March 11, 2024

Look and sound familiar by chance?

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/03/18/the-open-air-prison-for-isis-supporters-and-victims

You know how we know it isn't the 1960's in the USA?  The registered Republican voters are all in with the USA having dictators and loving Russia, and among the USA registered Dem voters, Israel is viewed as the Bad Guy.  So by all means continue educating me in the historical changes from the Vietnam era as to just why eradicating massive numbers of innocent people from the air win hearts and minds and wars, and so why we must drop nuclear bombs into the bargain.

 

Edited March 17 by Zorral

[LongRider]

27 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

and I'm sure there is a dogwhistle element to it, but at least read the entire article LR linked.  

I did read the article before I posted it, and as it reads, it looks to me that Trump said "“Now if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s gonna be the least of it,” he added. “It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country.

I see what you are saying, but to me "If I don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole [country]."  Means exactly that.   Remember Trump's "Stand back and stand by." quote?   To me, his bloodbath comment is like that.  MAGA's don't do nuance and they heard the 'going to be a bloodbath' loud and clear.

Could I be wrong, I sure hope so but wouldn't bet on it. 

[Zorral]

26 minutes ago, LongRider said:

Could I be wrong, I sure hope so but wouldn't bet on it. 

You are not wrong.  Alas.

[LongRider]

Trump’s rhetoric is an example of stochastic terrorism, which he used to terrible effect culminating on J6.   And that’s what this is too.

From Wikipedia:

Stochastic terrorism refers to political or media figures publicly demonizing a person or group in such a way that it inspires supporters of the figures to commit a violent act against the target of the speech.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_terrorism

Edited March 17 by LongRider

[Jaxom 1974]

1 hour ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

Not saying Trump isn't making appeals to violence and all, but those blood bath comments do appear to be to hyperbolic and metaphorical language about China vs the US in the auto market.  Not clear if the "no more elections" is about China or something domestic, and I'm sure there is a dogwhistle element to it, but at least read the entire article LR linked.  

 

53 minutes ago, LongRider said:

I did read the article before I posted it, and as it reads, it looks to me that Trump said "“Now if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s gonna be the least of it,” he added. “It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country.

I see what you are saying, but to me "If I don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole [country]."  Means exactly that.   Remember Trump's "Stand back and stand by." quote?   To me, his bloodbath comment is like that.  MAGA's don't do nuance and they heard the 'going to be a bloodbath' loud and clear.

Could I be wrong, I sure hope so but wouldn't bet on it. 

I was going to echo Longrider.  I originally looked at what was said as being a specific of what was, supposedly, being discussed at that point of the rally.  Then I remembered that nothing matters when it comes to nuance, let alone logic or common sense, with the MAGA crowd.  Should he lose, and really there isn't any legitimate reason why he should win (hell, his candidacy shouldn't even being happening in a sane world), there will be, at the least, attempted violence.  It's only a matter of how much is allowed to happen.