Societal Collapse

[Gregg]

I would disagree with that. As a moderate, I've been a "both sides" person in the past, but the events surrounding this particular thread leave no room for that - it was one side and one side only.

Wait, are you talking about the events of Jan.6th or the Canadian Authors? I was talking about the authors.

[Ken]

Wait, are you talking about the events of Jan.6th or the Canadian Authors? I was talking about the authors.

this particular portion of the topic started with "if #3 can stand alone then shame on both the Repubs and Dems."

[Gregg]

Ummm, it was a joke man. Sarcasm. But I have heard people say very similar ideas without joking. The reality is that there's a non-trivial portion of the US that believes in QAnon, so this "type comment" sadly is not unrealistic.

It seems you are a really bad mood, perhaps you should take a moment to cool off. You are being a jerk in this thread, and that's no like you honestly.

I appreciate the comment.

I think Bene took an unnecessary shot that had nothing to do with Canadian Authors.

I took your comment as agreeing with him.

If we are talking about the terrible actions of Jan. 6th we most likely would not be very far off. That was a terrible day.

[chancellor]

It looked to me that these were in order. So I read it as#2 would cause/help #3.

That said if #3 can stand alone then shame on both the Repubs and Dems.

Same for me. If it's a map, you have to go to point 2 before 3 and 4.

If not, point 3 is not insane. 4 is arguable. 5 is insane. Even with a red wave in 2022, and me being a GOP optimist, there's no way we get to two-thirds in the House and Senate. Which makes everything past 5 insane.

As for my head being in the sand, I can only laugh. Anyone who thinks either party will have enough of a majority in both the House and Senate to make Constitutional amendments pass isn't quite QAnon crazy, but certainly isn't dealing in reality.

[Gregg]

this particular portion of the topic started with "if #3 can stand alone then shame on both the Repubs and Dems."

Yep. Repubs need a better candidate. Dems need to do a better job than just not be Trump.

This was my quote:

It looked to me that these were in order. So I read it as#2 would cause/help #3.

That said if #3 can stand alone then shame on both the Repubs and Dems.

[Bene Futuis]

I think you have a good heart, Gregg, and I apologize for making you feel like I was attacking you. I feel very frustrated when, given that Republicans are actively inflicting upon our democracy, people just shrug off worries about what might come next as "insane". To say that Republicans have shown their willingness to subvert democracy in favor of retaining power is a total understatement. They haven't backed away from January 6th - they are doubling down. Edit: I remember some suggestion that TFG might refuse the peaceful transfer of power and rally his empty-eyed minions to violence was met with mockery. Not so funny anymore, though.

[Ken]

Does it even matter if a set of circumstances is "insane"? 75% of Trump voters still believe that the election was "rigged and stolen". A very large part of the US population is currently "insane".

So "insane" circumstances can't just be dismissed? Sanity is no longer a requirement for a major US voting block.

[chancellor]

Does it even matter if a set of circumstances is "insane"? 75% of Trump voters still believe that the election was "rigged and stolen". A very large part of the US population is currently "insane".

So "insane" circumstances can't just be dismissed? Sanity is no longer a requirement for a major US voting block.

OK, so explain to me how either party gets to 2/3rds in both houses. Seriously, enlighten me.

[Sour Masher]

OK, so explain to me how either party gets to 2/3rds in both houses. Seriously, enlighten me.

I'd say the answer to that question is the same, red or blue, and frighteningly, both will say it with all sincerity and conviction--that path to 2/3 for the other party is lined with cheating, corruption, rigging, and attempting to invalidate any and all results that do not lead to that outcome. It is far-fetched that it could happen, but it is frighteningly clear that at least some people are trying, undermining confidence in our whole system of government.

[Teenwolf]

Yep. Repubs need a better candidate. Dems need to do a better job than just not be Trump.

This was my quote:

It looked to me that these were in order. So I read it as#2 would cause/help #3.

That said if #3 can stand alone then shame on both the Repubs and Dems.

This is what I've been saying.

You have 2 right wing corporate, anti-citizen parties that are both simply serving the wealthy donors and themselves. Nothing can be done politically to solve the issues of the people, as both parties are beholden to corporate interests.

It's fine to say the Republicans are the instigators of the dissolution of democracy. Certainly stealing Obama's SC pick expedited the death of democracy, emboldened R's to support further anti-democratic measures. Certainly the domestic terrorist issue is largely a R issue.

But despite all of that, given a choice between the apologies of Dems for doing nothing (oh, boo hoo... the Senate Parliamentatian that we appoint told us we can't do anything, Manchin and Sinema are necessary to give us the majority we do nothing with... etc.) and Republicans... is anyone fucking surprised the country is so close to collapse?

Now that Biden has delivered on 8% of his promises, why should anybody living in instability give 1 shit about Biden or Trump?

[The Feral Slasher]

Same for me. If it's a map, you have to go to point 2 before 3 and 4.

If not, point 3 is not insane. 4 is arguable. 5 is insane. Even with a red wave in 2022, and me being a GOP optimist, there's no way we get to two-thirds in the House and Senate. Which makes everything past 5 insane.

As for my head being in the sand, I can only laugh. Anyone who thinks either party will have enough of a majority in both the House and Senate to make Constitutional amendments pass isn't quite QAnon crazy, but certainly isn't dealing in reality.

I've already forgotten what the numbers are on this list, lol. For me the question is if the either party will try to invalidate legitimate elections. It seems like Trump kind of made an effort in that direction. Without any consequences (Thanks Obama/Biden !) 1) do you think Trump made an effort to subvert legitimate elections in the last election? 2) Do you think it is a legitimate concern that he/Republicans will try to subvert/steal future elections ?

[chancellor]

I'd say the answer to that question is the same, red or blue, and frighteningly, both will say it with all sincerity and conviction--that path to 2/3 for the other party is lined with cheating, corruption, rigging, and attempting to invalidate any and all results that do not lead to that outcome. It is far-fetched that it could happen, but it is frighteningly clear that at least some people are trying, undermining confidence in our whole system of government.

Far-fetched? It's madness. There's 14-15 states that are mortal locks to elect every Senator as Democrat, and and equal amount for the GOP. Both parties have easily 10 others who are unstoppable as long as they're alive, and even if they'd die, their respective states are trending more and more the party they already are. Maybe - and I might be high on my count - there's ten Senators that could have their party affiliation swing when they either die or retire. For example, when Collins goes in Maine, it'll almost certainly turn blue. When Tester goes in Montana, it's most likely it'll turn red. But there's very few seats like that available.

As for the fools attempting to "undermine confidence in our whole system of government", I'll refer to an earlier post and many of Bene's accurate assessments of the legal capabilities of the Trump team. As I noted, almost all (maybe even ALL and not almost all) of Bene's references to Trump's legal representation was correct in noting they were ignorant fools with less legal skills than a first year law student. To do what you've stated would require them, in Star Wars lingo, to morph from Jawas to Darth Sidious and Darth Vader. Keep in mind Trump's legal team brought numerous lawsuits, most of which were dismissed out of hand, and the few Trump lawyers that made it to a serious legal proceeding got their heads handed to them virtually every time. And how about the success of all those FORENSIC analyses, no?

It ain't happening, people. Unless you actually believe umjewman's sarcastic description of Trump playing 5D chess while all those other fools play checkers.

[revo]

BTW, this was all off the top of my head, lol. Not to be taken literally. The article I read this morning on these books obviously spurred it on, then I got to thinking that hey, he feels jilted, he’s said he should serve an extra term, well, then if he could, why not appeal the 22nd Amendment.

Polls have also shown that more than half of Republicans would be Ok with secession (I think 25% of Dems feel the same).

And we know Dems have spoken about ending the Senate filibuster. So as payback, why wouldn’t the GOP do it?

I haven’t read the books they’re referring to, but I could imagine it going something like this. I’d like to think cooler heads would prevail, but if certain extreme right wing crackpots get into power, I would think the odds of retribution jumps substantially. And if those right wing crackpots DO get into positions of power, I could certainly foresee a gathering momentum of secession in Blue States first.


And BTW, I enjoy Gregg’s and Chance’s commentary and look forward to what they have to say.

This is fiction — until it’s not, lol.

[The Feral Slasher]

As for the fools attempting to "undermine confidence in our whole system of government", I'll refer to an earlier post and many of Bene's accurate assessments of the legal capabilities of the Trump team. As I noted, almost all (maybe even ALL and not almost all) of Bene's references to Trump's legal representation was correct in noting they were ignorant fools with less legal skills than a first year law student. To do what you've stated would require them, in Star Wars lingo, to morph from Jawas to Darth Sidious and Darth Vader. Keep in mind Trump's legal team brought numerous lawsuits, most of which were dismissed out of hand, and the few Trump lawyers that made it to a serious legal proceeding got their heads handed to them virtually every time. And how about the success of all those FORENSIC analyses, no?

I understand that everyone laughed at Trump's legal team...but that is somewhat beside the point. Did he knowingly try to overturn an election ? Were his actions anti-Democratic or illegal ?

EDIT: I think it would be a lot clearer if you just either said what Trump did was legitimate legal action based on concerns about election fraud, or criticized him for trying to steal an election.

[chancellor]

Certainly the domestic terrorist issue is largely a R issue.

Uh, no. Who's the only individual to actually shoot Congresspeople and their staff in the last four years? Ah, yes, that would be James T. Hodgkinson, who went after a collection of GOP Congresspeople, their staff, and some of their kids on a baseball field in 2017, emptying 62 7.62 mm rounds at a variety of potential victims, grievously wounding one staff member and Congressman Steve Scalise, both of whom were fortunate to survive. The Alexandria, VA DA's legal findings - who is a Democrat - are, and I quote: "The evidence in this case establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the suspect, fueled by rage against Republican legislators, decided to commit an act of terrorism as that term is defined by the Code of Virginia." A 2021 FBI report classified the shooting as an act of domestic terrorism, as well. That same report noted Hodgkinson had additional names targeted, all GOP members.

And who was James T. Hodgkinson? Yeah, a Bernie Bro. A rabid anti-Trump guy.