• HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    1 day ago

    So what. You wanted a dictatorship to stop a dictatorship. Once the normal transition of power is not followed its game over for our democracy.

    • Hegar@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      72
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Once the normal transition of power is not followed its game over for our democracy.

      Once people who’ve sworn to end democracy are given the power to end democracy, then it’s game over for democracy.

      Preventing a corrupt criminal who’s a known agent of a hostile foreign powers from becoming president is a healthy thing to do.

      • PixxlMan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        If the electorate in a democracy want to end democracy, then it’s game over. You can’t save that.

        • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Unless the democracy has systemic flaws that allow it to be captured by minority rule, and that minority voting block disenfranchises enough of the opposition to take all power from the majority.

          This wasn’t a democracy in anything more than name before the election.

      • HubertManne@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 day ago

        As would be preventing officials voted into office in a democracy but sooner. There is still a chance as of now as he has not stopped elections yet.

    • leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      60
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Congratulations, you just discovered the paradox of tolerance.

      And, yeah, essentially, in order to survive, a democratic society cannot allow those who seek to destroy it to participate in the democratic process.

      • HubertManne@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        30
        ·
        1 day ago

        Nope. I have been aware of the paradox of tolerance for awhile and its a little shoehorning to put this situation into it. Your talking about a case of allowing an elected official to take office not tolerating speech.

        • leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          35
          ·
          1 day ago

          An elected official who repeatedly stated and demonstrated his intention of preventing any future elections and destroying democracy.

          An elected official, therefore, who should never have been allowed to run for office in the first place (this isn’t the only reason he shouldn’t have been allowed, of course, in a sane country he’d also been unelectable due to his criminal record, lack of any semblance of mental health, and intellectual insufficiency, but it’s the most important).

          • HubertManne@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            16
            ·
            1 day ago

            Ill agree he should not have been able to run but that was a failure of congress or in other words other people elected under the democracy to office. Not allowing him to run would have been great but not allowing him to take office when elected would be disastrous.

            • leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              1 day ago

              not allowing him to take office when elected would be disastrous

              It would have been many orders of magnitude less disastrous than the alternative.

              Sure, cutting off your cancerous hand would’ve been traumatic. But survivable.

              Now, however, said hand is so far up your arse that it’s ripped apart your colon in several places and you’re bleeding to death while experiencing horrible agony, and spraying all your neighbours with blood and feces.

              You could have recovered from getting rid of Trump, but there’s no coming back from what you’ve allowed him to do to your country, and the world.

              • HubertManne@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                1 day ago

                No. No it would not have. Your talking about doing something trump has not done yet. It would accelerate the problems by putting us at worse case in january of 2025 rather than in late 2026.

    • Guidy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      24 hours ago

      I wanted the traitor coward Merrick Garland to do his motherfucking job and prosecute that POS and throw him in federal prison while making him completely unable to appear on any ballot.

      Thanks for asking.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Garland did what he was hired to do. He slow walked the investigations so biden could run against trump again because biden knew he couldn’t beat anyone better.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      You wanted a dictatorship to stop a dictatorship.

      Given the current state of affairs, I’m not clear how a Permanent Biden-o-cracy was supposed to be worse.

      Once the normal transition of power is not followed its game over for our democracy.

      Well, thank god we don’t officially lose our Democracy for another eighteen months.

      • HubertManne@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 day ago

        its worse because it would be 18 months sooner. Its like climate change. It won’t help if we were at 5 degrees now instead of 1.5. That would not fix it.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Its like climate change.

          Weird you would mention that in the context of a presidency that’s effectively set himself to the task of nationally Rolling Coal.