What they do not have, and will never have in the USA, is the right to overturn an election they lost with violent force.
It’s such an idiotic argument because it’s obvious they have a voice and significant representation at the state and federal level. 75 million of them voted their congresspeople in and now because they lost the presidency we have to tiptoe around their feelings while they foment an insurrection? What?
/r/politics, prior to the election, was in a fervor about how this might be the last "true election" of their lifetime. That they would forever lose their voice, etc. Have their rights stripped.
It's not so wild that the people on the other side would feel the same way, especially when the talk was literally about taking away the ability for Republicans to control any branches and "making sure this can never happen again."
Besides packing the court, other ideas to accomplish that included redistricting, mandatory voting, and adding some left-leaning territories as states.
If the idea of having more voter participation is antithetical to your political party, perhaps it is time to change your party.
> If the idea of having more voter participation is antithetical to your political party, perhaps it is time to change your party.
Indeed. The GOP is undoubtedly ultra-right wing, and this sounds mighty authoritarian. We've seen a pretty strong nationalist streak in them recently, as well. Conservatism pretty much is the idea that "everyone has their place, and they should stay in their place." Can anyone tell me how that's not fascist?
Reminder:
> Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.
If so, take it to court. If not, then suck it up.
I'm tired of apologizing for my country to every group with a grievance and a camera. Especially when they all invariably claim to be loyal citizens and patriots.
Now along comes an aggrieved group that wants even more than my apology, they want me to give up my constitutional order. How 'bout NO.
That attack at the Capitol has put me over the top. You want change? Vote like everyone else and accept the outcome. It's time to stop coddling these people.
The extremes have to convince you “everything lies in the balance” to get you to go along with their kookery. We should indulge neither end of the spectrum with foolish talk or justifications of their outlandish theories and feelings of (unjustified) grievance and fear.
So long as those people feel that they don't have a voice, they will earnestly believe they are victims of an oppressive dictatorship.
From their perspective, they're fighting for liberty the same as the Boston Tea Party did way back when.
Blame those people, not the people trying to figure out maybe-too-late how to stop their victims from burning the whole country down.
Why aren't you blaming anyone for anything? Do you not think what's happening is bad?
We need to be talking about ways to get everyone to cool down and take a time out.
Instead all I see is efforts to blame, cancel, belittle, and disparage lots of people well beyond Trump and the people actually at the Capitol building. I see lots of careless talk that puts 70 million Americans in the category of "not worth listening to -- ever!". How well do you think that is going to work out?
Lots of people seem to think that the unrest is wholly due to the election results, but the political polarization pre-dates Trump by many years.
How these people feel when they are committing violence in the streets, (and especially in the capitol), is no more relevant to our response than the weather being 'clear' or 'partly cloudy'.
Maybe I need to explain it another way:
Is it relevant how a BLM rioter feels when he's looting a store?
Sure, the black grandma who's at the peaceful BLM protest in the morning? How she feels is important. I definitely have a tendency to listen to that type of protester.
The armed BLM protesters that come only in the dark of night to loot and burn? No. How they feel is irrelevant to my response to them.
Same with these self proclaimed 'patriots'. The ones at unarmed peaceful protests matter. But, quick question for you: How many do you see at unarmed peaceful protests? That pretty much tells you all you need to know.
I'm only ashamed I that I had to see the Capitol fall to realize that how these violent people feel shouldn't matter.
Remember, currently the left are impeaching the president with 9 days left (literally taking any future office from him). Worse, some elected officials are saying the republicans involved in challenging the election integrity (which is constitutional and unrelated), aided in causing the “insurrection”.
They feel they’re being backed into a corner.
He does not deserve any of those privileges.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/impeached-president-lose-b...
Do you know how long I've sat and listened to minority groups complain about being backed into a corner and having no voice?
To my knowledge, none have ever gathered thousands of believers to attack the capitol in an attempt to thwart the implementation of the constitutional order.
Given the number of groups that are backed in a corner in the US, given the number of groups that have no voice in the US, those are tenuous excuses at best.
You want change? Do it the proper way like everyone else has to. Peaceful demonstrations that bring attention so that you can educate the population about your cause. Shortcuts like appealing to arms bring quick results but are doomed to failure long term.
What do you do with a group of people claiming they don't have a voice under those circumstances? What do you do when they're acting out violent insurrectionist fantasies under those circumstances?
We’ve got elections up the wazoo at every level of government including positions we just plain shouldn’t be electing at all; and most States have some form of ballot initiative. Both major parties and most of the minor ones are more or less a free for all as to who can join and vote for representatives and policies there.
In other words, everyone has a voice. Some are louder, some are quieter, but feeling like you’re not being heard? That’s the sort of namby-pamby crap you can expect from a college campus full of kids that haven’t figured out their life yet. If college kids stormed the Capitol, you think we should excuse their actions and shouldn’t charge them with insurrection because they’ve mistaken the Capitol for Boston Harbor and 2021 for 1773? Then why should we tolerate it from anyone else simply because they backed the losing candidate?
If you watched the process from October 2020 through January 5th 2021, you saw a fairly thorough stress test of our system of elections from voting, vote collections, ballot tracking, ballot verification, suits in courts of law, the counting process, the canvassing process, the re-canvassing and re-counting process in some cases, the certification of votes, the appointment of electors through Safe Harbor Day, the actual meeting of the electors to cast their votes and finally the final counting of the electors votes by Congress.
Whatever you think of our system, it is thorough, and even Trump appointed judges that gave his campaign their day in court weren’t buying this moat and bailey bullshit the President’s lawyers walked in with. Even during the process of the counting in Congress, objections were raised, and summarily shot down, a process entirely completed by elected representatives.
Now we will complete the transition of power. It may not be as peaceful as before, but the President’s powers have an expiration date. If Biden can’t be sworn in till midnight a week after normal for some unforeseen reason, Trump’s Presidency still expires at a fixed time and a fixed date, not when the next President is sworn in, but at Noon, EST, January 20th 2021.
Insurrectionists can fight for their liberty in a Court of Law. Hopefully they find one with more sympathy than I possess for them.
As an average citizen, it's our lot in life to be ruled over by the rich an powerful. It's always been that way, and the more I see of our "democracy" the more I believe it will stay that way.
What is your expectation? What do you mean by "voice"?
I think it's poignant that the Russian opposition to Putin is up in arms about Twitter banning Trump. Because de-platforming (web, TV and radio) is how the loss of freedom of speech started in Russia after Yeltsin resigned and Putin started getting rid of voices critical of him.
Now, if every bakery in town refused to do a gay cake - that would be a problem.
Can't conservatives go make their own video hosting platform? We’ve already seen how willing they are to take their ball to their own, private little country club when things get too hot for them. Crying “monopoly” doesn’t ring true here.
What’s the “free market” argument that says a private business should be forced to host hate speech, for free? What’s even the legal argument that YouTube is a monopoly, when DoJ has taken exactly zero action towards breaking it up?
Edit: light rephrasing
Can't %group% go make %something%.
Forget conservatives. Anyone who makes their living making video is doing so based on YouTube's whim. If they kick you off, even by mistake as has happened multiple times, you have no recourse. That's what makes them a monopoly. That is why they need to be treated as a utility.
Again, DoJ has done fuck all to break them up, so, why are they considered a monopoly? And why should a private business that isn't a monopoly be forced to host (edit: or link to) anything they don't want to?
Whether I believe this or not, it's a fair argument to use against conservatives here, because that's what they say all the time.
I am not blaming YouTube. In fact, good on them for beating everyone to the punch. Nonetheless, they are in a situation where they are the only game in town and should either act like that or be made to act that way. I mean, if the Edison electric company (they only local power provider) decided to kick me off their grid cause my views don't match theirs or for whatever reason, I'd be screwed. That's why they are treated as a utility, and not just another private company.
> DoJ has done fuck all to break them up
There is no disagreement here - I am just giving you my opinion on the way things should be©. DoJ should be more aggressive, but they are hamstrung by laws written in the days of robber barons. They couldn't even break up Microsoft 20 years ago when it was clear that monopoly position abuses took place on a regular basis.
> it's a fair argument to use against conservatives here
I'll concede this point. However, the well known "first they came for the %group% and I didn't care cause I wasn't a member" applies here. Cause when they come to demonetize you, ain't nobody gonna be around to help.
As far as Youtube being "the only game in town," that's not relevant as long as they're legally not considered a monopoly.
Edit: Also, why should Youtube unilaterally decide it's a monopoly and start being nice? At what amount of market share is a company required to put the kid gloves on?
Again, I'm more playing Devil's advocate here, but these are the arguments you'll hear from right wingers all the time.
which is a completely legitimate position to be in.
There weren't.
If there was nothing to hide there wouldn't be a need to censor it.
All I've heard is claims that there is evidence, none of which has been shared. Or when it has been shared is not compelling.
"Nuh uh"
"Uh huh"
I too saw (clips of) several of these lawsuits, where Trump advocates were threatened with contempt and finally admitted a complete lack of evidence for claims of fraud.
I also know that elections officials across the country, from both parties, assert there is no evidence of fraud in a systemic manner or in any manner that would change the results of the election.
I also know that the GOP leader of the Senate, the GOP lap-dog Attorney General, and the US intelligence community are in agreement that there is no evidence of the fraud alleged.
https://wannabewonk.com/wannabe-coup/
In short, the facts you linked to (ha) don't align with how the legal system works, common sense, or reality.
Can you please share some credible evidence?
Maybe some of this stuff is debunked but they try to catalog it here.
If we're whatabouting, the capitol-invaders got off mostly scot-free in the moment, compared to hundreds of more-peaceful protesters who were maced, beaten and detained by cops for much less.
https://www.good.is/stop-equating-trumps-capitol-insurrectio...
I don't think we disagree as much as it seems.
Postscript: Check that first link to see why I got rebuttal-happy when you compared it to BLM. A lot of bad-faith or otherwise ignorant actors are trying to draw false equivalence to the movements/actions, and the narrative needs to be challenged.
Most of them suck it up and move on with their lives. Some get their feelings in a bunch and can't let go.
Letting this guy whine on twitter about how unfair the world is to him 24x7 sure hasn't lowered the tensions in the past 4 years. It's given us exactly what we have now.
Except in 1876, 1888, 2000, and 2016.
But also I don’t blame Twitter for finally putting an end to the misery he caused. I blame them for not doing it sooner, if anything.
I can't find it now, but I saw some data that showed if the votes were split 50/50 Republicans would control the white house, 57 Senate seats, and hold a solid house majority.
Democrats are able to win marginal victories because they are a big tent party that tries to build a more moderate coalition of voters, while pulling in the country's left flank. Joe Biden would be a center-right politician in most western democracies, despite being considered the "left wing" candidate in the United States.
Republicans need to take fewer steps to the center to build a winning coalition. For example, there's a real chance Trump could have won with a 2nd round of COVID stimulus checks, but he was ultimately talked out such measures by conservative economic advisors (despite majority of his own supporters wanted a more robust stimulus plan for COVID) So it would have been a win-win. Unfortunately, by capitulating to a specific niche in his party it cost him popular support and ultimately the election.
The sad truth is, if Trump listened to his own supporters and actually governed as a populist he would have easily won reelection and this whole mess would have been avoided. But instead, he merely communicated like a populist but chose to govern more like a crummy Jeb Bush. If you look at the bills passed by the 115th congress[1] nothing looks particularly populist or even "Trumpian". Branding vs execution.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/115th_United_States_Congress#E...
That's the phrase used by DC Residents. Which has just been demonstrated:
1. The DC Mayor was powerless to stop the riot. The DC National Guard report to the President (EDIT: and the President took 3-hours 10 minutes before the DC National Guard responded to the break-in. From 2:30 to 5:40, the DC National Guard waited. So needless to say, DC Residents aren't exactly feeling safe about the President's ability to protect them)
2. The DC Residents, where the riot took place, have no Representative nor a Senator to represent them.
3. DC Residents pay taxes, just like everyone else in this country. But without a substantial Representative nor a Senator to carry their voice (on such important issues like: maybe the Mayor should have been in charge of the police forces on 1/6th, instead of Trump).
--------
I presume that those who lost the election still have a Representative, a Governor who controls their own military (a local National Guard and/or militia of some kind), two Senators and more.
DC Residents on the other hand: show the true "taxation without representation". What it actually feels like to not have power over your own city.
My understanding is that the Mayor specifically asked other law enforcement agencies to stay away. Draw your own conspiracies from this.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-01-07/dc-riots-c...
I know its a confusing situation. But your story has nothing to do with the DC Mayor.
EDIT: For yall who are downvoting me. The Mayor controls the DC Metropolitan Police Department. A COMPLETELY different set of officers than the Capitol Police. Furthermore, the DC Mayor has no access to a National Guard militia for backup, and relies upon the President for that. That's just the facts in this matter.
"To be clear, the District of Columbia is not requesting other federal law enforcement personnel and discourages any additional deployment without immediate notification to, and consultation with, MPD if such plans are underway."
From her twitter: https://twitter.com/MayorBowser/status/1346530358674792466?r...
Bowser was part of the group calling for reinforcements at 1:30pm.
As we all know, National Guard (under orders from Pence) didn't arrive until 5:40pm. The National Guard's superiors are the DoD and the President, not the Mayor.
Approval of DC National Guard reinforcements was ultimately a job that was squarely in the Trump Administration's responsibility.
------
It is clear that everyone underestimated the scope of the threat on 1/5th. But virtually everyone who was "near" the Capitol was going full-on panic mode by 2:30 (when the building was fully breached).
Well, everyone except the DoD / DC National Guard for some reason. Hopefully that issue gets further investigated and we figure out what the hell happened there.
Uh, what? Trump lost according to the rules of the Electoral College and lost the popular vote by millions.
This is just a regular old election loss. Why should it be worse than any other loss in the modern era?
Twitter, FB, Fox, OAN, etc, have been helping the President spread lies about not actually losing for months (going back to before the election itself). If people believe that, then this is the logical result.
It's astonishing how many people think the more dangerous thing is that the social media companies are rethinking their hands-off approach...
The really dangerous thing is the people fanning the flames for profit and disclaiming responsibility for their actions under the guise of "free speech." "I didn't destroy the country, I just told other people to..."
Congress is about to impeach Trump (successfully this time, since the Democrats now control the Senate). That will prohibit him from holding public office in the future, so they won't even be able to hope for a do-over in '24. I doubt that will do much to calm them.
Conviction requires 2/3 Senate vote, so 17 Republicans will need to vote to convict.
That’s not how that works. Conviction in the Senate requires a 2/3 majority vote, which is vanishingly unlikely even with Democratic control.
Unless Democrats can really stick to one well aimed narrow charge, this one will likely fall apart too. They only need to include one ridiculous charge to have Republicans nope out.
Trump should have been impeached for that phone call. Drawing any attention away from that was a mistake.
1) The Phone Call 2) Obstruction of Justice
The investigative report, you know the evidence, was needed.
Your version of how this went down doesn't make any sense.
In attempting to resist impeachment, the Republicans want to call the report into question. That includes both it's direct evidence (attacking sources, resisting subpeonas, etc) and it's other claims. If you claim A and B and I debunk B, it sure feels like I weaken A (that's not logically correct, but people fall for this trick all the time).
RealClearPolitics, which is a Republican heavy source - so note here, they ARE biased - lays out the argument the Republicans used: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/01/28/democr...!
(and I'm not saying RCP is accurate as a whole, but I'm saying they are accurate as to the Republican argument against impeachment)
Democrats do not control the Senate, and will not until after all of Ossoff, Warnock, and Harris (as VP) take office, which will be not earlier than exactly when Trump leaves.
More to the point, it takes a 2/3 vote in the Senate to convict, and Democrats will, even after all the newly elected figures relevant take office, have a bare majority due to the VP’s tie breaking vote, not a 2/3 supermajority.
Truth: In theory, peoples' grievances need to be heard. Trump did not get elected simply because he is a loudmouth contrarian criminal xenophobe. He also got elected over concerns for American manufacturing, a counterbalance to extreme-leftist social changes, the hope for real infrastructure investment, etc.
However, in 2020, the idea of not being heard is pretty crap. "Being heard" doesn't mean "do everything you ask all the time". Trump has spread constant, factual lies, and as the President, incited violence at the Capitol. The people marching currently, the pretext of which is to argue that the free and fair election of Biden is illegitimate because it isn't who they want, is garbage. That grievance does not warrant any more attention than it has been given; that there is no evidence of systemic fraud at any level, and that this is a well-vetted assertion.
Finally, while "primary sources" are nice to have, it is suspicious to me that you don't trust the FBI on this. I'm no blind supporter of LEO (Ha!) but how are you suspicious of the claim, given the behavior and events of the past week/two months? It makes no sense.
To be clear on my stance, I'm left and I am pleased overall with the social changes and tolerance being pushed.
Socially conservative people have always existed, and would typically be wary of changes in the world order/society no matter what. Our society on this planet has changed at a much quicker rate than average. Then throw in social media, which allows amplification of the extremes, and things really can feel off the rails.
However, to your last point:
> to have, it is suspicious to me that you don't trust the FBI on this. I'm no blind supporter of LEO (Ha!) but how are you suspicious of the claim, given the behavior and events of the past week/two months? It makes no sense.
No one had firearms at the capital, at least so far as I’m aware. Had they brought them that would be a different story. I also built a platform to monitor social networks (check my profile). I haven’t picked anything up like all 50 states protesting. A few surely, but idk not some crazy coordination or anything (honestly seems more from the left). Could be underground, but idk. The capital protest had far more going on.
Trivially fact checkable
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/alabama-man-charged-posse...
> and secured one black handgun, one M4 Carbine assault rifle along with rifle magazines loaded with ammunition, and components for the construction of eleven “Molotov Cocktails” in the form of mason jars filled with ignitable substances, rags, and lighters.
https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-tr...
> hey found a compact Tavor X95 assault rifle, a 9mm Glock 19 handgun and about 100 rounds of ammunition, according to court filings.
I assume you mean among the rioters: are you sure? I saw video of a guy pulling up his jacket showing a handgun stuffed in his pants.
>> I haven’t picked anything up like all 50 states protesting. A few surely, but idk not some crazy coordination or anything (honestly seems more from the left).
You're wrong about this, and you probably shouldn't be bragging about your platform or credentials if you're this ignorant of what is going on.
Trump, for better or worse, was the voice of half the country. Now, lots of people feel they have taxation without representation. Worse, they’re feeling as if they’re being persecuted.
IMO they should let him have Twitter back. If need be, have them approve his tweets pre viewing. This would lower tensions. It won’t fix the underlying issues, but you want the leader to empathize then disarm.
I also have to say, I haven’t seen where this is being planned. Facebook, Twitter... parler (lol)? I’d like to see evidence of it, not trust the FBI here.