Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frihed89
OK, but why doesn't someone take a look at the deeper grievances of Trump's base? The gang that took over the Capitol Building represent only the most radical element of a large group of people who have been cast aside for the last 30 or so years. Underneath all this there are some things to think about, like: structural change in the US economy and labor force, the decline of Industrial Unions, and the subprime mortgage crisis, to name a few.
The deepest seem to be claims of massive voter fraud and a 'stolen' election put forth with no credible evidence. They've been looked at and rejected by court after court.
The deepest seem to be claims of massive voter fraud and a 'stolen' election put forth with no credible evidence. They've been looked at and rejected by court after court.
You lose all your credibility when you refuse to even consider trying to validate mail in ballots from illegally enacted voting laws in states like Pennsylvania when you contested for 4 years Trumps election victory with wild and unhinged Russian conspiracy theories
Demanding justice: (access to ballots, signatures) & laws followed , having day in court (a full hearing), & remediation for lawbreaking (states violated their own election laws) ------ is NOT a Coup!
OK, but why doesn't someone take a look at the deeper grievances of Trump's base? The gang that took over the Capitol Building represent only the most radical element of a large group of people who have been cast aside for the last 30 or so years. Underneath all this there are some things to think about, like: structural change in the US economy and labor force, the decline of Industrial Unions, and the subprime mortgage crisis, to name a few.
doctors, lawyers, business owners, military officers - have been cast aside?
doctors, lawyers, business owners, military officers - have been cast aside?
Doctors-Yes by insurance replacing the with RNs and PAs.
Lawyers-Yes, by insurance companies using shifting settlement strategies to paralegals .
Business owners-yes by Amazon, Walmart, etc.
Military Officers-No, those are government jobs.
I read the article, I have a few issues with her facts:
1) Military Officials: Esper was lying to further an agenda opposed to the Executive's goals. He needed to go. Still, not a soft-coup.
2) Communications: At no time did Trump cut off communication or restrict the free flow of information between citizens. If anything, it is the tech elites that did that. (It would actually be evidence of a coup against Trump.)
3) The Judiciary: All within the power of the US Senate and the President. He didn't kill anybody to open the positions, he didn't demote anyone (he can't), it was a naturally occurring legal process.
4)Government Officials being replaced: This occurs regularly in US Presidential administrations. Trump's cabinet has a history of coming-and-goings. I would suspect he doesn't like hearing "No, that is not constitutional." However, to elevate this to soft-coup on the basis of replacements seems disingenuous.
5) The Legislature: This one I would almost agree with. I agree that the attempt to thwart the electoral vote count was a soft-coup attempt. I read the full speech posted by ABC and I did not see anything in there that explicitly said, "go over throw the Legislature." I did see the words "peacefully protest". I also saw the words, "let your voices be heard". Do threats of retaliation for going against him elevate to the level of soft-coup? Maybe. However, that seems to be normal rhetoric in the Senate and House since the 1990s.
I think Trump is a sore loser, but I don't think he attempted a soft-coup any more than any other other first time president trying to get reelected. I cannot fathom why she would think that exercising the legal process to have an audit represents a coup.
If you have been drinking the media Kool-aide and not listening to all sources, you probably would agree with dear Fiona. However, she compares our natural Constitutional and legal processes that normally occur under an administration with countries that do not share the same legal processes.
She makes up her own definition of coup (self-coup), finds some pretty flimsy “evidence”, and makes it fit. Not impressive, especially for a Harvard grad.
I know it’s an opinion piece, but she’s trying to prove something using pseudo-logic, and most of the article is just her opinions instead putting together actual facts to prove her point. You know the argument is flimsy when she has to start off with “I’ve been studying authoritarian regimes for three decades, and I know the signs of a coup when I see them.” She starts off with a basic “argument from authority” fallacy. Most people will just accept it face value and won’t continue reading. That’s what she’s counting on.
Call it whatever you feel like calling it or make up your own definitions, but I didn’t see an organized military takeover of anything. I saw a mob of rioters walking through the Capitol building posing and taking selfies. I saw them kicked out and a Republican Senate, lead by a Republican VP, confirm the election results.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
