zlacker

I read through every comment in this thread and no one seems to be addressing that the people voted for this. They'll probably vote for it again in the midterms and/or 2028. You're despairing over a democratic outcome. What do you actually propose that would fix this? Disenfranchise half the country? Outlaw things people are voting for to happen? Any criticism needs to address how we democratically counter this regime, how this makes sense when this is the voted upon regime, or perhaps make an argument for why democracy has failed.

My perspective is that a scale has tipped, a critical mass of people decided they want this sort of thing, and they got it. It wasn't rigged, it wasn't fraudulent, it was a democratic election. Critique democracy itself, or the criticism is incoherent. Make an argument for why a government should be disallowed from doing things that the voters want it to do.

>>eudamo+(OP)
I actually think disenfranchisement is the only solution. Nazis didn't change their worldview after the war ended, they were shamed for them and learned to hide.

Republicans are now defending straight-up murder in broad daylight by federal forces. I doubt there's anything that could change their minds at this point, they're too far gone.

>>eudamo+(OP)
> Disenfranchise half the country?

Way more than half the country was disenfranchised in the last election. Best case scenario (and very unlikely scenario): blue sweep in the next elections and then massive electoral reform.

>>eudamo+(OP)
I think a lot of voters were fooled (or foolish) into thinking that Trump would limit himself to go after other people; he got a higher percentage of minority votes in 2024 then prior elections. That's not good but the mask is off and I think Trump has lost a lot of those voters.

It's also hard to quantify how much the pandemic and inflation moved some voters away from Biden/Harris.

I think Dems will win big in the next election. The question is how long this lesson will last with voters.

>>eudamo+(OP)
If your definition of Democracy is based on how we elect our leaders, then Hitler's Germany was a Democracy because Hitler was elected Chancellor by a majority. You need to define Democracy based on how we replace our leaders. In that case, Hitler's Germany was not a democracy since it was impossible for the people to replace the Fuhrer had they wished to. In Trump's case, we may still be a Democracy but there are worrysome indications ("Trump’s recent musing that there should be no 2026 election may or may not have been jocular").

>>xnx+G3
Electoral reform is really hard for parties just voted in by that election system. Suddenly they see the good in that which they had previously seen as bad.

>>eudamo+(OP)
There might be Gandhian/Nelson Mandela way of handling this. Both fought to change system and didn't teach hatredness towards individual a Racist person. Get arrested peacefully.

Others can work for immediate protest for release of the arrested.

Appeal to common values that they also have, and show how they are violating the religious values they profess.

Technically someone can make some app, that can easily help in getting the citizenship proof for an individual.

I am not from USA.

>>eudamo+(OP)
I thought a lot of the rhetoric was around economic issues during the 2024 campaign season? I see this argument a lot, and while it's true that a sizable percentage voted for punishment of their political opponents, I don't think independents (in the immigration and "egg prices" camps) wanted this. Trump 2.0 voters should be ashamed because the signs were obvious, but the notion that we need to put kid gloves on for the vile, murderous fascists is asinine.

The next chapter of America needs to be punishing anyone who was apart of these death squads and the officials who allowed it to happen. That's it. There is no statute of limitations on murder or treason. We can't make the same mistakes as we did after the civil war (leniency towards confederates and various compromises)

>>eudamo+(OP)
You can't vote away the Constitutional rights of other people. ICE is regularly violating the Constitution and being encouraged to do so by those in power. Unless multiple amendments were removed from the Constitution without anybody noticing, your point about "the people voted for this" is an absurd and ridiculous attempt to justify real abuse of power and anti-democratic actions.

If we can't agree as a people that the Constitution applies to everyone equally then it isn't a problem with democracy, it's a problem with fascism and must dealt with as such.

>>eudamo+(OP)
Yeah Americans don't want to face that their culture is the problem. Trump is still slightly more popular than he was at this point during his first term

https://www.natesilver.net/p/trump-approval-ratings-nate-sil...

They'd have to change the fundamental nature of business. Most US companies are run like tiny little fascist dictatorships, which is a great training ground for the real thing. The relationship between capital (owners/management) and labor is usually adversarial with "at-will" employment. Contrast in Norway, where businesses operate within a 3-way Agreement (Trepartssamarbeidet) - a formal cooperation between the government, employers' associations, and trade unions.

Americans would have to change capitalism too. The most reliable way to prevent the rise of the far right is to implement robust safety nets and low inequality, to reduce status anxiety and grievance.

But even in this thread they don't want to do that.

>>xnx+G3
> Way more than half the country was disenfranchised in the last election.

Over 152 million votes were cast, representing more than 64% turnout among those eligible to vote (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidentia...).

The USA has about 342 million people, and over 18% of them are age 14 or younger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_Sta...) and at least some of them are 15-17 (citation needed). So clearly, doing some arithmetic, there are fewer than 304 million adults.

Not only was "half the country" not "disenfranchised", literally a majority of adults actually voted (and this is not even considering that not all adults were statutorily allowed to vote in the first place).

>>eudamo+(OP)
Only republicans are actively destroying federal voter protections. Many red states already run elections with ridiculous voting restrictions. It's up to the federal government to discourage those practices, not encourage them. Luckily, they cannot mandate such changes.

>>zahlma+zo2
Because of the electoral college, gerrymandering, and other reasons (e.g. District of Columbia) many votes don't count at all or count far less.

>>xnx+Uq2
If that is what you're referring to, then it's nothing particular to Trump. Not all of it is even particular to the US; for example, Canadian electoral "ridings" function like single-EV states.

But also, Trump won the popular vote this time.

>>zahlma+Cv2
No dispute there. It's just a terrible system that has no reason to exist. No telling what turnout would be if more of the country new their vote might matter.

>>eudamo+(OP)
The people voted for border control and law and order, shooting random protesters in cold blood was not part of Trumps platform. It was an obvious conclusion after some thought, but many didnt think that far ahead.