• TechyDad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    Quite honestly, I go back and forth on whether a Trump second term would result in a dictatorship. Don’t get me wrong, he would do immense damage to our democracy and should be kept as far away from power as possible. (Preferably in a prison cell.)

    Trump’s first term, though, showed that Trump was often too incompetent to fulfill what he wanted to do. Not only that, but he was prone to get distracted by shiny things. He’s going to go after the “deep state” and kick out anyone who doesn’t support him? Well, first he needs to hold a press conference with a hurricane map that he marked up with a sharpie.

    All this being said, the best case scenario for a Trump second term is that democracy is seriously wounded. We could emerge from it still with our voting rights intact, but with our entire democracy vulnerable to the next guy who can con a group of people into thinking that he’s protecting them from The Other by removing everyone’s rights.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Seems like a good reason for the party to adapt in order to secure as much participation from as many likeminded voters as possible.

        “Not Trump” is not as universally convincing as I fear the party is assuming. It’s sufficient for you and I, to be sure.

      • TechyDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Right. I didn’t address this in my comment because I wanted to focus on Trump himself. Whatever Trump does, he’ll likely use this plan to destroy our democracy.

        If Trump gets into office again, our best hope would be that 1) the institutions can survive Project 2025 and 2) Trump and Co are too incompetent to enact their plans. I wouldn’t want to bet my life on either of these, though. A better hope is to work to keep Trump (and anyone else like him) away from any position of power all the way from President to city councilman.

      • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Reagan started to get in to ideas of unitary executive theory and Bush was another proponent. The founders often debated, famously Hamilton, what the “executive” role actually meant for the office, and it was left vague as a lot of their ideas were. In the context of the time you had landowners being allowed to vote, the whole point of the government was basically to ensure no states had power over any other, then over time the executive branch developed and expanded and presidents had to see what that meant testing limits over time. I don’t think this plan would be successful and if it were it would probably be bad by virtue of who would be in power.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Landowning was never a requirement on the federal level in the US. It was allowed to be a requirement for the states for a little while, few states bothered and the ones that did gave it up.

          • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Look in to the men’s suffrage movement, Vermont, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky were the only three states to have full adult suffrage for white males before 1800.

            18th century property qualifications:

            Connecticut: an estate worth 40 shillings annually or £40 of personal property

            Delaware: fifty acres of land (twelve under cultivation) or £40 of personal property

            Georgia: fifty acres of land

            Maryland: fifty acres of land and £40 personal property

            Massachusetts Bay: an estate worth 40 shillings annually or £40 of personal property

            New Hampshire: £50 of personal property

            New Jersey: one-hundred acres of land, or real estate or personal property £50

            New York: £40 of personal property or ownership of land

            North Carolina: fifty acres of land

            Pennsylvania: fifty acres of land or £50 of personal property

            Rhode Island and Providence Plantations: personal property worth £40 or yielding 50 shillings annually

            South Carolina: one-hundred acres of land on which taxes were paid; or a town house or lot worth £60 on which taxes were paid; or payment of 10 shillings in taxes

            Virginia: fifty acres of vacant land, twenty-fives acres of cultivated land, and a house twelve feet by twelve feet; or a town lot and a house twelve feet by twelve

    • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      I wouldn’t put it passed him to try to weasel into a 3rd (or indefinite 2nd) term but given the rampant nepotism and astonishing loyalty I think it more likely his family will all start rotating into that role and we’ll see a Trump on the ballot for the next 2-3 decades. Plenty of time to slow cook that frog.

      • TechyDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        He’s already said this kind of thing. He admired the Chinese President for declaring himself President For Life and he said that he deserves a third term for the “Russia Russia Russia investigation.” His age might play into him actually going for a third term. He’d be 82 in January 2029 - assuming his lifelong bad health habits didn’t get to him first.

        I could see him trying to appoint his successor, but none of his kids are as “charismatic” as he is. (Using the term “charismatic” loosely to describe the hold he has on some people. Not sure what else to call that.) A Trump Dictatorship could oddly result in a civil war as we get Trump Jr MAGAs fighting Greene MAGAs or Lake MAGAs etc. All while the tattered remnants of the Democrats try to use the chaos to right the ship.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        The Supreme Court will find a way. Clarence Thomas will get a new boat.

        No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice,

        They will just say the first term or second term doesn’t count because he wasn’t elected he won the EC.

    • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Trump governed like a milquetoast Republican and most of what he did the Democrats haven’t undone, the tax breaks for corporations, the tariffs, the immigration policy, the fucking wall.

      The rhetoric is part of the hyperreal spectacle of politics and it’s hilarious how so many people still clutch pearls over his insane personality even after his first term. His entire political brand was created by provoking outrage and he continues to do this. The threat to democracy is the Republican party and people forget how they already stole the 2001 election, and how fraudulent American elections historically were. The “fair” election is a very recent thing, like last 50 years. Some of the stories from the past are hilarious too like literally paying people to get on busses and carting them to polling stations.

    • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      You don’t go from 0 to dictatorship in a couple years. You have to wait for slow burn of propaganda, build support with appointees, etc. You can’t judge this from the first term.

      • TechyDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I think the biggest factor isn’t going to be Trump himself. If it was just him, he might trip over his own feet and keep himself from instituting a democracy. (Not that I’d bet our democracy on that happening.)

        The bigger danger are the people who would be (and already are) working behind the scenes. I think they were caught by surprise in 2016 - both in Trump’s win and in his willingness to go further towards dictatorship than they even hoped to achieve. They weren’t prepared and we got the chaotic slip that did damage, but didn’t result in President Trump For Life.

        This time, they’re prepared. If they get into power via a second Trump presidency, our best hope is that the institutions are sturdier than they seem to be and possibly that Trump is even more clumsy - to the point of sabotaging his own team’s plans. That’s not a very big hope, though. It’s about the same level as saying “I’m completely broke so I’ll spend my last few dollars on this lottery ticket to become rich.” Could it happen? Sure, but it’s much more likely that you/America lose.

        And even if we somehow, miraculously, emerge from a trump presidency with our democracy intact, it would be on life support. As you said, you don’t go from 0 to Dictatorship. Trump would have turned the dial enough that some future Trump figure would get into power and turn it the rest of the way.

        The only way to ensure that our democracy is safe is to keep Trump - and everyone supporting him - as far from power as possible.

        • Uranium3006@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          all trump has to do is more and more fashy shit while not being physically stopped, by the courts, democrats or the American people. you can say “he can’t do that” all you want but if he does it and isn’t punished then yes he can do that, whatever “that” is no matter how extreme, and you are letting him though inaction