How will you react if Trump wins electorally but is declared unfit to be president?

[stevevw]

I'm actually worried they are ramping things to the point of foreign wars (invasion) over the rhetoric...

What did we do to stop Hitler? That was the whole point of NATO.

I don't know what they are doing with all this, but it's more than dangerous at this point, especially using the trappings of the office of the Vice President of the United States to say it.

I don't think it will go that far. Not a foreign invasion. Its more like a civil war. The undermining of the US internally. As they say united we stand and divided we fall.

Jordan Peterson speaks about the evolution of the totalitarian State. How it gradually forms and people sort of get use to the restrictions. Like right now we have pretty regulated lives and look what happened during Covid.

So the idea is to look for the signs of a developing controlling State to combat it before it gets too much control. They say one of the major institutions that is undermined in all controlling States is the family, then the church and freedom of speech.

Another sign is top heavy government. Especially the expanding welfare State. More bureaucracy especially in health, education, and law and order. More administrators in administering the regulations. More regulations for everything.

All the exact opposite of a free society and government by the people and for the people. .

But you may be right about foreign wars as far as other enermy nations trying to undermine the west. They have found breaches trying to sway the election. They want a destablised west. This feeds into world politics going on at the same time. It seems everyones wanting to undermine the west and Isreal. Wonder if its related.

 

[Aldebaran]

There is no legal mechanism by which Trump could be "declared unfit" prior to taking office.

And certainly no political reason, even if he were a self-declared Fascist. There's no legal reason a Fascist can't be elected president. Or a Communist.

Very true! Some parties are even named for what people often use as political slurs. Calling someone a Socialist, for example, and yet:

Claudia De la Cruz / Karina Garcia (Party for Socialism and Liberation) is on the ballot in November. Some might claim her party name alone makes her unfit for office, but it's the voters who ultimately make the decision.

 

[RDKirk]

do you remember Covid?

you're putting too much faith in the idea of legality, as if people are bound by something concrete and unchanging framework of rules.

the 'state of exception' nullifies all rules.

Yes in 'normal' circumstances, there would be no mechanism to deny a presidential election, however this is an emergency. The normal rules cannot apply in such a dire situation. Remember, Trump supposedly led an "insurrection" on Jan.6th. Democracy is at stake, and the administration cannot in good faith allow a "fascist traitor" to take power.


remember the Russian collusion hoax?
sure, in normal circumstances it's illegal and completely unethical to spy on the incoming administration, but wait, we heard a rumor about muh russia, therefore there's no rules anymore and we can surveil the president and anyone else with impunity, etc. ya know, it's an emergency and democracy is at stake and stuff.


so really all it will take is another imagineered 'state of exception' after the election to do whatever regime power wants to do.

This is not an emergency and nobody except you has said so. Certainly the Democrats would not say so, because that would be admitting an emergency occurred on their watch.

 

[RDKirk]

I'm actually worried they are ramping things to the point of foreign wars (invasion) over the rhetoric...

What did we do to stop Hitler? That was the whole point of NATO.

I don't know what they are doing with all this, but it's more than dangerous at this point, especially using the trappings of the office of the Vice President of the United States to say it.

The whole point of NATO was to stop the Soviets.

 

[lifepsyop]

This is not an emergency and nobody except you has said so.

A large portion of the regime in power has openly declared Trump to be the leader of an insurrection. There could hardly be a better reason to invoke a stage of exception/emergency that overrides all legal norms.

The Jan 6th insurrection narrative is pure fantasy of course, but that hasn't stopped anyone yet.

 

[RDKirk]

A large portion of the regime in power has openly declared Trump to be the leader of an insurrection. There could hardly be a better reason to invoke a stage of exception/emergency that overrides all legal norms.

The Jan 6th insurrection narrative is pure fantasy of course, but that hasn't stopped anyone yet.

This is not an emergency and nobody except you has said so.

 

[prodromos]

I would prepare to witness the mental breakdown of the libs with Trump 2.0.

We saw that here in Sydney when he beat Hillary Clinton. There is one suburb that is very popular among liberals, and when Trump won the election they had to organise counselling for many of the children at Primary School because they were acting out the distress of their parents (none of whom were U.S. citizens).
Incredibly sad.

 

[lifepsyop]

This is not an emergency and nobody except you has said so.

Of course it's not a real emergency.

It's an invented imaginary emergency so the regime can potentially force a 'state of exception' that has the effect of suspending normal rules and blocking the election of the president.

Again, it's the exact same rationale the regime used to capture the incoming Trump administration in a web of surveillance and general lawfare.

The idea of using US intelligence agencies to spy on the incoming president was pretty unthinkable in the public consciousness up until that point, and then the media and regime just normalized it all through their state of emergency narrative. ("muh russian collusion")

 

[stevevw]

The whole idea of names and labels for people and groups is cultivated by progressives. Not that labels are not important. But ideologues tend to make it everything. Words, language and narratives are what make reality. You can gain creedence for using the right words or be destroyed when misspeaking. Identities have varying worth and value. This is a modern phenomena of identity politics.

Everything is in the label given rather than all the other individual aspects to a person or group of people. The individual is determined by the label identity.

This stems from ideas like intersectionality invented by critical race theorists. Humans are reduced to 101 identities. All social interactions and differences in outcome are the result of intersecting identities in relation to power differences.

Thats why we see the expanding gender identities and the words that go with it ie pronouns. Thats why the word woman has been redefined, Thats why we see even existing groups being divided into smaller groups and even Christians being divided into different groups with intersections to other groups.

So a person is known by their race, sex, gender, belief, political ideology, class, age, interests, weight, looks, health, education status, socioeconomic status, intelligence, ect ect ect and not John or Mary with 100s of individual aspects that makeup the individual. Its actually stereotyping.

In fact there are so many intersecting differences between people that it brings us back to the truth that the individual is the ultimate worth. Which is exactly what Declarations and Human Rights are based on. Inalienable Rights regardless of identity. Just for being human.