It’s common courtesy not to post a video without commentary which is why it’s a rule. You can look up common courtesy on the internet as I’ve yet to see it displayed from you. At least not here. What Is Common Courtesy
That's quite funny. But then I've fallen over more than that in the past 3 years because I'm clumsy as hell. Thank heavens I don't have a camera on me 24/7...
Yes, but the fact he somehow runs the chance of winning the election again means the threat of succeeding is still there. The threat to democracy has not been removed. You think Trump and his psychophants are going to accept the results of this election if he loses? Absolutely not.
Your criteria are different than mine. Pearl Harbor, for example, was a traumatic and horrible incident, but it was from an outside enemy and resulted in the country coming together to defeat it. What happened on January 6, and what Trump and his MAGA minions continue doing, is an internal threat which, like the Civil War, threatens to tear the country apart. I'm not talking about policy differences. Fundamental to my belief system is reasonable people can differ - and compromise. I'm talking about people who still contest the last election, and a candidate who has already intimated he won't accept a loss in November. This is contrary to everything I was taught about America, and which I served from 1961-67 to protect. In short, Trump and his followers are a threat to the Republic.
I agree except the "moved on" comment. It hasn't, and won't if Trump is elected, which many "Americans" are hoping for. They are putting policy over the welfare of the country. One may disagree with some of Biden’s initiatives, but not with his loyalty to and respect for our democratic norms. THAT is the Number 1 requirement of any President.
[QUOTE="Gatorrick22, post: 16494705, member: 2070" Here's a prediction... Somewhere along the way Joe (his handlers) will ditch Kamala and replace her with Gavin Newsome. This happens only... if they can pull off another steal. Then they will declare Joe incompetent to hold office and thereby elevating Gavin to the WH. [/QUOTE] I think what is more likely (but still not very) is that, if polls are still very unfavorable like they are now, Joe bows out this summer at the behest of his “handlers” following a sudden health incident of some kind and is replaced by Newsome who picks someone other than Harris as his running partner.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but you’re saying that if he wins the election to be president, then he will succeed at becoming president. Isn’t that kind of a tautology? Now, if he loses this election as he did the last one, I really don’t know what will happen. I don’t know that his ego would let him just give up. But he might have a lot of other things to deal with in life that he just drops being president. Maybe his followers will riot. If they do, they might do some damage, but they can’t take over the country. Even if they wanted to, they don’t have the firepower. Now I freely admit that I might be underestimating Trump and his followers. Perhaps we will end up with a kind of Seven Days in May, if you get the movie reference. He would have to have the military on his side to stage a real coup. However, I’ve always believed that the ship of state has so much momentum that is very difficult to change it too far off course. I think Trump would lose, make a big stink about it, generate a few brouhahas, and then ride off into the sunset.
I think what is more likely (but still not very) is that, if polls are still very unfavorable like they are now, Joe bows out this summer at the behest of his “handlers” following a sudden health incident of some kind and is replaced by Newsome who picks someone other than Harris as his running partner.[/QUOTE] Quite feasible and it does kill two birds with one stone.
This is a dangerous way of thinking, as it potentially leads to a lack of vigilance and even carelessness.
First off, thank you for your service. That’s admirable, regardless of political differences. You started the sub discussion by stating January 6 was “the worst moment in our history since the Civil War.” I’m merely responded that I thought there were numerous days in our history that were worse than January 6. I understand the distinction you’re making between internal and external forces. The difference between us is that I do not see January 6 as coming close to the end of the world as we know it. Yes, some people used violence to gain access to the capital, and those people have been apprehended and are being prosecuted and punished. Once the intruders were inside the capital and had romped around for a while, I don’t recall any reports that they put up a fight before law-enforcement hustled them out of there and arrested them. Perhaps I missed news reports of a fight to retake the capital. I don’t recall them digging in to make a stand. I do recall a bunch of people on TH mocking the intruders as feckless. We’ll just have to disagree on the severity of January 6. Please do not misinterpret my position as supporting January 6 or even thinking it was OK. It was wrong and I fully support prosecuting the perpetrators. Perhaps in the future people will look at it as a moment in which our country almost ceased to exist. Or perhaps in the future people will shake their heads at it like we do the rabble who trashed the White House after Andrew Jackson’s inauguration.
Not a dangerous way of thinking, more a realistic one. Interpreting a past event in no way prevents vigilance and preparation for possible future events. Don’t you think your way of thinking could lead to preventively rounding up Trump supporters and incarcerating them because of what they might do?
Even though I meant it in the context of the survival of democracy, which was what we were discussing, I’ll accept that saying “anything” was too broad in meaning. I should’ve said no one wearing a buffalo hat is going to destroy our democracy.
Crazy. In this thread advocating for having a trial and then (presumably) rounding up Trump and incarcerating him for what he did do is pretty much the same as rounding up Trump supporters and incarcerating them because of what they might do. Quoted poster may not be paying close enough attention to the Trump trials (and not trials) to recognize that the grotesque distortion of our criminal justice system is very likely to prevent an actual trial in the majority of these cases. [See delays from Trump appointed judge. See delays from clearly tainted USSC. See potential intervention from elected officials in GA.] But hey - it's not really a big deal if a sitting President illegally tries to overturn an election and not transfer power. As long as they don't succeed. It's not like the sky is falling. Similarly, I'm pretty sure that the quoted poster would not be all that concerned if someone attempted to murder a member of his family......as long as they didn't succeed. It wouldn't actually be THAT important for justice to be served with a trial, because nobody ended up being hurt. It's not like the sky was falling.
Not if your interpretation is off (yours was). Perhaps you can explain what my way of thinking is here; I don't believe I shared one aside from cautionary tales.
