CDZ America’s Next Authoritarian Will Be Much More Competent

[OldLady]

There are posters on this forum who have stated that they do not care if the election was fraudulant as long as Biden wins.

Who? Want to quote them?

 

[OldLady]

all of the voter election misconduct affidavits are being dismissed out of hand or automatically being labeled debunked

They are being looked into and THEN explained or debunked. But the fraud crowd ignores that and keeps spewing them.

 

[Donald H]

[/QUOTE]
At this point, they sure are hopping mad. But what is Joe Biden's message? Unity. That doesn't mean we all have to agree but that we can work together for a common cause--our country, not our party. He says he will be a President for all the people, not just his supporters. Let's give it a try.
[/QUOTE]
Why not try to address the topic?
If you have nothing to say about it then maybe it's better to not get into the thread?
I suspect that you do so I'll present the challenge. Read my reply to Tom Payne and you will understand what's being asked, as far as we can tell until Tom expllains further.

This 'is' the CDZ.

 

[sartre play]

How bad has it gotten, Why do we allow one person to hold up legislation that effects the whole country. Mitch Mc keeps pushing no liability responsibility for big business & as little relief as possible for average Americans. Some how he is able to put the brakes on anything helpful to any one who is not supper rich.

 

[Donald H]

How bad has it gotten, Why do we allow one person to hold up legislation that effects the whole country. Mitch Mc keeps pushing no liability responsibility for big business & as little relief as possible for average Americans. Some how he is able to put the brakes on anything helpful to any one who is not supper rich.

That's more to suggesting that the system is fatally flawed, rather than your Constitution being so fatally flawed that it has no way of breaking the logjam. Is that your intent?

Whatever it is you've got the wrong thread.

 

[OldLady]

Why not try to address the topic?
If you have nothing to say about it then maybe it's better to not get into the thread?
I suspect that you do so I'll present the challenge. Read my reply to Tom Payne and you will understand what's being asked, as far as we can tell until Tom expllains further.

This 'is' the CDZ.
[/QUOTE]
Why don't you address the topic then, if you have something to say that hasn't been raised? First off, we're having an argument about whether he is an authoritarian. That was predictable. Perhaps this discussion is better left to other boards where people can agree with the fundamental principle that trying to steal the vote was an authoritarian move, preceded by many other authoritarian moves in his 4 years.

 

[Donald H]

[
Your comment on Trump trying to steal the vote and it being an authoritarian move, is closer to being on topic. But it still misses the point being asked by the OP. Mostly because the OP didn't really make any point that would speak to his notion that America's next authoritarian will be more competent.

Therefore I made an attempt to draw him/her out on what he/her based the suggested premise.

Do you have any further ideas?

 

[TNHarley]

Its hilarious watching people that support authoritarians whine about authoritarians

 

[Invisibleflash]

Op... military has to back the strongman or no go.

 

[OldLady]

[
Your comment on Trump trying to steal the vote and it being an authoritarian move, is closer to being on topic. But it still misses the point being asked by the OP. Mostly because the OP didn't really make any point that would speak to his notion that America's next authoritarian will be more competent.

Therefore I made an attempt to draw him/her out on what he/her based the suggested premise.

Do you have any further ideas?

I'm not sure what you're asking. Are you saying the OP has no point because the next authoritarian who can do it better hasn't arrived yet?

 

[OldLady]

Op... military has to back the strongman or no go.

Only if it is done by an armed coup.
The point is, our democracy can be laid waste without firing a shot if the pillars of democracy--the free press and the fair vote is undermined. It very nearly happened. It will take years to undo the damage Trump and his power greedy authoritarians have caused. And they never fired a shot.

 

[DustyInfinity]

You CAN NOT BE A DICTATOR -- until you control the MEDIA and the GUNS...

Thanks for making my point. He does control what media half the country believes. Therefore, what news they will hear. As far as guns...ever hear of Commander in Chief? If the generals hadn't balked, there would be a lot more of them crawling around civilian neighborhoods right now.

How do you explain the inaccuracies and outright fallacies of the mainstream news. The reliance of unnamed sources, the 90% negative coverage from the very beginning? The media discredited themselves with bizaar and sad behavior. He hardly has control of the media. I think it is telling that there is an effort to silence any dissenting opinions.

 

[Donald H]

[
Your comment on Trump trying to steal the vote and it being an authoritarian move, is closer to being on topic. But it still misses the point being asked by the OP. Mostly because the OP didn't really make any point that would speak to his notion that America's next authoritarian will be more competent.

Therefore I made an attempt to draw him/her out on what he/her based the suggested premise.

Do you have any further ideas?

I'm not sure what you're asking. Are you saying the OP has no point because the next authoritarian who can do it better hasn't arrived yet?

He's saying that America's next authoritarian will be much more competent and then he leaves it there with no explanation. I found it interesting enough to ask him to elaborate.

Is there going to be a next authoritarian? Was Trump an authoritarian or did he just have intentions of becoming one? A really simple question is, did Trump break the law to some extent that could be dealt with under the US Constitution? And than that would beg the question on whether the US Constitution would be able to deal with stopping authoritarian rule? Or, if Trump did break the law in a substantial way then would the Constitution be overruled by the incoming regime for the sake of keeping the peace?
Or, if Trump did break the law then why didn't the Constitution demand that the law of the land deal with him appropriately?

Keeping in mind, those questions are only guesses on what Tom Payne meant. Do you have any answers to my questions while we wait for him to expand on his topic?

 

[DustyInfinity]

The rejection of political plurality - It takes two sides to fight. It isn't like the left isn't trying to wipe out the Republican Party.

At this point, they sure are hopping mad. But what is Joe Biden's message? Unity. That doesn't mean we all have to agree but that we can work together for a common cause--our country, not our party. He says he will be a President for all the people, not just his supporters. Let's give it a try.

I am disappointed that you actually believe Biden when he says he wants Unity. His party, your party, has denigrated republican voters for years. The outright contempt for democrat leaders to conservatives is visceral. I would love unity, but Biden and democrat leadership have sunk to frightening levels to wipe me out.

 

[DustyInfinity]

There are posters on this forum who have stated that they do not care if the election was fraudulant as long as Biden wins.

Who? Want to quote them?

I was referring to Billy. There was a thread that asked if there was irrefutable proof of election fraud, would democrats care. I'm not sure if Billy was the only one to openly embrace possible fraud.

 

[OldLady]

[
Your comment on Trump trying to steal the vote and it being an authoritarian move, is closer to being on topic. But it still misses the point being asked by the OP. Mostly because the OP didn't really make any point that would speak to his notion that America's next authoritarian will be more competent.

Therefore I made an attempt to draw him/her out on what he/her based the suggested premise.

Do you have any further ideas?

I'm not sure what you're asking. Are you saying the OP has no point because the next authoritarian who can do it better hasn't arrived yet?

He's saying that America's next authoritarian will be much more competent and then he leaves it there with no explanation. I found it interesting enough to ask him to elaborate.

Is there going to be a next authoritarian? Was Trump an authoritarian or did he just have intentions of becoming one? A really simple question is, did Trump break the law to some extent that could be dealt with under the US Constitution? And than that would beg the question on whether the US Constitution would be able to deal with stopping authoritarian rule? Or, if Trump did break the law in a substantial way then would the Constitution be overruled by the incoming regime for the sake of keeping the peace?
Or, if Trump did break the law then why didn't the Constitution demand that the law of the land deal with him appropriately?

Keeping in mind, those questions are only guesses on what Tom Payne meant. Do you have any answers to my questions while we wait for him to expand on his topic?

It wasn't my understanding that the Supreme Court dealt in criminal matters. What they do is determine if an action is Constitutional or not. That is their limited power and their only brake on an authoritarian's rise to power.

 

[gipper]

See the Bush II administration for that blueprint OP.

You mean Obama right?

 

[DustyInfinity]

all of the voter election misconduct affidavits are being dismissed out of hand or automatically being labeled debunked

They are being looked into and THEN explained or debunked. But the fraud crowd ignores that and keeps spewing them.

I would have no problem if that were the case, but the media is summarily dismissing them out of hand. When the media says they are debunked, I would sure like to know which ones, and how.

 

[OldLady]

The rejection of political plurality - It takes two sides to fight. It isn't like the left isn't trying to wipe out the Republican Party.

At this point, they sure are hopping mad. But what is Joe Biden's message? Unity. That doesn't mean we all have to agree but that we can work together for a common cause--our country, not our party. He says he will be a President for all the people, not just his supporters. Let's give it a try.

I am disappointed that you actually believe Biden when he says he wants Unity. His party, your party, has denigrated republican voters for years. The outright contempt for democrat leaders to conservatives is visceral. I would love unity, but Biden and democrat leadership have sunk to frightening levels to wipe me out.

I have no party. If you would love unity, you need to listen for the voices willing to communicate like intelligent people with ideas. Let the shriekers make each other deaf.

 

[OldLady]

all of the voter election misconduct affidavits are being dismissed out of hand or automatically being labeled debunked

They are being looked into and THEN explained or debunked. But the fraud crowd ignores that and keeps spewing them.

I would have no problem if that were the case, but the media is summarily dismissing them out of hand. When the media says they are debunked, I would sure like to know which ones, and how.

If you haven't heard any, you have only been watching news that won't publish them. I've read all the allegations and I've also read all the reasons they are debunked. Many are simple misunderstandings, not lies. They are not at all hard to find.