this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2024
146 points (88.4% liked)

politics

19073 readers
6441 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FooBarrington 8 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Does anybody know which election wasn't "the most important election in history"?

[–] CptEnder 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Obama 2012. Sure Romney would've sucked ass but he probably would've just fumbled the whole thing comically instead of actively undoing democracy.

[–] FooBarrington 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Nah, that one also was the most important one:

Most every campaign cycle, it seems, presidential candidates and political pundits claim this election is the most important one ever. It’s become something of a cliché in American politics. This time, however, they just might be correct. Rarely before in modern times has the divide between the two parties been as stark.

https://www.politico.com/story/2012/03/the-most-important-presidential-election-ever-074188

[–] [email protected] 13 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I mean, this is the first where a genuine threat of fascism was on the table. I don’t see things getting pulled back any time soon. I think the orange criminal made too many bad behaviors ok and there’s no going back. We’re gonna crumble, the only question is how soon.

[–] FooBarrington 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that things are in a dire state, and this might genuinely be the most important election in history. But I don't see it ever getting better - as it stands right now, the Republican party will only continue getting crazier and more extreme, until there are no more elections. The system is fundamentally broken, and there needs to be some fundamental fix to off this wild ride.

Ranked Choice Voting with more political parties could be one such fix. It would allow for better representation on both sides (actual leftists on the left, and people on the right who aren't quite as despicable as is currently the case).

[–] aesthelete 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

But I don’t see it ever getting better - as it stands right now, the Republican party will only continue getting crazier and more extreme, until there are no more elections.

Them continually getting stomped in elections until they don't hold any meaningful power anymore would make them eventually have to moderate. I don't know that that's what will happen, as we seem to be stuck in the American cycle of dismay with the ruling party turning into support for the out-of-power party no matter how terrible the out-of-power party is.

But what I think it would look like is like what happened to Democrats trying to grab the Presidency during the Reagan era. They got stomped enough times in a row nationally that they basically had to change their party platform to appeal to Reagan voters.

[–] FooBarrington 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

But what's the likelihood of that happening? The Republican voter base lives in an alternative world, with alternative news and alternative media - and they are working hard on perpetuating that through indoctrination, both in the education system and through religion.

There have been so many points over the last couple of years where no rational person could keep supporting them, yet their base has grown or stayed the same. Their last president literally attempted a coup, yet there's a good chance he'll be re-elected. And even if he's not, and he dies in the next couple of years - his fascist movement will not end with him.

[–] aesthelete 1 points 6 months ago

But what’s the likelihood of that happening?

I'm not sure. I wouldn't bet on it either and don't think it's very likely to happen. They may have found a bridge too far for even their voters with the abortion ban stuff though. Theirs is an exceedingly unpopular opinion, and the more action they take to make abortion completely illegal without even exemptions for shit like rape and incest, the more I think they'll find themselves unelectable.

And even if he’s not, and he dies in the next couple of years - his fascist movement will not end with him.

I agree with the rest of what you're saying, however, on this point I have a difference of opinion.

I don't think fascism is an easily organized type of government. In my view, it's essentially a cult of personality in politics and a single autocrat is essential to its continued function. It's a type of retro-fitted monarchy where you have "dear leader" installed at the top and he cannot be removed except through death or exile.

One of the major problems with monarchies, autocracies, and even the mob (and sometimes business) is succession plans. These forms of organization can be stable for a while, but they tend to fall apart entirely or fizzle out at least somewhat once the central figure goes into the ground.

The Republican Party largely would've preferred to move on from Donald Trump probably as soon as he lost in 2020, but the populist dynamics are not allowing it to happen. "His base" is still his. Your Rons Desantis and your Nikkis Haley are no match for his cult of personality.

If he were to die, the people who voted for him that outlived him would still be alive, but I think they'd have a large amount of difficulty finding another leader to follow in exactly the same way. They'd likely split in their support for other leaders and their "movement" would be greatly damaged as a result.