(This is a parody for all who were unawere)
this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2025
458 points (98.3% liked)
NonCredibleDiplomacy
630 readers
144 users here now
Shitposting about geopolitics, diplomacy, and current events for shits and giggles
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Youre right. Should just let a traitor waltz in and be the authoritarian dictator. We'll just put Biden in the history book beside Hindenburg.
So your solution to prevent an authoritarian dictatorship is for Biden to become an authoritarian dictator?
Te courts are the check against this.
The same courts that gave immunity to the president for "official acts"?
Yes the same courts that did that. POTUS shouldn’t be preventing the opposition from running candidates.
Being a poltical opposition shouldnt be a shield from consequences. Anyone else, he would have been labeled a terrorist and sent off to gitmo. But i guess US has always been a veil democracy anyway, so im not really suprised once the remaining illusions eroded away.
It isn’t a shield from consequences. The courts and DOJ were prosecuting him.
There is NO situation where elected officials should be deciding who can oppose them in a democratic electoral system.
And how is that working out?
Badly but that doesn’t change that Biden shouldn’t interfere.
Why not? He could make the executive decision to stop the madness and force their hands to actually put forth a trial. He could done it and immediately resigned and let the system decide if his actions were justified. I understand its really not a great thing to undermine democracy... but if he truely believe democracy was already being undermined, then an exetreme act with benevolent intention should be allowed so as long those actions are proven justifiably.
Because that is how dictatorships work. That action would completely undo our democratic republic in a way that even 1/6/21 couldn’t.
So I Guess its better to vote for a dictatorship than trying to protect democracy for the future.
You wouldn’t be protecting democracy. You would be destroying it completely.
No it would not. It would be a wake up call for the senate to pull back the power of POTUS if anything.
Yes, it would because you have a candidate going out of their way to prevent a fair election from happening.
This is intro level poli sci stuff that you are not getting here
More like resetting the election forcing both parties to pick new candidates.
Which we don't do either unless there is demonstrable proof that the election was fraudulent and we don't have.
You keep making the authoritarian/dictatorial choice that doesn't align with the rule of law. Why?
Because the "rule of law" failed and allowed authoritarian to take over.
Why is that so hard to understand?