politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
So he got into power without any voting. ? Am I understanding you correctly ?
So in that case I guess we don't know very accurately how many people supported him at that point.
It would probably be speculating at best to his popularity.
It does seem though in general, initially he was fairly popular with the people and some of the other politicians.
There was a election and his party received the most votes, but it was far from what they needed to govern just by themselves. He had to find another party willing to form a coalition with to get above the required threshold. The other parties with strong results, the Left and the Social Democrats, refused to join him for obvious reasons. The Centre Party thought he could be easily controlled and saw their chance to get into government with him. They did not take him or his threats seriously.
Everything he did to seize power was completely legal, he just used the system against itself. And to circle back to the original point: While his party was popular at the time, the vast majority of people did not want them in power. As you said correctly, it's nearly impossible to determine his actual popularity after 1933.
I was aware that he used legal maneuvering to take control. (From that video I referred to)
And then at a certain point stopped abiding by the very system laws that allowed him to get into position.
Which is very concerning. Because I think many people and many politicians are under the impression that they can keep trump in check with laws.
But he only abides by them when they suit him and disregards them when they don't.
And those who oppose him always stay within the laws.
When we have no laws of enforcement/punishment of the executive branch, then any laws are dismissible by the executive branch when it suits them.
And there is already a long history of presidents doing this. Trump isn't the first. Just the worst.
Our current government system is set to ultimately fail when tested in this way.
It's playing a game where your opponent is allowed to cheat with no penalty and can even change the rules at their whim. But you are bound to the rule book.
Not impossible to still beat but nearly. And unlikely.