• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trump's Coup d'état.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thermal said:
It's not the wrong word. It's the wrong concept. A coup is a real threat. This ain't **** but a dying soliloquy, and a comical one at that.
Click to expand...

It is a real threat. His taking over the whole government is highly unlikely, but causing a very low level running civil war by emboldening local dead-enders is not. He's raging at the dying of the light because he has no concept whatsoever of sacrificing his interests for the greater good.

That he's highly unlikely to keep his office is besides the point.
 
Thermal said:
That's what concerns me. Trump, as a spoiled silver spoon draft dodging deadbeat should have been downright revolting to his base. And to the higher ups in the party, his stupidity coupled with arrogance should have had them pushing him away, too. Im concerned that the next one will have some grit, wit, and charm, but similar principles. We could be in real trouble.

Back on the OP, I guess we should be more troubled that Congress is not charging the Pres with treason as we speak. Its not Trump's coup we should worry about; it's that Congress is ignoring it. Unless maybe...just maybe...they know damn right well it's nothing.
Click to expand...

Why would anyone be charged with anything? According to you no one is trying anything.
 
Thermal said:
I of course agree that it is ****** up five ways from Sunday. What I disagree with is that is is anything remotely like a coup.

Every definition of a coup has something like "wresting control" or "seizing power" , bloody or not. In short, you have to have some teeth in there somewhere, be it guns or popular support or something, anything, to make it happen.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. What you are talking about is a coup d'état.

If Trump manages to use the courts to delegitimize the election results then it will not be a coup d'état, but it will still be a coup.

I don't think he will manage it, but even if he just manages to flip one state it will be a coup of sorts - or even if he just gets close. Because the thing he is wresting control of is not the presidency, but something far more valuable - democracy itself. He has already 'couped' the GOP and almost half the population, now he just needs the courts.

Assuming he fails to hang on to the presidency, Trump will still have achieved a coup if his shenanigans are not repudiated by both sides. Republicans will look at how far he got with those tactics and think, "next time we will do it better" and democracy is finished in the US. At that point Trump will have achieved the equivalent of a coup d'état, but without anybody being able to call it such.
 
ponderingturtle said:
But they would lose the appeal. I mean a big part of his appeal is the appearance of success while achieving nothing. If someone had real health care plans they would lose the appeal. I think the incompetence is fundamental to the charm he exudes to his base. I don't think he will be an easy act to follow, because the megalomania at the core of his appeal is limiting in what it can coexist with.
Click to expand...
Nonsense, whip up some fake threat & those who are susceptible will fall in line. Trump isn't some magical, 1 in a million snowflake being uniquely capable of fascist demagogy. Maybe the forms of it have not been particularly well followed in the past. Now they have. Now we have a guide to follow and someone can.
 
ponderingturtle said:
But they would lose the appeal. I mean a big part of his appeal is the appearance of success while achieving nothing. If someone had real health care plans they would lose the appeal. I think the incompetence is fundamental to the charm he exudes to his base. I don't think he will be an easy act to follow, because the megalomania at the core of his appeal is limiting in what it can coexist with.
Click to expand...

That's a very good point, and a scary one. I'd much rather have a Gov Romney type on the platter than another buffoon
 
Last edited:
Roger Ramjets said:
No, it doesn't. What you are talking about is a coup d'état.
Click to expand...

*glances at thread title*

If Trump manages to use the courts to delegitimize the election results then it will not be a coup d'état, but it will still be a coup.
Click to expand...

And that would be force of the Courts. Force need not mean bludgeons. But he doesn't even have the force of paper. Nor will he, IMO. Which is why I think "coup" is needlessly hyperbolic. Unskeptical, even.

I don't think he will manage it, but even if he just manages to flip one state it will be a coup of sorts - or even if he just gets close. Because the thing he is wresting control of is not the presidency, but something far more valuable - democracy itself. He has already 'couped' the GOP and almost half the population, now he just needs the courts.

Assuming he fails to hang on to the presidency, Trump will still have achieved a coup if his shenanigans are not repudiated by both sides. Republicans will look at how far he got with those tactics and think, "next time we will do it better" and democracy is finished in the US. At that point Trump will have achieved the equivalent of a coup d'état, but without anybody being able to call it such.
Click to expand...

But he would need some sign of force from the courts or election boards. He has nothing. His own appointments in SCOTUS aren't even backing him. The Senate makes no move to support him. He has nothing.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
Assuming he fails to hang on to the presidency, Trump will still have achieved a coup if his shenanigans are not repudiated by both sides. Republicans will look at how far he got with those tactics and think, "next time we will do it better" and democracy is finished in the US. At that point Trump will have achieved the equivalent of a coup d'état, but without anybody being able to call it such.
Click to expand...

The problem with this is that the shenanigans have become the definition of being a Republican. There is no "two sides" that can repudiate Trumpism

If we mean a significant number of elected officials sacrifice their political careers by abandoning the party, then sure. However, there is no possible faction within the GOP that can change that the party itself is hopelessly dependent on hard core Trumpists who think all Democrats are communist pedophiles that must be stopped at any cost.

Unless they want to give up their careers they are forced to continue down this path of consolidating minority rule. That this will also likely lead to their powerlessness as power is concentrated in less and less hands creates a sort of prisoner's dilemma most of them aren't going to navigate seeing these are the same people doing the same sort of thing w/r/t global warming.
 
Thermal said:
His own appointments in SCOTUS aren't even backing him. The Senate makes no move to support him. He has nothing.
Click to expand...

While I can't even imagine what sort of case could go to SCOTUS where they would be likely to make a ruling favorable to the Trump campaign (even with the captured court we have, I'm guessing near zero chances), this seems like an awfully strong statement to me considering that no cases have been heard. It's not like if you had 5 justices likely to back him they would be saying anything about it beforehand (many would even consider such statements, one way or the other, improper). Or am I missing something here?
 
cosmicaug said:
While I can't even imagine what sort of case could go to SCOTUS where they would be likely to make a ruling favorable to the Trump campaign (even with the captured court we have, I'm guessing near zero chances), this seems like an awfully strong statement to me considering that no cases have been heard. It's not like if you had 5 justices likely to back him they would be saying anything about it beforehand (many would even consider such statements, one way or the other, improper). Or am I missing something here?
Click to expand...

See the Allegations thread for some discussion on how SCOTUS has very recently refused to hear lower courts appeals on the matter. Gotta hand it to them, FWIW
 
Thermal said:
I of course agree that it is ****** up five ways from Sunday. What I disagree with is that is is anything remotely like a coup.

Every definition of a coup has something like "wresting control" or "seizing power" , bloody or not. In short, you have to have some teeth in there somewhere, be it guns or popular support or something, anything, to make it happen. That's why I think it falls far short of anything coup-ish. Its yapping, being met with a flat "nope" in four-part harmony with feeling.

Getting wound up about impotent bleating is something that seems beneath skeptics. I kind of like being on the side that doesn't get carried away in theatrical fantasy. Shouldn't we be focusing on the things that might be, you know, real?
Click to expand...
How might one who is concerned that things are ****** up five ways from Sunday express said concern in such a way that is no more impotent of bleating than most everything else that's posted hereabouts?
 
varwoche said:
How might one who is concerned that things are ****** up five ways from Sunday express said concern in such a way that is no more impotent of bleating than most everything else that's posted hereabouts?
Click to expand...

Its really ****** up 5 ways from Sunday that he would try such a thing. Its still completely impotent.

We don't call a guy who buys a blow up sheep sex doll a mass murderer, do we? Call things what they are, not what sounds more titillating.
 
dirtywick said:
oh you're actually the smartest person in the room
Click to expand...

Nope. I sincerely doubt I'm anywhere near the smartest person on ISF, although I would guess I'm in the top 25%. Many of the local denizens are extremely intelligent and well educated.

dirtywick said:
and anyone who disagrees with you is simply too dogmatic to see it.
Click to expand...
Nope. People disagree with me all the time, and I don't have any problem with disagreement. Opinions differ on any number of topics, and people have different backgrounds and different perspectives when the discussion includes judgement calls or inferences. I rarely assume that the other party in a disagreement is dumb/evil/dishonest/whatever-other-denigrating-term-gets-thrown-about.

dirtywick said:
you're not actually wrong about anything, ever.
Click to expand...
Nope. I'm wrong about all sorts of things, all the damned time. I'm okay with it. I have a fairly narrow area of expertise, and a handful of interests where I'm moderately-well-studied... and then there's a huge amount of everything else that I get wrong pretty regularly. It's part of being human.
 
Thermal said:
See the Allegations thread for some discussion on how SCOTUS has very recently refused to hear lower courts appeals on the matter. Gotta hand it to them, FWIW
Click to expand...

You must be referring to this? I did not know that that had happened. Seems pointless (Biden wins by a more than generous enough margin without those votes), but I guess it's a loss to the Trump campaign nonetheless.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Nope. I sincerely doubt I'm anywhere near the smartest person on ISF, although I would guess I'm in the top 25%. Many of the local denizens are extremely intelligent and well educated.


Nope. People disagree with me all the time, and I don't have any problem with disagreement. Opinions differ on any number of topics, and people have different backgrounds and different perspectives when the discussion includes judgement calls or inferences. I rarely assume that the other party in a disagreement is dumb/evil/dishonest/whatever-other-denigrating-term-gets-thrown-about.


Nope. I'm wrong about all sorts of things, all the damned time. I'm okay with it. I have a fairly narrow area of expertise, and a handful of interests where I'm moderately-well-studied... and then there's a huge amount of everything else that I get wrong pretty regularly. It's part of being human.
Click to expand...

Your earlier post was pretty insulting. I guess I misunderstood
 
Meadmaker said:
I just don't think that's an accurate characterization of what's going on.
Click to expand...
:D Of course not. I'm boiling it to the bare essence. At this point, you can't even tell if it started out as chicken or beef.

Meadmaker said:
What you hear pushback on is Trump's efforts to have ballots thrown out, to declare fraud, and even to simply ignore results, as with the meeting happening right now in the White House with Michigan legislators. Trump isn't asking for a recount in my state. He's trying to get the one and only count pushed aside.
Click to expand...
Yes, but that still doesn't make it a coup in any reasonable way.

Meadmaker said:
That doesn't mean we actually have to do anything differently, because whatever Trump is up to, whether he's serious about retaining power, or stark raving mad, or just doing his biggest super-trolling performance yet, it will all be over in a few months.
Click to expand...

Yep. Which is why I suggest that people calm down, let go of the outrage and the near panic. Maybe have a nice adult beverage. Maybe a bit of pie.
 
trustbutverify said:
If a Democratic POTUS (and party) had conducted themselves with 1% of what we've seen the last 4+ years, and especially post election, you'd be apoplectic right now.
Click to expand...

Nah, I'd be just as apathetic as I currently am. The only difference is that I'd be posting for all of the Republicans who were up in arms about the coming of the antichrist to stop listening to entertainment and thinking it was news, and to stop exaggerating every single thing because the color of the man's suit does not matter at all.

Of course, there aren't many of those here on ISF, and my comments would likely be drowned out among many others that might perhaps be a bit more partisan than I am.
 
Tero said:
I think the GOP is going to have a hard time finding Trump II. It has to be non-politician, famous and similar "dumb talk" to his fans. Trump had the Apprentice background to launch himself from. Tucker Carlson? No. I have no idea.
Click to expand...

Gary Busey/Roseanne Barr
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom