The elected leader in a democratic republic like the USA cannot stop candidates from running without becoming a dictator. This is intro level poli sci stuff.
There is a difference between permitting states to decriminalize cannabis and electoral interference.
They actually can, it’s called doing their job and charging the individual with high crimes against the US that they’ve committed. There’s no difference between a presidential candidate and a citizen.
No it isn’t. It is inappropriate for any candidate to utilize their office to prevent opposition. That is how authoritarian societies work not democratic republics. You should have been taught this in secondary/high school (ages 14-18 if you aren’t American).
How would you react if Trump had banned Bernie Sanders ir Biden from running in 2020 over perceived charges? Do you not see how easily misused that power would be?
The DOJ lead by the USAG should handle the prosecution without input from POTUS. That is what happened.
What you are suggesting is the kind of clownish fantasy that would get you laughed out of any courtroom. That’s how failed democracies work. That is not how systems should work. You are literally advocating corruption.
The norms you’re citing are all perfectly correct - but no democracy can survive if these norms are able to protect literal traitors. The fact that a coup was attempted should have resulted in swift and frightfully intense penalties for all involved. Unhung traitors poison republics.
Ceding your point for the sake of discussion, if that is a single point of failure for, in the emerging situation, the entire government, shouldn’t we have been talking about reforms? This whole notion of a democratic republic whose existence is predicated on norms is easily destroyed by one weirdo.
I don’t have all the answers, but at least tell me you see how fragile it all is. The most powerful country in history should not be designed to resist traitorous elements this weakly.
The DOJ, Congress and the courts all should have stopped this. The fact is a HUGE chunk of America knows fuckall about the government or how governing works (Lemmy is no exception). The public chose fascism.
Advocating for suspected criminals to face charges and go to trial in a timely manner is authoritarian.
Well that’s just absolutely ridiculous. I sincerely hope you understand this is why Trump won and why the US won’t exist by the end of the decade. Please don’t fuck up something so simple in your next country.
When the person being tried is a current and former opponent in an election yes it us and anyone suggesting otherwise needs remedial education in the difference between societies with rule of law and those without.
So in order to commit any crime, including murder, which Trump can be charged with as he committed a felony where individuals died, you just need to run for office.
Weird, I’ve heard this line of reasoning on fox news before.
You stated a falsehood, outright misinformation. I am attempting to let you understand why your incredibly short sided point of view is wrong.
In your world, with the words you have stated, all presidential candidates are immune to prosecution. That’s obviously incorrect, therefore you entire basis of objections is wrong.
No, I did not and you repeatedly demonstrated a complete lack of understanding on how democracy works.
Suggesting Biden should intervene in the electoral process is suggesting an action only seen in authoritarian states.
You have an incredibly flawed understanding of philosophy or how anything works here. Is this because you don’t live in a democracy and only understand how authoritarian states like China works?
The elected leader in a democratic republic like the USA cannot stop candidates from running without becoming a dictator. This is intro level poli sci stuff.
There is a difference between permitting states to decriminalize cannabis and electoral interference.
They actually can, it’s called doing their job and charging the individual with high crimes against the US that they’ve committed. There’s no difference between a presidential candidate and a citizen.
No it isn’t. It is inappropriate for any candidate to utilize their office to prevent opposition. That is how authoritarian societies work not democratic republics. You should have been taught this in secondary/high school (ages 14-18 if you aren’t American).
How would you react if Trump had banned Bernie Sanders ir Biden from running in 2020 over perceived charges? Do you not see how easily misused that power would be?
The DOJ lead by the USAG should handle the prosecution without input from POTUS. That is what happened.
What you are suggesting is the kind of clownish fantasy that would get you laughed out of any courtroom. That’s how failed democracies work. That is not how systems should work. You are literally advocating corruption.
The norms you’re citing are all perfectly correct - but no democracy can survive if these norms are able to protect literal traitors. The fact that a coup was attempted should have resulted in swift and frightfully intense penalties for all involved. Unhung traitors poison republics.
Yes, and the list of people who dropped the ball on that prosecution does not and cannot include his political opponent.
Ceding your point for the sake of discussion, if that is a single point of failure for, in the emerging situation, the entire government, shouldn’t we have been talking about reforms? This whole notion of a democratic republic whose existence is predicated on norms is easily destroyed by one weirdo.
I don’t have all the answers, but at least tell me you see how fragile it all is. The most powerful country in history should not be designed to resist traitorous elements this weakly.
The DOJ, Congress and the courts all should have stopped this. The fact is a HUGE chunk of America knows fuckall about the government or how governing works (Lemmy is no exception). The public chose fascism.
They should have, yes. They didn’t because democratic norms failed. The norms failed because he’s so weird.
Programming is the art of exception handling, a QA lead once told me. On that basis, the US government is a really shitty program.
The Electoral College chose fascism. For all your pedantry you lose points on precision.
If we are being pedantic the electoral college did so because of the electorate.
Advocating for suspected criminals to face charges and go to trial in a timely manner is authoritarian.
Well that’s just absolutely ridiculous. I sincerely hope you understand this is why Trump won and why the US won’t exist by the end of the decade. Please don’t fuck up something so simple in your next country.
When the person being tried is a current and former opponent in an election yes it us and anyone suggesting otherwise needs remedial education in the difference between societies with rule of law and those without.
You’re in a tech job, aren’t you?
So in order to commit any crime, including murder, which Trump can be charged with as he committed a felony where individuals died, you just need to run for office.
Weird, I’ve heard this line of reasoning on fox news before.
You never answered how the tech job is working out.
That’s not what Im saying at all and I have no idea why you would conclude that given how many times I have clearly stated the issue to you.
You stated a falsehood, outright misinformation. I am attempting to let you understand why your incredibly short sided point of view is wrong.
In your world, with the words you have stated, all presidential candidates are immune to prosecution. That’s obviously incorrect, therefore you entire basis of objections is wrong.
No, I did not and you repeatedly demonstrated a complete lack of understanding on how democracy works.
Suggesting Biden should intervene in the electoral process is suggesting an action only seen in authoritarian states.
You have an incredibly flawed understanding of philosophy or how anything works here. Is this because you don’t live in a democracy and only understand how authoritarian states like China works?