If Trump Loses In November, What Do You Think Happens Next

[RainMaker]

Cults can have an immense impact on people. No clue how they get so entrenched but it happens. I think Q is popular because it plays to their authoritarian desires and can be changed on a whim to fit whatever narrative they want to tell.

This is so depressing.

I’m a Parkland Shooting Survivor. QAnon Convinced My Dad It Was All a Hoax.

[thesloppy]

K. Thor Jensen.....now that is a name I haven't heard in a long time.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Tyler Perry is involved in the conspiracy! I should have known.

the new Trump diehard theory is that Joe Biden was repelled from entering 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue by "the military" on inauguration day and has been living in an 80% replica scale model of the White House on Tyler Perry's Atlanta estate. pic.twitter.com/uK7QUFRInl

— K. Thor Jensen (@kthorjensen) July 26, 2021

This is the real truth

I also heard that the inside of the White house has been redesigned to match Mar-A-Lago and Trump is pretending to be a former President, while still living in the White House and signing Joe Biden's signature to everything.

— Fast Eddie C (@ChiltonEddie) July 27, 2021

[Kodos]

This stuff just boggles the mind...

[Qwikshot]

It just makes you realize how many stupid people there are in the world.

[RainMaker]

Also kind of fucked up that their ideal country is one where a dictator ushers dissidents away to be tried by the military and executed in secret. We can call them crazy for believing this stuff but also remember they are ardent fascists.

[BYU 14]

I just want to go on record with how much respect I have for Adam Kinzinger. I couldn't give 2 fucks about the R or D after his name, because he has respect for his duties, respect for the constitution and puts what is right over his political ambitions. Can't say that about more than a handful of republicans right now and plenty of democrats can wear that badge of dishonor too.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

I just want to go on record with how much respect I have for Adam Kinzinger. I couldn't give 2 fucks about the R or D after his name, because he has respect for his duties, respect for the constitution and puts what is right over his political ambitions. Can't say that about more than a handful of republicans right now and plenty of democrats can wear that badge of dishonor too.

Totally agree on Kinzinger. I keep hoping one day the lights will come on and he'll appreciated for the patriot he is. I'm not understanding why this is such a hard road to go down for more R's. I get it, you may lose your job, but for God's sake having some principles and being able to look at yourself in the mirror used to mean something.

He must have led a hell of a clean life or they would have destroyed him by now.

[JPhillips]

I don't know what ambitions Kinzinger has, but I'm sure Liz Cheney wants to be the President. It looks like a longshot, but placing yourself as the one voice of courage and truth isn't a bad play if you aren't ever going to go full MAGA.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I don't know what ambitions Kinzinger has, but I'm sure Liz Cheney wants to be the President. It looks like a longshot, but placing yourself as the one voice of courage and truth isn't a bad play if you aren't ever going to go full MAGA.

That was my thought-she wants to be the leader of whatever emerges from the wreck of the Republican Party

[Brian Swartz]

It didn't work out too well for Justin Amash, among a few other examples - i.e. the rash of Republican politicians who have retired from public life rather than continue in the current environment. People know what's going to happen to them if they don't buy what Trump is selling.

Originally Posted by Sweed

I'm not understanding why this is such a hard road to go down for more R's. I get it, you may lose your job, but for God's sake having some principles and being able to look at yourself in the mirror used to mean something.

If it doesn't mean something to the electorate (and it means very little to them, clearly) then it won't mean much to their representatives. I wish it wasn't that way, but that's the way it is.

[JPhillips]

But Trump will be dead within ten years. There's nobody else that has the magic of Trump, so I think someone like Cheney is patient and positioning herself for whatever comes next.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

But Trump will be dead within ten years. There's nobody else that has the magic of Trump, so I think someone like Cheney is patient and positioning herself for whatever comes next.

Eh, the damage is done. Trump proves you can tap into half this country's baser desires and win, and if you don't win, you can destroy it out of spite.

[Ksyrup]

I think it's broader than that. It seems now that you can do/say almost anything and as long as you have the imprimatur of one of the two parties, a solid 45% of the country is going to vote for you no matter what. As this plays out long enough into the future, I don't think it is really going to matter what the positions are, or what side they are on.

[larrymcg421]

The argument is you need to either go full MAGA or fully anti-MAGA. Maybe MAGA never dies, even in a post-Trump world. But just in case it does, people who were fully anti-MAGA will be set up for success.

An example is someone like Marco Rubio. He is currently seen as too MAGA by the anti-Trumpers and not MAGA enough by the Trumpers. He's screwed either way, whereas the Cheneys and Kinzingers at least have a chance.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

The argument is you need to either go full MAGA or fully anti-MAGA. Maybe MAGA never dies, even in a post-Trump world. But just in case it does, people who were fully anti-MAGA will be set up for success.

An example is someone like Marco Rubio. He is currently seen as too MAGA by the anti-Trumpers and not MAGA enough by the Trumpers. He's screwed either way, whereas the Cheneys and Kinzingers at least have a chance.

This. You don't want to be neutered and humiliated like George P. Bush. If you aren't full MAGA, pick a different lane and lead that. It may not work, but being half MAGA won't work either.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I think it's broader than that. It seems now that you can do/say almost anything and as long as you have the imprimatur of one of the two parties, a solid 45% of the country is going to vote for you no matter what. As this plays out long enough into the future, I don't think it is really going to matter what the positions are, or what side they are on.

I do wonder if someday their will be a "cult of personality" figure that comes out of the Democratic side. Someone that fully takes the mantle of the far left, but then really just twists it into his or her own populist thing. It hard for me to imagine, but I can't say that it could never happen. Heck, I would really love a super charismatic person to take up the Democratic mantle, though that does run it's own risks.

[Ghost Econ]

The right tried to make Obama seem like that, but Bernie was probably the closest but is actually genuine his beliefs.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I do wonder if someday their will be a "cult of personality" figure that comes out of the Democratic side. Someone that fully takes the mantle of the far left, but then really just twists it into his or her own populist thing. It hard for me to imagine, but I can't say that it could never happen. Heck, I would really love a super charismatic person to take up the Democratic mantle, though that does run it's own risks.

It would be tough because the entire establishment would be against it. Not just other politicians in the Democratic Party, but the mainstream media, and incredibly wealthy donors who control most of the country.

Obama was the closest to a figure on the left that had a cult of personality going. But he was also a moderate and didn't really alter politics that much.

Bernie has a following but the media hates him, his party hates him, and their donors hate him. It's an uphill battle.

Also like how Bernie's policies are "far left" when they're mostly in line with the first world. We're the extremists in politics from a global perspective.

[JPhillips]

There's a well-documented difference in the tolerance for authoritarianism between the left and right in the U.S. It's much more likely for the right to follow a Trump because there's already a desire to follow a strong leader among people with a conservative ideology. (Yes, not every conservative...)

[thesloppy]

I mean, Bill Clinton became the figurehead for progressives & Democrats (at least in the right's mind) for like a quarter of a century despite his conservative fiscal policies, sweeping de-regulation of corporations, and truly oppressive criminal & prison policies, all of which we are still suffering from directly.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

It would be tough because the entire establishment would be against it. Not just other politicians in the Democratic Party, but the mainstream media, and incredibly wealthy donors who control most of the country.

Obama was the closest to a figure on the left that had a cult of personality going. But he was also a moderate and didn't really alter politics that much.

Bernie has a following but the media hates him, his party hates him, and their donors hate him. It's an uphill battle.

Also like how Bernie's policies are "far left" when they're mostly in line with the first world. We're the extremists in politics from a global perspective.

And the media and establishment loved Trump?

Bernie doesn't have the wide-spread charisma needed to pull it off. I would think for it to be someone from the left, they would to be young, dynamic, and well educated. JFK with Bernie like positions. Then they would have to turn true Soviet-style communist once they gain power and popularity to be a Trump level danger. I don't think an open lefty authoritarian (a Casto-esqe figure) could win an election. They would have to come into power and then make the turn.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

I mean, Bill Clinton became the figurehead for progressives & Democrats (at least in the right's mind) for like a quarter of a century despite his conservative fiscal policies, sweeping de-regulation of corporations, and truly oppressive criminal & prison policies, all of which we are still suffering from directly.

In their fictional definition of the world, but he was never as unwaveringly popular among Democrats as Trump is with his crowd.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Qwikshot

Eh, the damage is done. Trump proves you can tap into half this country's baser desires and win, and if you don't win, you can destroy it out of spite.

It's not half, it's not even a plurality. It's a whiny little minority that demands to be placated and doesn't believe they can ever lose, or that they should.

[GrantDawg]

The more I think about it...I would think that the only place a true left wing demagogue could come from is just not very likely: Organized Labor.
A true labor movement would have the broadest appeal across racial demographics, but there isn't really a strong labor movement in this country. The GOP have done a good job destroying organize labor since the 80's. Most of the people in any labor movement have already moved to Trump and are scapegoating brown people.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

And the media and establishment loved Trump?

Bernie doesn't have the wide-spread charisma needed to pull it off. I would think for it to be someone from the left, they would to be young, dynamic, and well educated. JFK with Bernie like positions. Then they would have to turn true Soviet-style communist once they gain power and popularity to be a Trump level danger. I don't think an open lefty authoritarian (a Casto-esqe figure) could win an election. They would have to come into power and then make the turn.

The people who vote for Trump aren't consuming mainstream media. They're watching Fox News, Newsmax, OAN and gathering other information from Facebook. The entire party is built around the idea that you can't trust any media that isn't far-right and constantly fawning praise on them. It works incredibly well to shelter them from criticism.

Outside of a couple popular podcasts and some Twitter accounts, progressives don't have that kind of apparatus at their back. Any momentum they have to disrupt the establishment is going to see massive pushback from their own party.

Maybe that changes down the road, but as long as the wealthy call the shots in politics, it's going to be next to impossible for progressives to build a large coalition with the public and stand a chance in major elections.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

The more I think about it...I would think that the only place a true left wing demagogue could come from is just not very likely: Organized Labor.
A true labor movement would have the broadest appeal across racial demographics, but there isn't really a strong labor movement in this country. The GOP have done a good job destroying organize labor since the 80's. Most of the people in any labor movement have already moved to Trump and are scapegoating brown people.

Democrats did a pretty good job of destroying labor support for themselves too. That's why a lot jumped to the Republicans. Biden seems like he wants to change that, but he's only go as far as he can without upsetting those who pay the bills.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The people who vote for Trump aren't consuming mainstream media. They're watching Fox News, Newsmax, OAN and gathering other information from Facebook. The entire party is built around the idea that you can't trust any media that isn't far-right and constantly fawning praise on them. It works incredibly well to shelter them from criticism.

Outside of a couple popular podcasts and some Twitter accounts, progressives don't have that kind of apparatus at their back. Any momentum they have to disrupt the establishment is going to see massive pushback from their own party.

Maybe that changes down the road, but as long as the wealthy call the shots in politics, it's going to be next to impossible for progressives to build a large coalition with the public and stand a chance in major elections.

A movement like this would also come from outside media, and would chiefly be online. As it the, the most progressive demographic is under 30, which largely doesn't follow mainstream media now. I think you over estimate the power of mainstream news.

I will add, it isn't unthinkable that a far-left movement would mostly be funded by small money donors (look at what Bernie did) along with a couple of tech billionaires providing media infrastructure.

[kingfc22]

“Just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. Congressmen,” Trump instructed the DOJ officials, according to the notes by Richard Donoghue, then the acting deputy attorney general, who was also on the call.

No shocker here, but he should have said gone with Q Congressmen instead.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/30/trum...ttee-says.html

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by kingfc22

No shocker here, but he should have said gone with Q Congressmen instead.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/30/trum...ttee-says.html

Not a good day in Trump world-Justice Dept orders Treasury Dept to turn over Trump tax returns to the House Ways and Means Committee after subpening them nearly 3 yrs ago.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by kingfc22

No shocker here, but he should have said gone with Q Congressmen instead.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/30/trum...ttee-says.html

and we have learned by now none of this will matter. It will be fake news or deep state, etc...

The people who need to understand how corrupt he is never will because there is always a built in excuse.

[GrantDawg]

These people are dangerously crazy. https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_6...impression=tru

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

At what point does this cross into treason?

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by Lathum

At what point does this cross into treason?

I think that bridge has long been crossed, it's like 1861 all over again.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

I think that bridge has long been crossed, it's like 1861 all over again.

I'm going to mark my place on near Bull Run with a MyPillow for when the shooting starts.

[sterlingice]

It's weird watching history happen in real time. Like you read about it in books and are like "how did this happen?" "How were people so blind or stupid?" "How did people not know this was going to end badly?"

SI

[PilotMan]

I finished season 2 of Narcos Mexico and while I lived thorough the Mexican elections that were covered there in the 80's I didn't remember what had happened. The similarities (or attempted) were astounding.

There was concern that when the returns for Mexico City came in and showed the underdog winning, that it would embolden the rural areas to vote and would undermine the PRI candidate (who was the preferred in this case). So they rigged the system to show the PRI candidate winning in Mexico City and when the PRI candidate had a strong showing it suppressed the turnout of the rural areas as they succumbed to the idea that their vote wasn't going to matter and nothing would change.

The other part of that was to declare victory prematurely (once the early returns showed that they were winning). Then contest any further results. Claim corruption (if they ended up winning and say your opponents for cheated.

Sound familiar?

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

I think that bridge has long been crossed, it's like 1861 all over again.

crap...does that mean we have to memorize a lot of dumb generals and battlesite info?

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

crap...does that mean we have to memorize a lot of dumb generals and battlesite info?

No, we will just name Army bases after them in 60 years

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

crap...does that mean we have to memorize a lot of dumb generals and battlesite info?

It's okay, Republicans will just rewrite history anyway

[Brian Swartz]

We can all relax. Nobody's having a civil war. Nobody cares enough. A whole bunch of people are going to say a whole lot of nonsense, and meanwhile President Biden will continue on with his administration.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

We can all relax. Nobody's having a civil war. Nobody cares enough. A whole bunch of people are going to say a whole lot of nonsense, and meanwhile President Biden will continue on with his administration.

While it is highly unlikely there will be a civil war in the traditional sense your nuts if you think this doesn't greatly weaken us on an international level. There is also no end in sight to the erosion of democracy and the mistrust in our elections that has been completely fabricated.

Maybe I am an alarmist, but I think it is amazingly naïve of anyone to think our democracy isn't facing the biggest test since the actual civil war.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

No, we will just name Army bases after them in 60 years

"And today, kids, turn to page 65 in our Pearson Official History Books. We're going to talk about when General Motors beat General Mills at the battle of Abilene, on the PepsiCo Battlefield."

SI

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

We can all relax. Nobody's having a civil war. Nobody cares enough. A whole bunch of people are going to say a whole lot of nonsense, and meanwhile President Biden will continue on with his administration.

My comments are embellished since it is mostly just a whole lot of bluster, but as Lathum says, it shows great cracks in our democracy and does weaken us globally. Russia and China are already exploiting that and it is only going to get worse short term. At least until we get to a point where the extremes on both sides, and the cult of Trump are marginalized.

And while nothing full scale will happen, we have still seen almost as much domestic terrorism since 2010 as we had experienced prior to that year going all the way back to the late 1840's. And the ease in which hates groups and the lunatic fringe can connect online is the reason why and that isn't changing anytime soon.

Some of these people are out there purposely sowing discontent because they know there are a whole bunch of people out there that are easy to manipulate, and they don't give a fuck about the consequences of their actions.

[albionmoonlight]

Vermont—Dem stronghold and with through the roof vax rates—has a GOP governor.

In any sane world, he’d be the GOP front runner for president.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Vermont—Dem stronghold and with through the roof vax rates—has a GOP governor.

In any sane world, he’d be the GOP front runner for president.

He's pro-choice.

I do wonder what a SCOTUS ruling allowing states to outlaw abortion doe to national politics. Will it help or hurt guys like Scott, Baker, and Christie?

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

He's pro-choice.

I do wonder what a SCOTUS ruling allowing states to outlaw abortion doe to national politics. Will it help or hurt guys like Scott, Baker, and Christie?

hell republicans STILL get abortions....they just do so while cussing out the doctors giving the abortions and scream at them they are going to hell.

Not making this up either.

[spleen1015]

Seeing it a lot in the news about Trump and his PACs raising millions and not spending money on what they were set up for.

Is this a common political tactic that Trump is getting attention for because it is him or is this him being him?

[Brian Swartz]

Yes to both. It's common but Trump also cares less if people know he's doing it.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I think it is amazingly naïve of anyone to think our democracy isn't facing the biggest test since the actual civil war.

You're not wrong, but I think that this was building for decades and going back to what I said at election time, I don't view this as us being stable and then tumbling off a cliff. It's more, we've been heading towards circling the drain for a number of decades and the cracks are just now real obvious since we reached a tipping point.

I also think it's bigger than the US. Extremism is on the rise in many 'western' nations. Trump came along at the right ... or rather wrong ... time to make it more obvious and blatant here, but we're not alone in the problems we're having. The world will look much different in the Age of China. What exactly that entails I don't know, but 'democracy' as it was known in the second half of the 20th century probably doesn't come along for the ride.

There were enough people talking about civil war, and I often can't tell the difference between hyperbole and seriousness around here, so I wasn't certain people weren't thinking it was going to literally happen.