• DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    97
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Well, let’s see.

    • He has been surrounding himself with and replacing people in positions of power with people based on loyalty alone in all branches of the government including the military,
    • He has tried to overthrow the results of an election through violent means and said he will do it again
    • He gets rid of anyone who dares to contradict him
    • He divides the population against itself
    • He called out for political violence against his opponents
    • He floated the idea of getting rid of the two mandates cap for himself
    • He expressed the intent of jailing his opponents on multiple occasions
    • He said that if he wins next election voting won’t be necessary anymore
    • He openly admitted he wants to be a dictator on multiple occasions…

    Beats me. It’s anyone’s guess.

  • minorkeys@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yes FFS. Why are you still asking this question at this point? Couldn’t figure it out after he successfully got Scotus to rule in favor of criminal immunity for presidents?

  • Zombie-Mantis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m going to be a dictator on day one!

    But… Does he really want to be a dictator? Hmm, we’ll never know… Guess we’ll just have to find out in January 🤷

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    3 months ago

    Let’s see - voting system gerrymandered to the point that minority rule is a factor. A political party exerts every possible pressure to make voting more difficult, onerous, or to expel registered voters from the registry, especially those in contested areas or favoring the opposition. Sending false electors to invalidate an election. Calling elected leaders on the phone to falsify vote counts. Literally attempting a coup to overturn an election.

    Then the multiple times trump has directly or indirectly stated he wants to be a dictator and cement his/his family’s position in essentially a hereditary dictatorship of the country.

    But does he really mean it?

  • Foni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    3 months ago

    The issue isn’t whether Donald the Duck wants to be a dictator—it’s clear that he does. It’s also evident that his supporters are aware of this. The real question is why so many Americans feel so let down by their political system that they’re willing to tear it down completely.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Because they keep voting against their own interests? Because they’re gullible fools manipulated by outrage headlines? Because they aren’t able to understand the consequences of their votes?

      I try to understand, I try to find common ground, but all I see is someone in a horror movie standing in an open grave wondering if they’re trapped but won’t stop digging.

      • Foni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        If you really believe that such a large percentage of Americans vote to end democracy because they are idiots, then you don’t believe in democracy either.

        And that is what will do more than anything to end it, to make neither side believe that it is the least bad of the systems.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Yep, both sides the same. Voting for universal healthcare and achieving it, is the same as voting against and having hundreds of thousands without. Voting to respect everyone’s reproductive rights is the same as trying to control other people’s choices. Voting to improve education is the same as starving education. And most of all not understanding people’s poor choices is exactly the same as treason and election fraud

          • Foni@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            You haven’t understood me. I’m not talking about specific policies and which ones are better; I’m talking about the very foundations of democracy. In a democracy, those in power are chosen by the majority. If you believe that the majority (or close to it) is idiotic, how can you believe that democracy is better than other systems? In your own response, you make it clear that you think your ideas are better and should be implemented regardless of whether they convince people or whether the majority wants them. How can you call yourself a democrat in those circumstances?

            • AA5B@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              That’s a really big stretch, even before complaining about the electoral college, nor did I focus on my ideas but listening to the candidates, watching actual behaviors, accepting reality

              • Foni@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                But it’s much simpler than that. Do you believe that decisions made by the majority of citizens are legitimate and valid even if they go against your ideas, yes or no? If the answer is yes, it doesn’t matter if your ideas are to raise or lower taxes; it doesn’t matter if your ideas are for healthcare for all or none. You believe in democracy, and then we’ll decide which team you’re on and whether it’s ‘better’ or ‘worse’ ethically.

                I’m not from the USA, but from the outside, it seems like there are a lot of people who don’t accept decisions unless they align with their ideas, no matter how much popular support they have. And those ideas can be great (and may align with mine), but imposing them is never a good idea.

    • StThicket@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Probably because they are feeling like the electoral system is not working for them at the moment. Sometimes you need to tear it down completely in order to build it up properly. Trump seems to be the perfect candidate to fuck it all up, before someone else can take over the wheel.

      • Foni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        3 months ago

        Be careful with those types of ideas “we have to tear down the system and anyone who tears it down is worth it” no, if Trump ruins everything, whoever comes after him is not going to fix it, at least not in the way you imagine. Believe me, in Europe we have seen those kinds of ideas before

      • EvilBit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah when my car is running poorly I usually put a brick on the gas pedal and drive it into a tree then light it on fire. It’s the perfect way to stop having a poorly running car.

      • Ultraviolet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s not how that works. You don’t end up with a blank slate, you end up with a fascist shithole with no guarantee of it ever being unfucked.

  • MeekerThanBeaker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    3 months ago

    He wants to become president to stay out of prison, first and foremost.

    He also wants what Putin has… so yes. He’s wants to be a dick- traitor.

  • danekrae@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 months ago

    Everybody knows that. Good thing people and media keeps giving him publicity.

    I expected the 5:1article ratio for the candidates to change, when Harris took over. But it’s too late for the shit hole country.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Trump = clicks = money

      There is no corporate journalism, there is corporate profit seeking. That’s all that exists.