You're viewing part of a thread.
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 public chose fascism.
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.
I don't think you have a strong grasp on the electoral college. Nor do you understand how the vote is suppressed in the US and the fact that population center votes count for less than rural ones.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/14/politics/restrictive-voting-laws-brennan-report/index.html
https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/block-the-vote-voter-suppression-in-2020