I spent all of last evening after the news broke about the Colorado decision thinking about this. I find I agree with Chris Christie. I do not agree with him that the decision is evidence of an “out of control judiciary.” I do agree with him that we - the voters, the people from whom all legitimate governing power in our system is derived - must be the ones who decide our future.
It needs to be pointed out - again! - that nowhere in this article do I say the court decision should be ignored. What I say is the court cannot strike the decisive, winning blow.
I always like when you point out things like this. Keeps the ball in our playground. Just where it should be. We decide where to kick it. Instead of standing hoping it doesn’t hit us in the face.
There is the law (at least we hope their is) and there's politics. The CO SCOTUS got the law right in my opinion. We need to get the rest by whatever means we can muster. I'm afraid Trump and his mob won't go away quietly no matter what..
TC, you make an important clarification. We need as many " blows" as possible to weaken this particular movement-- and it IS a movement with TFG as its destructively charismatic frontman. The insurrectional powers swirling around him have brilliantly lasered in on his particular psychological and emotional dysfunctions and unleashed them to their purpose.
This is not an either/or battle....this is a both/ and, and, and...effort. Perhaps Jack Smith and the J6 trial will establish his role in insurrection.
The J6 BiPartisan House Committee already presented a masterful evidentiary case for his central insurrection role.
But we need a strong and timely ( should have been said on Jan 7!) ruling that Jan 6 was an insurrection and insurrection is not acceptable in the U.S. and that even sitting Presidents cannot insurrectionally obstruct the will of the voters.
It is all of a piece. In the CO case we are once again in that creatively tense arena of
Plus, for those that say boohoo, it’s not a fair election to take him off the ballot, I would reply you can vote for whom ever you want by writing in a name. They could vote for Donald trump or Clarabelle the Clown. Apologies for repeating myself there. 🎃🤡
Amazingly, I disagree with you on this, TC. Sort of. You're right that we can't wait around wringing our hands and hope the courts save us. You're also right that we are in an existential struggle and that Trump must be defeated, and soundly, by voters. But this is a fight with multiple fronts, and democracy needs all the defensive power it can get if it's going to survive. The Colorado decision and the way it will force the issue to the Supreme Court (whose decision is sure to be another nail-biter and may well be a disaster) is one part of that. It doesn't let us off the hook.
I agree with you Jan. Those evil people never rest. Voter’s rights across the country are threatened. We already know we can outvote them with numbers and still lose the election.
Faced with such a menace, what are the country’s institutions of government to do? It’s easy to say that Mr. Trump’s ultimate rejection should come at the hands of the voters, not the courts; I have been inclined toward that view myself. The obvious rejoinder is that an outright majority of voters already rejected Mr. Trump in 2020, and we know how that turned out: brutal violence, several deaths and the enduring myth of a stolen election. Why should we expect it to be different next time? If anything, the threats of chaos and violence by Mr. Trump and his allies have only grown bolder.
But there is a reason we have a written Constitution, and courts tasked with interpreting it. Not every decision in our system is left solely to voters. The 14th Amendment’s bar on insurrectionists serving in office, which was drafted to target former Confederates after the Civil War, “is a statement that certain things will be withdrawn from the terrain of electoral contest,” Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a former constitutional law professor, told me recently.
Voters still get to cast their ballots for nearly anyone they want, Mr. Raskin said. But “the framers of the 14th Amendment contemplated that there would be people who would be otherwise attractive to a certain portion of the population who must be kept off the ballot because they are a threat to the Republic. Their obnoxiousness is not within the normal course of American electoral politics.”
By that reasoning, that we beat him once and that was enough, the US should have stopped fighting the Pacific War after stopping the Japanese at Midway - why did we have to fight all those other fights? Well, because we were up against a determined enemy. Like we are here.
We are definitely up against an enemy that will not stop. It is more than djt at this point. He is the centerpoint of a tornado and it will not be enough to defeat him. The gop (government of putin) must be defeated everywhere possible. But also the "think tanks" allied with the gop must also be addressed. There is nothing "conservative" about them IMO.
Those "think tanks" were started by people like Leonard Leo and Charles Koch. They use them to manipulate public opinion. They are truly interested in ideas; they are interested in hoarding money. Politicians and think tanks help with that.
Fear is our ally. Remember Trump’s global allies, Putin, Orban, Kim Jong-Un for openers; for closers the billionaires who behave like the United States is their empire. Fear is our ally. Vote.
Tom, yes, very true. However, using that logic, in 1984, President Carter should have run for a second term. Of course, he didn't (because he knew better), not because Reagan was corrupt (he was), but because he was popular.
Get a grip folks. Our work has been cut out for us for quite a while. Court case here, court case there. We still have an election coming up that requires our undivided attention and efforts to pull off.
I like the fact I finally wrote something that didn't get 100% I-love-you agreement. Every answer has been thoughtful and we finally see the range of beliefs and attitudes, none of which is a bad thing. All those differences mean if a person connects with the activity for 2024 that fits with their beliefs about things, we will cover the full range of what needs to be done. So thank you all.
I have a conflict of interest here - I would love to see the 14th amendment upheld as a precedent, but some pundits have pointed put that Trump in a general election is actually the weakest Republican candidate against Smokin' Joe Biden..... So, "Quo vadis?" Which way do we go.....? You are right though that only a significant defeat will end the existential threat from Trump and Trumpism.....
A significant defeat must be one in which millions of voters who "previously" voted for Trump either vote for Biden or stay at home. Only when legions of former maga supporters bale on Trump will the others even consider giving up their anti-democratic impulses, actions, and rhetoric. The magas seek to belong, and only when so many other magas are running out the door will they too go home and take a cold shower.
IF Trump is barred from running again, that might keep many of the MAGA crowd home - but some pundits feel that Trump is actually the WEAKEST Republican candidate in the general election, so getting rid of him by Court edict might possibly reduce the chances of a Biden win.
I posted this a bit earlier on JVL's Triad, which talked about the Colorado decision. I think it's germane here as well. The phrase referenced was from a section of Last's post asking how we should view Republicans and their behaviors. The barista and name tag line was a response to something else in the text.
RE: "a profoundly paternalistic, bigoted view of Republicans"
Well, how, exactly, are we supposed to view them? And by "we" I mean people like me (I'm sure there's at least a few of us) who have lived and worked and had relationships with many of the people you speak of for our entire lives and who are very much like them ourselves in many aspects of our daily lives. Except for their lemming-like devotion to Donald Trump and all things Trump and proto-fascistic. Are they, and by "they" I mean neighbors, co-workers, friends and family members...are they all crazy, delusional, stupid? Racist, bigoted, evil?
I've given up trying to come up with a particular way to view them. I do not see the ones I know personally as my personal enemies; none of them constitute a threat of physical harm to me or mine. But I do see them as an enemy to my - and many, many others'- way of life. Which is basically live and let live within the confines of the rule of just, fair and constitutional law, the purpose of which is to safeguard personal liberties, rights and freedom within an ordered, safe and pluralistic society.
I don't care about a nose ring in a barista or pronouns on a name tag or any of the other cultural indicators that so many see as sure signs that the country is going to Hell. Which, of course, is always the path it's on for a certain segment of the electorate. They know this because their preferred leaders, politicians and news sources are always telling them that it is. If I were among this group, I'd have a perfect example to put forth to prove that...
Not too long ago, a young woman showed up at my door dressed in jeans, combat boots and a black T-shirt with some image of something I didn't recognize silk-screened on it. She was sporting a nose ring, an eyebrow piercing, several ear piercings, a butch haircut and lots of ink on her arms and hands, an appearance quite alien to my neck of the woods. She was working for a local water softener company that sends salespeople around every so often to try to drum up business, since in these parts a water softener is a necessity rather than a luxury. In the past, this company's salespeople who came by occasionally looked and were dressed as most anyone else in this rural area would be.
After informing me of the purpose of her presence on my porch, I told her politely - as I'd always done on such occasions in the past - that I was more than satisfied with the system I have and said no thank you to any further information, thank you and have a good day. She was perfectly polite in her speech and mannerism, much more so than a few neighbors I've had over the years, and I didn't feel ill at ease talking to her nor any compulsion to launch into some kind of rant about her appearance or to run her off the place at gunpoint. But I'm sure if she knocked on enough doors around here, she'd find more than a couple of folks who might just do that, because for them she'd be the perfect symbol of those who are steadily pushing the nation down that burning path to oblivion.
So, again, how to view these people? Again, I really don't know, because I can guarantee that with only one or two exceptions, if any of the folks around here had occasion to mention to me that this young woman had knocked on their door, I'd have a snowball's chance in Hell of convincing them that she was no more of a threat to them and their way of life than I am. So, I just have to view them as a real and material force that must be reckoned with as a whole to preserve our democracy and way of life as a nation of laws and not men.
And after all the talk, after any amount of sundry activism you want to throw at the problem, the ultimate way to do that in the end is to vote one's conscience informed by the guiding light of liberty and justice for all, in every election, every time, without fail. Because your neighbors, co-workers and loved ones who follow the piper's call aren't going away, and they have the same right to vote as you do, like it or not. Which is as it should be, if you want to live in an actual democracy.
Those folks found acceptance in the maga movement and glommed onto Trump to give them an identity. They will not give up that identity easily; therefore, they must have other options, other avenues to pursue to find an accepting group. If they understood how fully they've been manipulated not just by a sixth rate Elmer Gantry, but by a diabolical bunch of schemers and oligarchs who've cleverly and persistently rigged things at the local level and lured in people who should have known better, they might be open to new attachments, new purposes, if you will. A few of those convicted for crimes on 1/6 may have had such epiphanies, but more of them need to see that a trip to a Guyana jungle with a charismatic leader is fraught with their own destruction.
extra thanks for this one, Tom. ever since I found out about the decision, something was bugging me. you managed to put your finger right on it. I couldn't agree more with EVERYTHING you've covered in this post. everything.
slam bang!! what a great post! today was a really 'down' day for me, and when i read your post, i was LIFTED!! Thank you, dear one. You speak my language!! xx's
I disagree with you on this one Tom. We hold ourselves to be a nation based on laws and norms. Those laws must be administered equally regardless of wealth, power or politics. The constitution is quite clear on the matter of insurrection and specifically applies to the President. That said, Trump has been able to gum up the judicial system for years. That’s why the danger has only grown since he left office. We need to use all the tools we have to defeat him in the courts and ballot boxes. However he looses, if he looses, there will likely be an uprising. Once a man like Trump comes to power, it takes a long struggle to remove him and restore equilibrium to the body politic.
There will be a lot fewer uprisers standing with him after a big public defeat in the election, than there will be protesting his "exclusion" from the process.
I go back and forth on this. the only "preparations" for his winning will require a lot of improvising and planning while experiencing profound despair...we already know this. but there are plenty of things to do to avoid it happening. we all know what they are.
the CO decision won't make any crucial difference, but it's the first state in which this has been decided and there are a whole bunch of others about to do the same thing. it feels like there's a certain "death by a thousand cuts" aspect to it, and it makes me feel better.
btw, has everyone bought the new (January/February 2024) "Atlantic," which is completely dedicated to examining the "What If Trump Wins" from a whole bunch of different perspectives? it is NOT light reading, and it's a lot of stuff we all know, but it's very handy having it in one place
Was just going to comment on the issue of Atlantic......powerful pieces and a strong editorial explaining why they compiled it!! The editor`s advice to " read it all" comes with the caution " but maybe not all at once" ( for the sake of mental hygiene)!!!!
If SCOTUS declines to take the case, that means that the CO Supreme Court decision stands and applies only to Colorado, right? Does a candidate for president HAVE to be on the ballot in all 50 states?
Jonathan V Last made the very same case that you have made,TC. This court decision vindicates my thinking regarding tRump's criminal insurrection, but we can only (?) get rid of him by beating his ass at the ballot box. ( I thought we did that in 2020 by 7 million votes. Damn the electoral college.)
I'm all in for whatever it takes to get Trump back under the rock he crawled out from under, and using the 14th Amendment to address the consequences of his insurrection is a useful tool in the box. Failing to do that would dishonor that law, the people who wrote it and the reasons they had to.
Reading friends reactions here to your column today suggests to me that you spent your last night well. To me, this is the problem dealing with the rats and, especially successful eradication of the species. There are existential and pragmatic and strategic courses that probably all need to be applied in the right times to not merely dimish their numbers, but controls resistance to our methods and elimination of the diseases that result from their unchecked presence. When increased dosages of rat poison no longer achieve our desired outcomes, mitigation will certainly involve more permanent courses that only new laws and constituional changes can acquire, before good hygiene and other social norms may be again relied upon. Protections or vaccinations of those affected by the illnesses and disease have to be ongoing and effective in all our social and political laboratories, campaigns, and voter education. The urge to put our hopes on simply getting rid of the largest and most virile rat may be tempting as just maybe his elimination before the election just might give the appearance of success or merely cede the immediate to a yet unproven rat in the hierarchy of the species. Sometimes sparing with the obvious rat while the fertility and reproductive capabilities of the wanabees may just be enough to stop the imminent explosion of vermin throughout thendale.
Maybe your best TAFM piece yet, thanks TC. We also need to remember and keep reminding others that the presumptive MAGA base is, at most, 30% of the electorate and 70 is more than 30. We have the numbers on our side and, with a little boost like the accomplishments memo the administration came out with today, we can carry the story as far as we need to. At that point, the conviction and sentencing will just be icing on the cake. Voting is our superpower.
I hear you. However, the voters spoke in Nov 2020. Kicked his arse to the curb, loud and clear. He should be in jail, not on any ballot. Anybody who thinks that he will accept any future defeat is still seeing him as a human. He has no redeeming characteristics. As Ayn Rand said, “it’s not who will let me, it’s who is going to stop me.” So far, not a damn law, rule, election, court, or any of our institutions. And it’s not just him. At this point, it’s like the Nazi machine. A machine of money, lawmakers, political operatives, “religious” Pharisees, and morons. Armed and dangerous…. The voters spoke awhile back. It’s not too late. Lock him up!
I sort of agree with you on this, Tom. I think the Colorado decision, if it stands, introduces an element of chaos to the election, and in doing so may convince MAGA voters in all states to vote for the big greasy chito. It may also push bad actors into terrorism, or allow one of the other MAGA candidates, who might be more electable than el culo gordo to make it into the general election. I think we would be better off without the Colorado exclusion.
It needs to be pointed out - again! - that nowhere in this article do I say the court decision should be ignored. What I say is the court cannot strike the decisive, winning blow.
Exactly correct.
I always like when you point out things like this. Keeps the ball in our playground. Just where it should be. We decide where to kick it. Instead of standing hoping it doesn’t hit us in the face.
We the People. Always.
Salud, TC.
🗽💜
There is the law (at least we hope their is) and there's politics. The CO SCOTUS got the law right in my opinion. We need to get the rest by whatever means we can muster. I'm afraid Trump and his mob won't go away quietly no matter what..
TC, you make an important clarification. We need as many " blows" as possible to weaken this particular movement-- and it IS a movement with TFG as its destructively charismatic frontman. The insurrectional powers swirling around him have brilliantly lasered in on his particular psychological and emotional dysfunctions and unleashed them to their purpose.
This is not an either/or battle....this is a both/ and, and, and...effort. Perhaps Jack Smith and the J6 trial will establish his role in insurrection.
The J6 BiPartisan House Committee already presented a masterful evidentiary case for his central insurrection role.
But we need a strong and timely ( should have been said on Jan 7!) ruling that Jan 6 was an insurrection and insurrection is not acceptable in the U.S. and that even sitting Presidents cannot insurrectionally obstruct the will of the voters.
It is all of a piece. In the CO case we are once again in that creatively tense arena of
...arena of Federal/States rights.
Plus, for those that say boohoo, it’s not a fair election to take him off the ballot, I would reply you can vote for whom ever you want by writing in a name. They could vote for Donald trump or Clarabelle the Clown. Apologies for repeating myself there. 🎃🤡
Amazingly, I disagree with you on this, TC. Sort of. You're right that we can't wait around wringing our hands and hope the courts save us. You're also right that we are in an existential struggle and that Trump must be defeated, and soundly, by voters. But this is a fight with multiple fronts, and democracy needs all the defensive power it can get if it's going to survive. The Colorado decision and the way it will force the issue to the Supreme Court (whose decision is sure to be another nail-biter and may well be a disaster) is one part of that. It doesn't let us off the hook.
I agree with you Jan. Those evil people never rest. Voter’s rights across the country are threatened. We already know we can outvote them with numbers and still lose the election.
We can outvote them and still lose the election. Boy, do we have enough proof of that.
I read this opinion this morning and it makes all kinds of sense to me.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/20/opinion/editorials/the-colorado-ruling-is-a-rebuke-for-the-ages.html
Faced with such a menace, what are the country’s institutions of government to do? It’s easy to say that Mr. Trump’s ultimate rejection should come at the hands of the voters, not the courts; I have been inclined toward that view myself. The obvious rejoinder is that an outright majority of voters already rejected Mr. Trump in 2020, and we know how that turned out: brutal violence, several deaths and the enduring myth of a stolen election. Why should we expect it to be different next time? If anything, the threats of chaos and violence by Mr. Trump and his allies have only grown bolder.
But there is a reason we have a written Constitution, and courts tasked with interpreting it. Not every decision in our system is left solely to voters. The 14th Amendment’s bar on insurrectionists serving in office, which was drafted to target former Confederates after the Civil War, “is a statement that certain things will be withdrawn from the terrain of electoral contest,” Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a former constitutional law professor, told me recently.
Voters still get to cast their ballots for nearly anyone they want, Mr. Raskin said. But “the framers of the 14th Amendment contemplated that there would be people who would be otherwise attractive to a certain portion of the population who must be kept off the ballot because they are a threat to the Republic. Their obnoxiousness is not within the normal course of American electoral politics.”
By that reasoning, that we beat him once and that was enough, the US should have stopped fighting the Pacific War after stopping the Japanese at Midway - why did we have to fight all those other fights? Well, because we were up against a determined enemy. Like we are here.
We are definitely up against an enemy that will not stop. It is more than djt at this point. He is the centerpoint of a tornado and it will not be enough to defeat him. The gop (government of putin) must be defeated everywhere possible. But also the "think tanks" allied with the gop must also be addressed. There is nothing "conservative" about them IMO.
Those "think tanks" were started by people like Leonard Leo and Charles Koch. They use them to manipulate public opinion. They are truly interested in ideas; they are interested in hoarding money. Politicians and think tanks help with that.
Fear is our ally. Remember Trump’s global allies, Putin, Orban, Kim Jong-Un for openers; for closers the billionaires who behave like the United States is their empire. Fear is our ally. Vote.
Tom, yes, very true. However, using that logic, in 1984, President Carter should have run for a second term. Of course, he didn't (because he knew better), not because Reagan was corrupt (he was), but because he was popular.
Get a grip folks. Our work has been cut out for us for quite a while. Court case here, court case there. We still have an election coming up that requires our undivided attention and efforts to pull off.
Get involved, stay involved.
I like the fact I finally wrote something that didn't get 100% I-love-you agreement. Every answer has been thoughtful and we finally see the range of beliefs and attitudes, none of which is a bad thing. All those differences mean if a person connects with the activity for 2024 that fits with their beliefs about things, we will cover the full range of what needs to be done. So thank you all.
Hope it stirs the needed energy
I have a conflict of interest here - I would love to see the 14th amendment upheld as a precedent, but some pundits have pointed put that Trump in a general election is actually the weakest Republican candidate against Smokin' Joe Biden..... So, "Quo vadis?" Which way do we go.....? You are right though that only a significant defeat will end the existential threat from Trump and Trumpism.....
A significant defeat must be one in which millions of voters who "previously" voted for Trump either vote for Biden or stay at home. Only when legions of former maga supporters bale on Trump will the others even consider giving up their anti-democratic impulses, actions, and rhetoric. The magas seek to belong, and only when so many other magas are running out the door will they too go home and take a cold shower.
IF Trump is barred from running again, that might keep many of the MAGA crowd home - but some pundits feel that Trump is actually the WEAKEST Republican candidate in the general election, so getting rid of him by Court edict might possibly reduce the chances of a Biden win.
Burn the Republican party to the ground, figuratively speaking.
I posted this a bit earlier on JVL's Triad, which talked about the Colorado decision. I think it's germane here as well. The phrase referenced was from a section of Last's post asking how we should view Republicans and their behaviors. The barista and name tag line was a response to something else in the text.
RE: "a profoundly paternalistic, bigoted view of Republicans"
Well, how, exactly, are we supposed to view them? And by "we" I mean people like me (I'm sure there's at least a few of us) who have lived and worked and had relationships with many of the people you speak of for our entire lives and who are very much like them ourselves in many aspects of our daily lives. Except for their lemming-like devotion to Donald Trump and all things Trump and proto-fascistic. Are they, and by "they" I mean neighbors, co-workers, friends and family members...are they all crazy, delusional, stupid? Racist, bigoted, evil?
I've given up trying to come up with a particular way to view them. I do not see the ones I know personally as my personal enemies; none of them constitute a threat of physical harm to me or mine. But I do see them as an enemy to my - and many, many others'- way of life. Which is basically live and let live within the confines of the rule of just, fair and constitutional law, the purpose of which is to safeguard personal liberties, rights and freedom within an ordered, safe and pluralistic society.
I don't care about a nose ring in a barista or pronouns on a name tag or any of the other cultural indicators that so many see as sure signs that the country is going to Hell. Which, of course, is always the path it's on for a certain segment of the electorate. They know this because their preferred leaders, politicians and news sources are always telling them that it is. If I were among this group, I'd have a perfect example to put forth to prove that...
Not too long ago, a young woman showed up at my door dressed in jeans, combat boots and a black T-shirt with some image of something I didn't recognize silk-screened on it. She was sporting a nose ring, an eyebrow piercing, several ear piercings, a butch haircut and lots of ink on her arms and hands, an appearance quite alien to my neck of the woods. She was working for a local water softener company that sends salespeople around every so often to try to drum up business, since in these parts a water softener is a necessity rather than a luxury. In the past, this company's salespeople who came by occasionally looked and were dressed as most anyone else in this rural area would be.
After informing me of the purpose of her presence on my porch, I told her politely - as I'd always done on such occasions in the past - that I was more than satisfied with the system I have and said no thank you to any further information, thank you and have a good day. She was perfectly polite in her speech and mannerism, much more so than a few neighbors I've had over the years, and I didn't feel ill at ease talking to her nor any compulsion to launch into some kind of rant about her appearance or to run her off the place at gunpoint. But I'm sure if she knocked on enough doors around here, she'd find more than a couple of folks who might just do that, because for them she'd be the perfect symbol of those who are steadily pushing the nation down that burning path to oblivion.
So, again, how to view these people? Again, I really don't know, because I can guarantee that with only one or two exceptions, if any of the folks around here had occasion to mention to me that this young woman had knocked on their door, I'd have a snowball's chance in Hell of convincing them that she was no more of a threat to them and their way of life than I am. So, I just have to view them as a real and material force that must be reckoned with as a whole to preserve our democracy and way of life as a nation of laws and not men.
And after all the talk, after any amount of sundry activism you want to throw at the problem, the ultimate way to do that in the end is to vote one's conscience informed by the guiding light of liberty and justice for all, in every election, every time, without fail. Because your neighbors, co-workers and loved ones who follow the piper's call aren't going away, and they have the same right to vote as you do, like it or not. Which is as it should be, if you want to live in an actual democracy.
Those folks found acceptance in the maga movement and glommed onto Trump to give them an identity. They will not give up that identity easily; therefore, they must have other options, other avenues to pursue to find an accepting group. If they understood how fully they've been manipulated not just by a sixth rate Elmer Gantry, but by a diabolical bunch of schemers and oligarchs who've cleverly and persistently rigged things at the local level and lured in people who should have known better, they might be open to new attachments, new purposes, if you will. A few of those convicted for crimes on 1/6 may have had such epiphanies, but more of them need to see that a trip to a Guyana jungle with a charismatic leader is fraught with their own destruction.
extra thanks for this one, Tom. ever since I found out about the decision, something was bugging me. you managed to put your finger right on it. I couldn't agree more with EVERYTHING you've covered in this post. everything.
slam bang!! what a great post! today was a really 'down' day for me, and when i read your post, i was LIFTED!! Thank you, dear one. You speak my language!! xx's
I disagree with you on this one Tom. We hold ourselves to be a nation based on laws and norms. Those laws must be administered equally regardless of wealth, power or politics. The constitution is quite clear on the matter of insurrection and specifically applies to the President. That said, Trump has been able to gum up the judicial system for years. That’s why the danger has only grown since he left office. We need to use all the tools we have to defeat him in the courts and ballot boxes. However he looses, if he looses, there will likely be an uprising. Once a man like Trump comes to power, it takes a long struggle to remove him and restore equilibrium to the body politic.
There will be a lot fewer uprisers standing with him after a big public defeat in the election, than there will be protesting his "exclusion" from the process.
Tom, you have much more faith in a Trump loss than I do.
I go back and forth on this. the only "preparations" for his winning will require a lot of improvising and planning while experiencing profound despair...we already know this. but there are plenty of things to do to avoid it happening. we all know what they are.
the CO decision won't make any crucial difference, but it's the first state in which this has been decided and there are a whole bunch of others about to do the same thing. it feels like there's a certain "death by a thousand cuts" aspect to it, and it makes me feel better.
btw, has everyone bought the new (January/February 2024) "Atlantic," which is completely dedicated to examining the "What If Trump Wins" from a whole bunch of different perspectives? it is NOT light reading, and it's a lot of stuff we all know, but it's very handy having it in one place
Was just going to comment on the issue of Atlantic......powerful pieces and a strong editorial explaining why they compiled it!! The editor`s advice to " read it all" comes with the caution " but maybe not all at once" ( for the sake of mental hygiene)!!!!
He's right - one at a time is more than enough.
If SCOTUS declines to take the case, that means that the CO Supreme Court decision stands and applies only to Colorado, right? Does a candidate for president HAVE to be on the ballot in all 50 states?
Has to be in enough states to get to 270
Jonathan V Last made the very same case that you have made,TC. This court decision vindicates my thinking regarding tRump's criminal insurrection, but we can only (?) get rid of him by beating his ass at the ballot box. ( I thought we did that in 2020 by 7 million votes. Damn the electoral college.)
Repubs have been gaming the system for more than three years. They have left no stone unturned
exactly!
I'm all in for whatever it takes to get Trump back under the rock he crawled out from under, and using the 14th Amendment to address the consequences of his insurrection is a useful tool in the box. Failing to do that would dishonor that law, the people who wrote it and the reasons they had to.
Tiny Michael’s has been saying this for months. “It’s not the Courts or Jack Smith’s job to save our democracy. That’s OUR job!”
We have to spread the word of Biden and the Democrats’ accomplishments with as many people as we can. The media sure as hell has not, nor will.
Reading friends reactions here to your column today suggests to me that you spent your last night well. To me, this is the problem dealing with the rats and, especially successful eradication of the species. There are existential and pragmatic and strategic courses that probably all need to be applied in the right times to not merely dimish their numbers, but controls resistance to our methods and elimination of the diseases that result from their unchecked presence. When increased dosages of rat poison no longer achieve our desired outcomes, mitigation will certainly involve more permanent courses that only new laws and constituional changes can acquire, before good hygiene and other social norms may be again relied upon. Protections or vaccinations of those affected by the illnesses and disease have to be ongoing and effective in all our social and political laboratories, campaigns, and voter education. The urge to put our hopes on simply getting rid of the largest and most virile rat may be tempting as just maybe his elimination before the election just might give the appearance of success or merely cede the immediate to a yet unproven rat in the hierarchy of the species. Sometimes sparing with the obvious rat while the fertility and reproductive capabilities of the wanabees may just be enough to stop the imminent explosion of vermin throughout thendale.
Should be: To me, this is the problem dealing with rats and, especially successful eradication of the species.
Damn AI and spell check combined with my lost editing skills.
How I wish that Trump and his cronies were all old friends of Hannibal Lecter - I'd be happy to supply the fava beans and a good Chianti.....
Maybe your best TAFM piece yet, thanks TC. We also need to remember and keep reminding others that the presumptive MAGA base is, at most, 30% of the electorate and 70 is more than 30. We have the numbers on our side and, with a little boost like the accomplishments memo the administration came out with today, we can carry the story as far as we need to. At that point, the conviction and sentencing will just be icing on the cake. Voting is our superpower.
I hear you. However, the voters spoke in Nov 2020. Kicked his arse to the curb, loud and clear. He should be in jail, not on any ballot. Anybody who thinks that he will accept any future defeat is still seeing him as a human. He has no redeeming characteristics. As Ayn Rand said, “it’s not who will let me, it’s who is going to stop me.” So far, not a damn law, rule, election, court, or any of our institutions. And it’s not just him. At this point, it’s like the Nazi machine. A machine of money, lawmakers, political operatives, “religious” Pharisees, and morons. Armed and dangerous…. The voters spoke awhile back. It’s not too late. Lock him up!
I sort of agree with you on this, Tom. I think the Colorado decision, if it stands, introduces an element of chaos to the election, and in doing so may convince MAGA voters in all states to vote for the big greasy chito. It may also push bad actors into terrorism, or allow one of the other MAGA candidates, who might be more electable than el culo gordo to make it into the general election. I think we would be better off without the Colorado exclusion.
https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2023/12/trump-supporters-target-judges-with-death-threats-and-violent-rhetoric-over-colorado-ruling/