I know I can get apocalyptic sometimes with my political predictions, but Trump deciding to defy the 22nd amendment and run for a third term in 2028 is pretty much all that is needed to end American Democracy isn't it? Cause if he can get away with it, and he will, why wouldn't the next guy do it too? We will be stuck with Lifetime Presidents who win their "elections" with 90% of the vote just like Putin, KJU, etc...

Is there anything that can prevent this? Other than a surprise upset from Biden?

If the Supreme Court were just going to let Trump do whatever he wants they would've overturned 2020 for him.

At this point both sides are concerned the other are authoritarians who want to end democracy, personally I think there's a higher risk that the left decides their socialist views are so correct and their utopian plans for the humanity are so pure that they can't let elections mess them up for another four years anymore like 16-20. If having a permanent one party means getting their way on gun control, universal healthcare, abortion, affirmative action, climate change, etc. instead of those evil conservative views, maybe those leftists would be killing to break a democracy egg to make an omelette.

Nah, when Democrats have power they are far more neo-liberal than anything conservative. Admittedly Joe Biden has been very New Dealy ala US presidents of the the 30s-70s but this is hardly socialism.

Polls are actually showing that young people are increasingly diverging by gender. Young men are supporting Republicans at higher rates, and women are supporting Democrats. Yeah, you could have expected the future to be influenced by a generational shift in politics, but there’s much more reason for conservatives to worry about a feminist revolution now than a socialist one. Even AOC will abandon socialist talking points or the socialist label more easily than feminist ones. The courts now prevent abortion from reversing for what looks to be decades, but on every other issue all that’s really necessary for significant change is corporate self-interest.

The woke strategy is basically to triple down on emotionally manipulating and pressuring people, since women are more empathetic it worked on them more.

So, you have stereotypes, cliches, and bad assumptions rather than a reasonable argument. Got it.

You’re welcome to triple down.

“Pressuring people”? You try to make my brain melt exactly while talking about brain melt.

Trump isn’t much different than them. Certainly in my experience. The main difference is that he’s less powerful personality-wise, more obviously ridiculous, easier to discredit from your contemporary perspective, but most importantly: easier to see as a short-term threat.

I mean, I don’t care about any of your narratives. It defeats the whole purpose to double down on “western supremacy”, and anti-feminism. Strategically, rationally, logically, and by any truthful morality. As far as my new species is concerned regardless of gender. Your politics are obviously reflective of human, or Homo-Sapien nature. I don’t support “liberalism” or “socialism” at all, just like the rest of your politics. I really am apolitical, believe it or not. I was like “whatever libertarianism” if anyone asked long ago. But, I don’t really have any reason to even keep that pretense anymore.

I don’t support capitalism, but I’ll always oppose socialism more. I’d honestly rather undermine socialism and liberalism than capitalism, whatever the cost, even if I fundamentally oppose capitalism; it’s a matter of principle with both, but at least capitalism is rationally respectable to a limited extent.

Conservatives have obviously been emotionally manipulating people for thousands of years, but at least from my vantage point, they seem to be worse at it now than ever in the US since Christianity was pretty defanged the last few decades, while the far left can't say a word without loading it with emotional intent and the whole movement is essentially built on activists realizing a trick that if they pretended to be offended it would make people apologize and give in their demands.

I think it’s just lazy, exploitative, and opportunistic politics. Almost lowest common denominator, which they seem to expect to be respectable and right by default.

Plus, men are obviously motivated by emotions all the time in politics. When they mention “values” it’s not just for the sake of persuasion, influence, and manipulation, but because of their own self-interests, needs, and wants. That’s human, or homo-sapien at it’s fundamental and definitive, but obviously symptomatic of emotional decision making. Much of male politics is motivated by jealousy, spite, anger, feelings about how they’ve been treated by the opposition, or enemies, or feeling for the interests of their own group. Again Human and Homo Sapien at its basic, and yes, human male at its basic.

If men were not motivated by their own emotions, they wouldn’t speak of them differently than women. But, of course, they have their own motivations and emotions.

To claim that men are generally more rational than women, who supposedly are generally more emotional, is a pretense about bad assumptions that are claimed to be rational when really they may be popular, persuasive, politically palatable, convenient, relatively or contextually non-controversial, or agreeable, at least to their audience, group, culture, time, or place. That absolutely can be insidious or represent something insidious, but such assumptions are certainly not a signal of reason rather than emotion. These beliefs about gender and emotion can also act as a self-fulfilling prophesy, which regardless of the emotions people really feel, can cause people to respond to expectations and manipulation, in a way that can appear to confirm beliefs and expectations even if it’s only an effect of the same.

I shouldn’t have to repeat that the legacy of your economic, political, and state systems will not be tolerated whatsoever, and cannot have any future whatsoever. The only option is unconditional surrender, or ultimate destruction, and extinction for associated species. The alternative is rationally indefensible in reality and time, and there will be no precedent of tolerance or acceptance. To believe the alternative emotionally or “morally” is a symptom of extreme immaturity as far as my new species is concerned.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming. lol

There’s a difference between more emotional and more empathetic, the males at J6 were very emotional though it’s not the same as empathetic.

Events that happened to random people like cop shootings or school shootings are wildly blown up and milked by left wing activists because they are a great way to manipulate people who pride themselves on their empathy and makes them feel like they have to support their party to be a good person. A conservative equivalent is focusing on presumably negligible amount of drag queens reading to kids or trans women playing sports and not sucking (and MTG talking about illegal immigrant killing Laken Riley is kind of a right wing version of the cop stories).

There are other reasons why women don't like the right as much though, no doubt they hate the Andrew Tate type stuff and are obviously pro choice. Both candidates were accused of rape but Trump's personality is easier to sell it with.

Both were accused, but I don’t think Biden has as many accusations. I’m not making excuses for him, I’m just saying it isn’t exactly the same thing.

I’m not convinced that one gender is necessarily more empathetic. That statement certainly seems simplistic. Men can care about their families among many things. There may be differences in context, but I don’t think a generalization accurately describes anything but feelings about other feelings.

You say this yet the most extreme liberals who would choose socialist wokeism over democracy don't have any real power. Even AOC has embraced the luxurious lifestyle.The Trump over democracy people have a ton of power and will have a ton more power in a few months. Conservatives fear speculation over what liberals might do. Liberals fear what Trump has actually said he will do.

Is this to be interpreted as a statement of fact, political pragmatism, or surrender?

Yeah, and the Bush Era after September 11th was also really bad, so, in my experience, it’s the “”USA”, and it’s “allies””, or the “West”, rather than only “liberalism,” or “socialism”.

Also, to be clear about politics:

There’s a difference between political interests; political analysis for the sake of winning elections or other political games or in other political arenas; political analysis for the sake of truth and rationality, impartially and regardless of political interest, affiliation, or loyalty; and completely impartial political analysis with no goals whatsoever. The first two reflect homo sapien, or human nature as you know it, but only the last two are human as far as my new species is concerned. At least, beyond a very and extremely limited level of maturity for my new species.

I also should be unambiguous about human nature, consciousness, and conscious as far as my new species is concerned. Nothing you could ever know, think, believe, want, intend, or try can ever be good enough, satisfactory, equal, or acceptable for us if you are or represent a threat to my (new) species or challenge the truth, or our love or understanding of it.

Also, to be clear about the terms “democracy” and “politics”: and why one may be tolerated and the other will not be tolerated whatsoever under any circumstances whatsoever. Majority rule has no authority, legitimacy, or tolerance whatsoever in reality, time, or as far as my new species is concerned. Complicity will not be tolerated whatsoever under any circumstances whatsoever as per the same. It will only ultimately possibly be punished, and absolutely everything that could be hoped to gain from it will be temporary, limited, and ultimately defeated by whatever means necessary.

Majority rule is completely and totally indefensible by every possible meaning of the term. This is objective reality; it is not possible to disagree besides in delusion.

I permit and tolerate, to a limited extent, the term “democracy”, and will not eliminate or punish everything that might be considered “democratic” because such “democratic constitutions” and their legacies, may be permissible or acceptable, to a limited extent and in certain contexts, so long as they do not challenge, threaten, or interfere with my new species, the truth, or our love, or understanding of it.

Under no possible acceptable or permissible definition of “democracy” (as far as my species or reality is concerned), could politics or majority rule be considered “democratic”. Your claims otherwise are either fundamentally contradictory, or all of “democracy” must and will be completely and forever eliminated. Politics and majority rule must, as objective reality, be considered less democratic than all other political systems by any reasonable, acceptable, or permissible definition of “democracy”. As objective reality: politics, and majority rule must be considered the least democratic form of statehood in human history by any tolerable definition of “democracy”. Any other definition of “democracy” is fundamentally: untenable, unsustainable, contradictory, irrational, and inhuman to my new species. As such my new species will not tolerate it or accept it whatsoever under any circumstances whatsoever at maturity.

Additionally, your “democratic constitutions” are only permitted to the extent that they comply with the truth, reality, logic, the “laws” of nature, responsible decision making, and the terms of my new species, and our love and understanding of truth. If they contradict or oppose any of the above, they are required to comply, or they will not be tolerated, and will only ultimately be punished.

To the extent that they reflect human nature as you know it, or the species Homo Sapien: they are liable for their self-interest, and any statement, claim, element, decision, process, priority, value, or rule that favors their self-interest: whether for their individuals, groups, or species. They are also liable for their self-interest being prioritized over any other interest, selfish or otherwise, or over the truth. There is no possible escape from such liability.

Also, your legal, political, and economic systems are definitively limited and temporary. They are required to comply with the truth, reality, and responsible decision making, or their decisions, rules, and evaluations are subject to be limited and temporary.

Western liberalism, as it’s ever been known, will never again have any significant or real power. It’s been strategically defeated far earlier than I expected. That’s clear from the crushed student protests over the past couple weeks. Its momentum, its narratives, and its sustainability against opposition are gone. Its future now is essentially strategically irrelevant. Its only real future is feminist, completely anti-western, anti-neo-colonial, and anti-capitalist (beyond socialism or communism).