Trump 2nd term prediction thread
So, looks like Trump not only smashed the electoral college, but is looking on track to win the popular vote, which seems to be an unexpected turn of events, but a clear sign of the current temperature in the country and perhaps the wider world.
Would be interested to hear views on how his 2nd term will pan out from both sides of the aisle - major happenings, what he's going to get done, what he's not going to get done, the impact of his election on the current conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, whether his popularity will remain the same, wane, or increase, etc.
A bit of an anemic OP, I know, just interested to hear people's thoughts now that the election uncertainty is over.
They refuse to call Trump a big fat unhealthy slob, which he absolutely is. And now as a result, more than 1/2 the country voted for him. Had he been fat shamed like he should have been, he’d not be so fat and horrible. He’d just be horrible.
No idea what you're talking about?
Spoiler
Pretty sure that's exactly what's happening, correct. Anyone suspected of being in a gang goes to his fancy new prison and stays there until and unless they feel like letting them back out. Maybe if they're lucky they might get a lawyer and a trial after a few years, but the majority haven't even seen a judge I don't think.
Do you have a non radical leftist souce claiming that?
I apologize for conveying these offense facts about the US President-elect and his hand picked AttorneyGeneral so offensively. In the future I will use the term BLATFOCE to non-offensively convey these offensive facts.
I should have stated that Trump will have his hand-picked AG and MAGA’s favorite son, MattGaetz, show him where he gets all kinds of BorderlineLegalAssToFacilitateReleaseOfCongressionalEjaculate (BLATFROCE).
MrDavitWilliam regrets the oversight.
After a spike in homicides in March 2022, Bukele asked the National Assembly to approve emergency measures that suspended the right of association, the right to be informed of the reason for an arrest, and the right to legal counsel. Moreover, the measures gave authorities the power to monitor the communications of anyone suspected of gang membership. In July El Salvador claimed its first day in more than two years with zero homicides. Gang activity and the homicide rate fell dramatically, and the shadow of violence and extortion was lifted from daily life in much of the country.
On the other hand, by February 2024 an estimated 75,000 Salvadorans (roughly 1 percent of the country’s population) had been arrested and incarcerated. Human rights organizations raised concerns over the resulting violations of the civil rights of Salvadorans, claiming that innocent people were being caught up in the sweep and that officials were abusing prisoners.
Thanks. Sounds like my recollection was spot on. Well, according to the radical leftists at Britannica, anyway.
I can't be bothered to look it up. That's my recollection of what I watched. If it's shown to be wrong, I'll retract it.
The detention before seeing a judge has been prolonged (pretty normal in those emergencies, literally exactly what the spanish government did to deal with basque terrorism), and habeas corpus suspended for gang crimes.
Emergency legal measures enacted by the state of emergency (suspension of constitutional rights):
– Permits arrests with no warrant
– Increases time detainees can be held without appearing before a judge
– Removes guarantee of defense lawyer or being informed of reason for detention
– Allows government to intercept civilian communications
– Authorizes security forces to set up roadblocks and checkpoints to restrict freedom of movement
/
Keep in mind the USA constitution as well explicitly allows suspension of habeas corpus in case of mass violence (invasion or rebellion). Criminal gang having substituted the state in major areas of the country and having the local monopoly of force is an equivalent threat that justifies the same.
Ofc the crime problem in the USA isn't but a fraction of what Bukele had to deal with so it wouldn't be justified in the USA to do the same.
The major emergency powers also deal with the possibility of cutting off gang communication/organization. In third world countries (And often enough in the USA, Italy as well) gang criminals keep doing business while in prison. They manage their affairs in various ways, they conspire with fellow criminals and so on. Stripping them of all "prisoner rights" temporarily is what cracks their networks.
Full incommunicado, no personal item possession, that sort of thing. And of coure no communication can remain private and you can't waste time asking for a warrant for every single time you need to intercept it. If you can suspend that right to privacy you can fix things, and Bukele did.
But i mean *their constitution allows for emergency power to be used to suspend those rights*, that's not fascism, or a disrespect of the constitution, that is *using the constitution as intended* as having the worst murder rate worldwide is clearly an emergency, one of the worst possible ones, unlike made up emergencies like "the climate" .
For the USA you have to look at what the constitution allows, but with the eyes of "what is the absolutely maximum impact i can get while technically respecting the letter of the constitution stretching everything to the max in order to crush those enemies of the state forever"? that must be the spirit and that's what you can learn from Bukele.
A publicly transparent intention to do literally everything that is possible under the constitution to fix those problems.
With no ethical concern ever outside achieving the goal, achieving which IS the most important ethical concern of all (while respecting the technical letter of the constitution). Destroying enemies IS THE PRIMARY FUNDAMENTAL ROLE OF THE STATE, is the essence of state ethics.
That's the ethos needed to achieve things against violent enemies.
That's not unlimited detention with no trial.
The detention before seeing a judge has been prolonged (pretty normal in those emergencies, literally exactly what the spanish government did to deal with basque terrorism), and habeas corpus suspended for gang crimes.
Emergency legal measures enacted by the state of emergency (suspension of constitutional rights):
– Permits arrests with no warrant
– Increases time detainees can be held without appearing before a judge
– Removes guarantee of defense lawyer or being informed of rea
Firstly, you conveniently elided over the fact that the so-called "state of emergency" has lasted for years. That's quite obviously an overreach and abuse of those powers.
Secondly, what exactly do you think Gaetz is proposing when he says he wants to copy El Salvador? Be very specific please, not vague generalities like "everything allowable under the constitution".
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/j...
Cool, trying hundreds of defendants at a time. I'm sure they'll get a fair trial.
Firstly, you conveniently elided over the fact that the so-called "state of emergency" has lasted for years. That's quite obviously an overreach and abuse of those powers.
Secondly, what exactly do you think Gaetz is proposing when he says he wants to copy El Salvador?
Why, if every time the sovereign elected parliament prolongs it legally as their constitution requires? if the constitution allows something it definitionally can't be an abuse there. If you think a constitution is "wrong" well then, accept the sovereign will of another people can be different from your preferences. I dislike some aspects of the american constitution but it's not like i would support people to disregard them.
I can't read Gaetz mind but i think the direction (if Gaetz preferences were to be followed) can be clear.
You get the lawyers active to learn how why and in technical detail you can suspend/compress/reduce/interpret more strictly rights to expand the efficacy of law enforcement in dealing with crime.
You try your best to make life as miserable as possible for criminals, and as easy as possible for law enforcement, within the limit of the constitution as interpreted in the most favourable possible way for your goal, with the only ethical concern in your mind at all steps always being "fixing that criminality problem" and nothing else.
Prisoners might get abused, innocents jailed, tough luck if necessary to fix the problem. Still far better than many more innocents being damaged every day by the criminals.
Ofc the above applies to exceptional crimes and only temporarily. In america case, it would mostly apply to the mass deportations of illegals i think.
Re: trials
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/j...
Cool, trying hundreds of defendants at a time. I'm sure they'll get a fair trial.
You mean like when italy tried more than 450 mafiosos all togheter in our best attempt in our history to deal a lethal blow to the Mafia? which succeeded so well, sicilian mafia is but a shadow of what it was (unfortunately, other mafias took it's place but that's another topic).
Sicilian prosecutors indicted 475 mafiosi for a multitude of crimes relating to Mafia activities, based primarily on the testimonies given by former Mafia bosses turned informants, known as pentiti, in particular Tommaso Buscetta and Salvatore Contorno. Most were convicted, 338 people, sentenced to a total of 2,665 years, not including life sentences handed to 19 bosses; the convictions were upheld on 30 January 1992 by the Supreme Court of Italy, after the final stage of appeal. The importance of the trial was that the existence of Cosa Nostra was finally judicially confirmed.[1]
It is considered to be the most significant trial ever against the Sicilian Mafia, as well as the largest trial in world history.[2] Throughout and after the trial, several judges and magistrates were killed by the Mafia, including the two who led it—Giovanni Falcone and Paolo Borsellino.
///
Do you even attempt to comprehend what it means to have structured sub-national entities with armed forces subverting the state at the local level in a capillar way systematically?
What you as well should learn from Bukele is that at some point, your notion of individual liberal values collapses against reality and you can't keep both that and a normal country, you have to choose. And it's a moral imperative to choose the well being of the country in the long term even if it means suspension of otherwise important individual rights, if the constitution allows for that ofc.
And if it doesn't, it should be changed to allow for that, otherwise at some point the country will face problems too big for those rights to be kept and would collapse under a coup by someone who wants to fix things and will disregard the constitution, which isn't a good outcome.
Fortunately for El Salvador, their constitution was smartly written.
And it's truly obscene from outside to have people caring about "the rights of prisoners" when the country was ravaged by gangs for decades because there was no legal solution to those problems.
Why, if every time the sovereign elected parliament prolongs it legally as their constitution requires? if the constitution allows something it definitionally can't be an abuse there. If you think a constitution is "wrong" well then, accept the sovereign will of another people can be different from your preferences. I dislike some aspects of the american constitution but it's not like i would support people to disregard them.
Because that's not what "emergency" means. Constitutions have to be written in generalities owing to the nature of how the document is used. If an authoritarian leader installs judges who rubber stamp his decisions, there are no checks and balances and pretty much anything can be declared constitutional. That doesn't make it not an overreach or abuse of power, under the guise of adhering to some technicality like "state of emergency".
I can't read Gaetz mind but i think the direction (if Gaetz preferences were to be followed) can be clear.
You get the lawyers active to learn how why and in technical detail you can suspend/compress/reduce/interpret more strictly rights to expand the efficacy of law enforcement in dealing with crime.
You try your best to make life as miserable as possible for criminals, and as easy as possible for law enforcement, within the limit of the constitution as interpreted in the most favourable possibl
Well, that sounds like freedom. No idea why anyone says that republicans are authoritarians, really, I struggle to think of a more free society than the one you've described above.
You mean like when italy tried more than 450 mafiosos all togheter in our best attempt in our history to deal a lethal blow to the Mafia? which succeeded so well, sicilian mafia is but a shadow of what it was (unfortunately, other mafias took it's place but that's another topic).
Sicilian prosecutors indicted 475 mafiosi for a multitude of crimes relating to Mafia activities, based primarily on the testimonies given by former Mafia bosses turned informants,
I do understand that extraordinary situations require extraordinary measures. I don't much care what he does to MS-13, I just wish you wouldn't pretend he is doing it under colour of law.
Because that's not what "emergency" means. Constitutions have to be written in generalities owing to the nature of how the document is used. If an authoritarian leader installs judges who rubber stamp his decisions, there are no checks and balances and pretty much anything can be declared constitutional. That doesn't make it not an overreach or abuse of power, under the guise of adhering to some technicality like "state of emergency".
Well, that sounds like freedom. No idea why anyone says that r
Defending freedom can have costs at times. And the costs increase if you don't act immediatly, of course far less would have been needed if the proper. ethical ethos of "tough on crimes" had always underpinned all decision making by both parties.
Any possible excess necessary today to fix something in the USA (keep in mind the situation isn't remotely comparable to pre-Bukele El Salvador, so far less is necessary) would have been caused by democrats dereliction of duty.
As usual, the left is the source of most of society problems, and you can't blame the right if in order to fix the horrors of leftism, some costs are to be paid.
I do understand that extraordinary situations require extraordinary measures. I don't much care what he does to MS-13, I just wish you wouldn't pretend he is doing it under colour of law.
It is, i wish you would accept that the law can allow stuff you dislike at time, and it's still the rule of law.
Defending freedom can have costs at times. And the costs increase if you don't act immediatly, of course far less would have been needed if the proper. ethical ethos of "tough on crimes" had always underpinned all decision making by both parties.
Any possible excess necessary today to fix something in the USA (keep in mind the situation isn't remotely comparable to pre-Bukele El Salvador, so far less is necessary) would have been caused by democrats dereliction of duty.
As usual, the left is the s
We need to take your freedoms and rights away today so you can be even more free tomorrow. Spoken like a true fascist.
We need to take your freedoms and rights away today so you can be even more free tomorrow. Spoken like a true fascist.
There are checks and balances even for temporary suspensions. Have to be voted again and again by elected representatives who have to answer to voters. And only if the constitution allows for that.
There is nothing fascist in that, do you understand your take here is what allows Victor to claim Zelensky is a fascist? because he is getting renewal of emergency powers during a war by parliament?
And yes a domestic effort against criminals can reach the emergency level of a war
There are checks and balances even for temporary suspensions. Have to be voted again and again by elected representatives who have to answer to voters. And only if the constitution allows for that.
There is nothing fascist in that, do you understand your take here is what allows Victor to claim Zelensky is a fascist? because he is getting renewal of emergency powers during a war by parliament?
And yes a domestic effort against criminals can reach the emergency level of a war
Ben Franklin: "It is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer."
Luciom / Gaetz: "Prisoners might get abused, innocents jailed, tough luck if necessary to fix the problem."
Zelensky has an actual emergency. Bukele had an actual emergency, whether he still has one is questionable. Gaetz does not have an actual emergency, but that's what fascists do - invent an emergency, then use additional powers to piss all over the constitution. And enablers like you defend them, explaining to everyone how it's all perfectly legal.
There are actually human beings on planet earth who think Matt ****ing Gaetz gives a **** about the rights of Americans?
Lol gtfo
Ben Franklin: "It is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer."
Luciom / Gaetz: "Prisoners might get abused, innocents jailed, tough luck if necessary to fix the problem."
Both can be true : normal times vs exceptional times (as decided by elected representatives , temporarily, under the constitutional framework for emergencies, if it exists)
Oh and btw there is no reason to think the Blackstone ratio isn't respected by Bukele
Both can be true : normal times vs exceptional times (as decided by elected representatives , temporarily, under the constitutional framework for emergencies, if it exists)
Oh and btw there is no reason to think the Blackstone ratio isn't respected by Bukele
You said what I quoted in relation to Gaetz, not to Bukele. What are the exceptional times in the US?
