https://batolebaaz.com/50147-free-chat-no-registration-pornstar-escort-czech-12028/ The same media that created Trump is now aghast he has supporters. What did they expect when they gave Trump hours of free airtime every night back in 2016? The media ignored fifteen other Republican candidates in order to gain ratings by airing whichever rants Trump chose to utter that day.
https://espacoyujin.com/36855-gay-dating-app-mission-viejo-ca-81428/ Even now, the media are giving Trump far more airtime, and in spite of themselves, more credibility by being utterly consumed by everything he does. Now they are concerned about a “slow-moving coup?”
https://gusgotit4ya.com/12112-who-is-halle-berry-dating-right-now-95472/ This will be the narrative of the next few months, and will, once again, give Trump the airtime and attention he craves. Mainstream media has no credibility among many Trump supporters. But, as one of the cardinal rules of politics attests, any coverage, even negative, is preferable to no coverage.
singles rietberg Trump lost the 2020 election, plain and simple. I know there are far too many who believe he actually won, and the election was somehow stolen from him. Indeed, this is the portrayal Eric Trump is trying to advance in order to keep his father relevant and in the news. But the truth is that Trump, in his arrogance and hubris, ran an awful campaign.
Cobham seznamka pro seniory karolinka Because he didn’t get the kind of unlimited and uncritical airtime he enjoyed in 2016, he had to actually run a campaign in 2020. He failed to do that, and he lost.
Even those believing some sort of conspiracy “stole” the election from Trump have failed to read the Constitution. Article II, Section 1, clearly states, “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.”
Note that the Constitution does not require a popular election for president. If it so desires, any of the states could just appoint electors of their choosing (and that was the original intent of this passage of the Constitution). Once the states approved their presidential electors, they completed their obligations according to the Constitution. Even if Trump actually did win the states his supporters claim were “stolen,” it doesn’t matter according to the Constitution. All the states had to do was appoint electors. Constitutionally, it doesn’t matter if the electors reflected the votes each presidential candidate received.
Personally, I always thought Trump was an idiot who ran a populist campaign designed to appeal to the grievances of many middle-class Americans (indeed, he stole his techniques from the tactics used by the left for decades). He has virtually no knowledge of government, and even less of the Constitution (of course, that critique can be applied to far too many members of Congress, as well).
I won’t deny the nation was better off with Trump as president than it is under Biden, but that’s a very low bar to clear. Biden has given the Bernie Sanders’ “progressive” wing of the Democratic party far too much power, and, in fact, many Democrats are attempting to govern to the left of Sanders. Considering the current state of the Democrats, anyone that even sounds remotely reasonable would be a better choice. Even confirmed liberals, like Senators Joe Manchin, (West Virginia), and Kyrsten Sinema, (Arizona), seem moderate by comparison.
Both major political parties are a mess. If the Democrats continue on their unitary national government, socialist path, there won’t be a need for a “slow-moving” coup. There will be a need for a full-scale revolution to reinstate federal government according to the principles of the Constitution. This revolution won’t be led by Trump. Instead, it would be conducted by those who actually read, understand, and revere the Constitution. That doesn’t describe Trump.
There will always be those who are attracted to charismatic populists, and who believe they see their own images in populist candidates. However, populists rarely make good representatives and leaders because of the narrow and shallow focus of their beliefs and their inherent narcissism. Instead of holding any recognizable political philosophy, populists rely solely upon their own charisma. Although Trump is a charismatic individual to many, and even though he has the ability to make people think he cares about them, Trump was less than a success as president. Even though some of his instincts were correct, he lacked the power and ability to create long-standing change. Indeed, his actions actually further emboldened the socialistic left.
If the country is to move to the correct course, it needs a president who understands their job is to execute the laws passed by Congress, not one who unilaterally attempts to create law anytime he thinks Congress has failed.
We need a Congress whose members actually understand federalism, and who recognize the states, not the federal government, are invested with the majority of sovereignty by the Constitution. Members of Congress must recognize the powers of the federal government are limited by design, and this design is appropriate. They must also recognize they shouldn’t have the power to spend other people’s money anytime they have a constituency with a grievance or an opportunity presents itself to buy votes with government spending. Representatives should use the upmost discretion every time they seek to spend a dollar, and they must use fiscal sense so as not to extort too much money from wage earners or saddle future generations with massive debt.
Trump is not the answer, and the election was not stolen from him. The Democrats, as they are now constituted, are not the answer either.
Both parties must carefully assess their beliefs and goals, and develop appealing candidates consistent with those beliefs and goals. If they continue to fail to do so, another party may rise up to supplant one or both of the current major parties. And if the situation appears too extreme, we might actually see the genesis of a new political revolution, and not merely a “slow-moving coup.”