So much winning.
- Thread starter dbmhoosier
- Start date
Is this some you are rooting for? What do think will be the different regions? Do you think it will be based on race?
Yugoslavia was assembled, like Frankenstein, and has no correlation to the American Constitutionsl Republic.
Last edited:
Sorry for so many questions. Butwho is the “we” here?
What you’re saying is undeniably true. It’s why our Federal government being the size it is and having the control it has, is so untenable.
You cannot hope to govern a country of our size and diversity through a powerful central authority unless you’re willing to go full autocratic.
And thus you have identified they democrats plan. We almost let they get away with it.
Now that we have once again staved it off, I pray that our weak ass kids don't let it happen again. This time was WAY too close.
The die has been cast. Trump is at best a band aid. I was in Mississippi a few weeks ago for the weekend. It is completely asinine to expect them to live under the same federal laws and regulations as Illinois or California for that matter.
The difference of our states and how they choose to operate is a strength to be embraced. Not something to be smoothed out.
And people have been fighting over the extent of local rule vs. centralized elsewhere for a very long time.
The problem is. There’s not a single modern day example of a country the size and scope of the U.S. that isn’t ruled by an autocrat and/or theocrat.
Some people will say Modi in India where people shit in the streets.
I suppose they have a point.
But even if you have an autocrat, you can allow for a lot of local rule in certain areas. Rome was pretty good at that.
On the other hand, England's spreading of the common law throughout their colonies was a boon to all those nations and their rule of law. @CO. Hoosier
So I think it all depends. But if the U.S. suddenly turned into a monarchy, with Trump at the head, and the current federal system still in place, much of our lives would remain unchanged (no, I'm not championing that idea).
I guess I'm saying it's all a big balancing act between local rule and centralized, autocratic rule. Each nation has to figure it out for themselves and there is no universal, one-size fits all best govt. system or balance.
There is a one size fits all. The Roman Empire even at its height was highly decentralized. Much more decentralized than the U.S. is today. Outside of a standing army and securing borders there’s nothing else that should be ruled by a central authority.
You may not be championing the idea but it sure sounds like you're saying "no biggie."
For years here, virtually anyone who floated the idea that Trump had authoritarian (and even strongman) tendencies was roundly criticized for being absurd. Same with references to Project 2025, which promotes an imperial presidency. "Oh, Trump has nothing to do with that. He doesn't endorse it and shouldn't be associated with it," even though many/most of its architects served in his first administration and/or are otherwise closely connected to Trump. Why now, after Trump has been elected, is the idea of an autocratic regime, with Trump at the helm, plausible - - and even acceptable?
P25 is the most anti-government policy paper ever generated. Calling it autocratic would be something a lemming that has never read a page of it says.
It’s an ode to getting government out of people’s lives and leaving them alone,
Glad to see you holding Brad's feet to the fire for his outspoken support of Trump.
I like Brad.
You bring this uneducated, smarmy bullshit again I’ll smack you silly.
Project 25 my ass. One consistent message dominates everything Trump says, every thing he does, every appointee he has put forth, and the stated purpose of Musk and Ramaswamy:
To cut the size, scope, and authority of the federal government and return power to the state and local government.
If he intends to be a national authoritarian, he’s not off to a very good start.
Similar threads
