What are the most fundamental differences between Biden and Trump? Voters must ask themselves what kind of country they want to live in for the coming years. The contrast is stark and simple. If Biden can win, the messaging must be just as stark and simple. It is about messaging. again. Biden's supporters are mostly college-educated, so they get it because democracy is not a simple concept, and histories and conflicting values are not simple either, and they get that. Some may still understand that in the long term, the rule of law, instead of the rule of a strong man, is worth keeping, and they appreciate the degree of fairness the rule of law provides, but they are still weighing their decisions. They must ask themselves: "What kind of a country do they want to live in?" The answer may lie in being asked to imagine what it would be like to live in a dictatorship.
The urgency of the problem I see is that too many have swallowed the" dictator is a good thing" pill.This is the reason such an issue must be addressed now and effectively. They may think it advances their cause, but they are dangerous fools. One test: ask them to compare those lining up at the border to immigrate to Hungary, Russia, Turkey, North Korea, and Venezuela, fleeing dictator-run countries with the numbers trying to get into the US. That may be bad news to the same MAGA types, but it should also be a warning about how foolish they are about Trump's playing dulcet tunes to which he wants them to dance.
Maddow Blog | Poll: Too many GOP voters back authoritarian vision under Trump (msn.com)
The fence-sitters are the ones who most need to hear this message in sharp, digestible terms. Others may get it but think their personal interest lies in tax breaks, as big donors have shown recently. They may think Trump has personality quirks and dreams of dictatorships, but their pocketbooks and lust for more r are more important. Besides, Trump would not dare do what he openly promises to do, would he?
One approach would be to state the value of democracy in terms of "imagine a dictatorship" and what it means to be treated unfairly in everyday life. There are plenty of examples of how they work in today's world. Trump's words or deeds warrant using that as an example that amplifies the contrast of violence and turmoil with the rule and observance of the rule of law. Domestic tranquility is not a goal in a dictatorship unless dissent crushed by the dictator himself. Not only is it who is governed by whom in theory a risk, but it is by it is who wields the violent or threat of vilence big stick without any checks and balances at risk.Trump proposes to use the active military to put down demonstrations to which he objects. Fairness also is not the goal or the standard.Trump proposes to use the Department of Justice to target his political enemies with a campaign of revenge and retribution. Instead, the standard is what helps the "great leader"?Trump lusts over the power of "strong men" from Russia, China, North Korea, Turkey, and Hungary who operate that way. He believes he is immune from obeying any law. He has worked toward becoming one in the past; he promises to become one in the future if he wins in 2024.
Is that the kind of country you want to live in? Those seeking fairness need not apply to a government dominated by those who serve the big guy, the bos?. That's the way it worked in the land of Jim Crow of my youth, or even the political system in Chicago in the 1950s I saw when I went to college there. I may have been a young white girl, but I recognized and revolted against unfairness when I saw it. Trump's message is that he knows who our enemies are and defines enemies as enemies blocking his power, not necarily those who are yours or mine. His power is based on enforced loyalty to him, by fear or the carrots of tempting ambition, and he insists he is is immune from prosecution for violating and ignoring laws, even before, during, and after he was in office, to this day. Rule of law means little when applied to him; use of law enforcement for him is just another weapon to use on his behalf.
In a government led by a strong man, a dictator, the rule of law is subverted and used as a tool to advance the dictator's power and is not worth much more than the paper it is written on. That is how the "judicial system" works in an autocracy or dictatorship like Putin's or even in the less violent Hungary. All those on the bench are there because of their loyalty to the "strong leader." We saw how it works in Russia in the case of detained American sports stars and dancers, journalists, and Navalny. Is this the government you want to live in?
A word about the rule of law. Why is that such a big deal? Imagine a football game without referees and officials on the field. These days, video replays are respected as a basis for appeals. That is what the judicial system provides, not only to provide the most element of fairness based on rules that apply to both sides in a game but to protect the safety of the players or litigants in a sport or a court action that can be brutal. In the judicial system, the defendants and the prosecutions have rights and responsibilities that are rules or laws all agree on or swear to in advance. The rules in advance in a democracy are set in fair and free elections of legislatures and often enforcement is delegated to the executive branch to "faithfully execute" them. That means those in charge of enforcement should their duty to abide by them, too. Don't like the rules? If elections are still considered fair and free enough in a democracy, you can change it by voting. There will always be those who are in the minority, but in current dictatorships, 87% seem always to vote for the big guy. That is no coincidence.
Think the system is already intolerably unfair to voters? The voting system did not work for them in 2020, so the attempted coup on January 6 was justified, or taking control of the voting system by Trump loyalists and getting revenge on opponents in 2024 is also justified? They are dug into their fantasy world.. After four years of intense trying, no evidence or court decisions emerged to produce any proof that enough irregularities happened to change the result. Those clinging to that belie are also beyond reason.
Overwhelmed by those invoking "law and order" or the other term, "the rule of law."? These have become cliches or part of word salads pitched by opposing sides. What do those terms really mean? The rule of law isn't always pretty or flawless. Still, it is far better than the alternative when the judges are not bound in reality but not publicly spoken in the open, but as political appointees, their longevity and appointment were the reason they were there, to tilt the scale and help one side game the system. Those subject to those rules on paper see a self-serving interest in making th calls they know they can get away with by ignoring or intentionally violating the written laws. Laws are enforced when they serve a political boss and ignored when they benefit their opposition is not law and order. Recent sympathy showing a law enforcement officer killed by an undocumented immigrant while the same voices demanding the Jan.6 committers of violence resulting in the death of 6 law officers be released and are hostages is a cynical view of law and order. Both died in the line of duty and deserve sympathy. Neither is the rule of law upheld by those who misinterpret the laws because the judges, the referees, and the appeals court will have their backs if they subvert and twist laws' meanings.
The government-controlled press will never blow a whistle or investigate, report, or expose bias or corruption. The only news they get is also approved by the big boss. Imagine, nonMaga if the only news you got was on FOX and Newsmax or their spinoffs and the only social media was Truth Social or other carefully monitored, conforming media.
That is what living in an autocracy/dictatorship means; Opposition media viewpoints are either de-licensed or worse when a dictator controls media....and it is a part of all such autocrcies, including Hungary.
