Trump Presidency

[Vertigo 7]

True, but he also said he doesn't care, which I've been saying forever. They dont care who protests and how loud they get and how many they are. They don't have to even acknowledge it. Protests do not work. Writing your reps and senators or even the orange imbecile himself does not work. If they get their way, voting won't even matter. MAGA freaks are irrational "people" and will not respond to rational discourse. They must be paid back in kind for every evil they visit upon us. You don't try to reason with and understand a rabid dog, you put them down.

[Usenko]

I think that’s too pessimistic a view of what protests actually do.

A protest isn’t primarily about forcing a president to immediately respond. Most of the time leaders don’t respond. The real purpose is to galvanise people, encourage others who feel the same way, and signal that dissent is large and visible.

When millions of people show up, that matters politically whether the president acknowledges it or not. Politicians notice large voting blocs, and ignoring them entirely is usually a good way to lose the next election.

That’s also why there are constant attempts by the Republicans to dismiss or deny the number of people marching. If protests didn’t translate into political pressure and voter turnout, nobody would bother trying to limit them.

And if someone thinks the current leadership is dangerous, the practical way to deal with that in a democracy isn’t by talking about “putting dogs down.” It’s by organising, persuading people, and voting them out.

Protests are one step in that process, not the whole thing—but they’re far from pointless.

[decifer]

I think that’s too pessimistic a view of what protests actually do.
A protest isn’t primarily about forcing a president to immediately respond. Most of the time leaders don’t respond. The real purpose is to galvanise people, encourage others who feel the same way, and signal that dissent is large and visible.
When millions of people show up, that matters politically whether the president acknowledges it or not. Politicians notice large voting blocs, and ignoring them entirely is usually a good way to lose the next election.
That’s also why there are constant attempts by the Republicans to dismiss or deny the number of people marching. If protests didn’t translate into political pressure and voter turnout, nobody would bother trying to limit them.
And if someone thinks the current leadership is dangerous, the practical way to deal with that in a democracy isn’t by talking about “putting dogs down.” It’s by organising, persuading people, and voting them out.
Protests are one step in that process, not the whole thing—but they’re far from pointless.

100%.
Protests are still the most important action of the people.
If you want to motivate others to take action and show resistance, you need to show them that they're not alone and give them something they can join.
When protests die, the oppressors have won.

[Vertigo 7]

I Politicians notice large voting blocs, and ignoring them entirely is usually a good way to lose the next election.

Thats great in theory, but if you haven't been paying attention, the MAGA freaks are actively trying to rig the next election, leading to doing away with them all together. We are past the point of yelling and screaming and hoping something gets done to save this sinking ship. The MAGA freaks are not hiding their intentions. They're breaking laws every day because they simply do not care.

[Usenko]

Yes — the Republicans are absolutely are trying to tilt the rules of the system in their favour. That’s obvious to anyone paying attention.

But historically, that’s exactly when large-scale civic mobilisation matters most.

I’ve come across research by the political scientist Erica Chenoweth suggesting that non-violent campaigns that mobilise around 3.5% of a country’s population have historically been extraordinarily difficult for governments to withstand. Once that many people are visibly engaged over time, the political pressure becomes overwhelming.

In the USA, that 3.5% figure involves maybe 11-12 million people. If the estimates of 8-9 million people actually MARCHING are even close to correct, then the number of people who are actively sympathetic or involved in the movement could easily be around that threshold or beyond it. A demonstration involving millions isn’t meaningless — it’s part of how societies signal that a huge slice of the population is paying attention and organising.

If people are worried about democracy being undermined, the answer isn’t to give up on protests and civic action. It’s to do more of it. That’s how democratic systems have historically been defended.

[Vertigo 7]

But that still requires the people being protested to care. All this is accomplishing is making noise they can and will ignore.

The British didn't surrender when the colonists protested and threw a bunch of tea into the Boston harbor. The confederate states didn't give up their rebellion because some folks in northern states held up signs demanding an end to slavery. The 3rd Reich didn't fall when Jewish people protested their genocide. Protests aren't defending democracy, they're just being laughed at. You're still thinking that this is some political exercise that can be overcome by a clearly broken system. These MAGA freaks aren't going to care until their livelihood is directly threatened.

[Usenko]

Interesting that you mention the Boston Tea Party — it’s a classic example of how symbolic and mass protests can create political pressure. That protest didn’t immediately overthrow British rule, but it was part of a process that eventually led to American independence.

The broader point is that when enough people are visibly mobilised, violence becomes unnecessary to achieve change. The government may respond harshly, but history shows that sustained, large-scale opposition is extremely difficult to suppress.

Protests aren’t a magic switch — they’re one critical part of a process that can defend democracy and hold power accountable.

Here’s an important point that’s easy to overlook: protests aren’t mainly for the government’s benefit. It’s helpful if leaders notice and adjust, but what they think becomes largely irrelevant once a movement reaches a large enough scale. The main effect is signalling, galvanising supporters, and demonstrating that a significant portion of the population is actively engaged.

[Vertigo 7]

Protests aren’t a magic switch — they’re one critical part of a process that can defend democracy and hold power accountable.

So when can we expect to see the Trump administration in jail since we just had 9million people protesting it?

Again, they DO NOT care. They don't fear accountability because these protests are meaningless to them. I get it, they matter to people on this side. They just don't to the other. While this side protests, his gestapo is still brutalizing and disappearing people. He's inches away from starting yet another war. On and on it goes and what do we do? Protest... and nothing changes.

[Usenko]

The place where you are making the error is that you think that the important thing is the protests' relevance to the leadership. It actually DOESN'T MATTER if the current government is scared by the protests. In fact, when the Midterms come around, the more overconfident they are, the better.

What I'm saying is that their importance to the other side IS the point. You don't directly get people put in gaol by marching in the street, but if they don't march, the chance of the bad people getting their comeuppance decreases.

[Vertigo 7]

In fact, when the Midterms come around, the more overconfident they are, the better.

And when they declare martial law and prevent a legitimate election from taking place, or one of the other myriad of plans they have to prevent the midterms from taking place? We're just supposed to protest again? You're gonna have to explain how yelling and screaming turns into this mythical "defense of democracy". Because the only defense of democracy I've seen has been at the business end of a gun. Ask Ukraine for a current example.

[Usenko]

Ironically, there’s reason for hope if you watch what they actually do.

The Republicans may talk about cancelling the midterms or giving the president a third term—but those are largely rhetorical threats. In practice, what they’re doing is trying to make the midterms work for them: gerrymandering districts, changing voter eligibility rules, atttempting (largely unsuccessfully!) to discredit opponents, and spending enormous sums to influence the outcome.

What does this tell us? It shows that they still view the midterms as crucial. If they truly thought the election didn’t matter or could be ignored, they wouldn’t be expending all this effort. Their actions reveal that they feel vulnerable and are trying to secure power within the system.

In other words, the very fact that they are taking these steps is proof that civic engagement and elections still work—it’s exactly why participating, organising, and mobilising voters remains the most effective defense of democracy.

[Vertigo 7]

And there it is. You're as dismissive of the threats they're making as folks were dismissive of the threats that the orange one made during his campaign. "Ohh thats just rhetoric. They can't do that. Blah blah blah." Look where that got us. They're telling us exactly what they're going to do, just like he did.

You're not paying attention. The law DOES NOT MATTER TO THEM. Yeah they're trying to rig things in their favor if a vote takes place. If they can't win it, they're going to steal it. and If they can't do that, they're going to prevent it from happening. That's their plan. No amount of protesting is going to change that. Have you not seen them double down and triple down when they get called out? You're wanting to take a principled stand against people that have no principles. Do you not see how that is doomed to fail? They are, quite literally, child murderers and rapists and/or defenders of those that are. They're not going to let go of power because we yelled at them, no matter how big our crowds get.

I'll add too, you should track down the people his gestapo have kidnaped and the families of the soldiers that have and will die in his war and tell them we protested. I'm sure that'll be of great comfort to them.

[matthewfarmery]

Lets try and make this less personal, and try and keep things a bit more on topic. However, I fully agree with Vertigo 7 assessment.

@Usenko

The problem is, without making this more heated, your missing some major points, I have a checklist of what went wrong. Maybe before things get a little annoying. You should realise, That Trump run for office, I think was part of a grander scheme. You see, The problem is, America had wool pulled over its eyes. The reason why, The republicans will do anything to stay in power, is that the MAGA elite, that are running things, will be exposed if they fail. Which is why, they can't afford to lose the midterms.

Read this checklist, and see if you can calculate where things went wrong.

Those in bold are the ones you should focus on, but to be truthful, they are all critical. Trump couldn't do this on his own. He doesn't have the mental capacity to do this. To do this, took a lot of leverage. Especailly packing a one sided supreme court. And look at the underline point, So a easy history lesson question. WAs Trump in office during that time?

1
2
3
4
5

Why was he allowed in office?
Why was his medical records not fully disclosed?
Why wasn't the 25th amendment not triggered?
Why did the Supreme court give him immunity and that Judge cannon shut down his classified docs case?
And why, when he was this state, nothing was still allowed to kick in?
Why was he allowed to declare war on a country, without going through congress?
why was his hand picked people for high position approved?

He wasn't, so clearly someone somewhere, went to a lot of trouble to clear the hurdles to allow him back in, and Remember too, He was impeached twice, and the Republican senate gave him a free pass each time.

So ask this, Who has been controlling Trump? how has been helping to break laws to make him get away with things? And finally, which group will lose the most, IF Trump loses, and this comes to the surface? As they are the ones breaking the laws to keep him in power? So again, someone spent a llot of time planning this. The ask, is this too late for America? and what can be done about it, unless Americans start fighting for what little democracy, they still feel they have left. The problem now is, America is a dictatorship. And those that watch fox and other channels, those Americans are still alseep at the wheel, thing that America will win, as Trump and who else is behind him is tell that part of America, especailly what they want to hear, While others are walking up, and realing the true horror, for allowing this mad man and madness in to start with.

So again, you should be asking, who is to blame, and what can be done about it, when those in control now know they can do whatever they like. Hence, ICe patrols, and its stunts at airports. FEAR, You control and manipulate that, and you just have frightened kids, too scared to go outside.

See the issue now?

[Chips]

And there it is. You're as dismissive of the threats they're making as folks were dismissive of the threats that the orange one made during his campaign. "Ohh thats just rhetoric. They can't do that. Blah blah blah." Look where that got us. They're telling us exactly what they're going to do, just like he did.

You're not paying attention. The law DOES NOT MATTER TO THEM. Yeah they're trying to rig things in their favor if a vote takes place. If they can't win it, they're going to steal it. and If they can't do that, they're going to prevent it from happening. That's their plan. No amount of protesting is going to change that. Have you not seen them double down and triple down when they get called out? You're wanting to take a principled stand against people that have no principles. Do you not see how that is doomed to fail? They are, quite literally, child murderers and rapists and/or defenders of those that are. They're not going to let go of power because we yelled at them, no matter how big our crowds get.

I'll add too, you should track down the people his gestapo have kidnaped and the families of the soldiers that have and will die in his war and tell them we protested. I'm sure that'll be of great comfort to them.

His opinion differs from yours. As does mine; I'm aligned with Usenko's view here.

So, what are you hoping to achieve - make us see the light? All that's been put forward is that protests are valuable and can indeed work. A protest being that coordinated mass show of feelings that lead to changes of outcomes as it can embolden and encourage others that views/concerns/objections are shared, and together, can be more visible (snowball effect) to cause uptake of people showing said opinion.

Can protests be prevented? Of course, not often in a true democracy though, so if that happens expect it'll escalate as you'd appear to desire.

Even what you appear to be saying (in your opinion) is the *only* solution... (correct me if I've misunderstood, but advocating civil war is the only solution) has to start with people coming together. How do they usually find out they share opinions and beliefs...? Is that not through gatherings that would appear to look like protests?

[Vertigo 7]

And there it is. You're as dismissive of the threats they're making as folks were dismissive of the threats that the orange one made during his campaign. "Ohh thats just rhetoric. They can't do that. Blah blah blah." Look where that got us. They're telling us exactly what they're going to do, just like he did.

You're not paying attention. The law DOES NOT MATTER TO THEM. Yeah they're trying to rig things in their favor if a vote takes place. If they can't win it, they're going to steal it. and If they can't do that, they're going to prevent it from happening. That's their plan. No amount of protesting is going to change that. Have you not seen them double down and triple down when they get called out? You're wanting to take a principled stand against people that have no principles. Do you not see how that is doomed to fail? They are, quite literally, child murderers and rapists and/or defenders of those that are. They're not going to let go of power because we yelled at them, no matter how big our crowds get.

I'll add too, you should track down the people his gestapo have kidnaped and the families of the soldiers that have and will die in his war and tell them we protested. I'm sure that'll be of great comfort to them.

His opinion differs from yours. As does mine; I'm aligned with Usenko's view here.

So, what are you hoping to achieve - make us see the light? All that's been put forward is that protests are valuable and can indeed work. A protest being that coordinated mass show of feelings that lead to changes of outcomes as it can embolden and encourage others that views/concerns/objections are shared, and together, can be more visible (snowball effect) to cause uptake of people showing said opinion.

Can protests be prevented? Of course, not often in a true democracy though, so if that happens expect it'll escalate as you'd appear to desire.

Even what you appear to be saying (in your opinion) is the *only* solution... (correct me if I've misunderstood, but advocating civil war is the only solution) has to start with people coming together. How do they usually find out they share opinions and beliefs...? Is that not through gatherings that would appear to look like protests?

/yawn - go back to ignoring me, please. i have nothing to say to you.

[matthewfarmery]

@Chips, I think that was a good post, But if you read my post above yours, people should be a little bit more broad minded, (I say this for myself as well, as we all make mistakes) is that Trump's raise to power and that IF the surpreme court HAD sided with Special Counsel Jack Smith.

What would have happened if,
A the SC didn't take up the case?

Remember, their job is not to rewrite the constitution, but to back it up, and say, we have a better knowleddge if this, we can say this part may mean something a bit different, But they didn't do this. And remember, they been siding with Trump, unless many started to back off. But if you see many recent cases, its always THREE that side with trump.

Are they been manipulated?
Bribed? if so by who?
Also, Trump has been packing the lower courts, like adding a totally out of her depth Judge cannon, and HER Husband has criminal connections. And then there is that packing lot lawyer, who became an FBI someone or other, before, many other judges started to pile on the pressure, so that she had to resign

So again, who has the power to make this happen? who will lose out, if they came to light. Trump will be gone, or silent. Those that hid in the shadows, will not be exposed.

[Chips]

i have nothing to say to you.

You never did.

[Alan Phipps]

Enough of the personal comments thank you both.

[Mailo]

But that still requires the people being protested to care. All this is accomplishing is making noise they can and will ignore.

The British didn't surrender when the colonists protested and threw a bunch of tea into the Boston harbor. The confederate states didn't give up their rebellion because some folks in northern states held up signs demanding an end to slavery. The 3rd Reich didn't fall when Jewish people protested their genocide. Protests aren't defending democracy, they're just being laughed at. You're still thinking that this is some political exercise that can be overcome by a clearly broken system. These MAGA freaks aren't going to care until their livelihood is directly threatened.

Those three examples have one thing in common ... they are all way before modern mass media, which greatly strengthens the power of protest. A more modern counter example: The Berlin Wall came down only due to the pressure of public protest, and in a peaceful way. And no matter how far down the road towards a police state the US currently is (and I agree with you that is WAYYYYYYY too far), the US still could take lessons from East Germany. Yet, it did not save the political party in East Germany in the end, who cared even less about what people thought than Republicans do.

I'm not saying things will definitely work out this way, but the world isn't as black and white as you seem to think it is.

[jlehtone]

... has to start with people coming together. How do they usually find out they share opinions and beliefs...?
Is that not through gatherings that would appear to look like protests?

This. Almost no war is waged by one person alone.