The Biden campaign fiercely denounced Donald Trump following his caustic remarks aimed at immigrants Saturday, saying the former president “parroted Hitler.”
“Tonight Donald Trump channeled his role models as he parroted Adolf Hitler, praised Kim Jong Un, and quoted Vladimir Putin while running for president on a promise to rule as a dictator and threaten American democracy,” Biden-Harris 2024 spokesperson Ammar Moussa said in a statement.
Trump on Saturday ratcheted up his already inflammatory rhetoric on immigrants at a rally in New Hampshire. “They’re poisoning the blood of our country,” the former president said. “They’ve poisoned mental institutions and prisons all over the world. Not just in South America, not just the three or four countries that we think about, but all over the world they’re coming into our country from Africa, from Asia.”
So like, “Biden should seize the powers of the presidency to take a more authoritarian stance against authoritarianism.” Is this really what you mean?
Contrary to your premise, Biden has consistently promoted an anti-authoritarian view of how our representative democracy should work. He thinks people should vote against authoritarianism, instead of them calling on a POTUS who was elected to office because of his anti-authoritarian views to start taking authoritarian action against his authoritarian opponents.
The citizenry is not powerless. The citizenry has the most fundamental power of all: power over who is elected to office.
Just because that power can be corrupted and diminished through gerrymandering, electoral college imbalances, and two-party FPTP distortions (and a million other for-better-or-worse Constitutional safeguards against mob-rule) does not change the fact the citizenry still holds the most basic and fundamental power of all.
Tweets and finger-wagging are fine too, if you like, but if you are against fascism, I’m glad too. I hope you vote, and I hope you vote strategically instead of out of anger.
deleted by creator
It’s not really a strawman if you refuse to explain your argument. That would be called “a guess”.
deleted by creator
The first response in this chain seemed genuinely interested in engaging with you, and the part you shot down for being a “strawman” (the very first paragraph) seemed more like an honest question than an attack on you. Despite numerous attempts, nobody was able to figure out what your first comment meant, and I cannot comprehend why anyone would be happy with such an outcome.
Hah, pass. I’m just as happy to ignore the rest of your comment as you are.
What exactly can he legally do to keep trump out?