Elections are apparently the greatest threat to democracy

Here’s part of the reason why.

And from Roger in the comments: NBC News Goes Full Fascist: Voting for ‘Racist’ Trump Is ‘Not Only Immoral but Illegal’. Its conclusion:

Make no mistake about it, this is the real face of the modern American left. They want to destroy America as a constitutional republic, and in the name of “equality,” they’ll abolish every single one of its citizens’ rights.

It’s for your own good so why fight it?

This entry was posted in American politics, Cultural Issues. Bookmark the permalink.

55 Responses to Elections are apparently the greatest threat to democracy

  1. Bruce of Newcastle

    Those deplorable deplorable voters. What would they know?

  2. a happy little debunker

    The Progressives couldn’t win their arguments by reasoning.
    The Progressives couldn’t win their arguments by debating.
    The Progressives couldn’t win their arguments by insisting.
    The Progressives couldn’t win their arguments by silencing.
    The Progressives can’t win their arguments by illegalising.
    All they have left, to for fight their arguments, is rage.

    Coming soon to an Australia near you!

  3. C.L.

    It’s pretty incredible to think these massive crowds have never been joined by a Republican president before. Shame on them – especially Bush.

  4. Tom

    What 21st century leftism has come down to: people are too stupid to make the correct moral choices so voting must be banned and all decisions left to university-diseducated “experts” (naturally selected by leftists).

    The old name for 21st century leftism was fascism.

  5. Fisky

    Any of the Bow-Tie Intifada want to explain why no Republican President before Trump ever spoke at this rally? Not even the bible-thumping Jesus lover Bush43 could be bothered to show up. What a bunch of dishonest frauds!

  6. Fisky

    Previous GOP Presidents were all faking the whole “faith” thing. Never ever went to the mat for it. They only really “meant” it when they were trying to gaslight the electorate into opening the borders. Disgusting!

  7. Zatara

    “The President’s misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won.”

    – Adam Schiff

  8. Zatara

    “We have to impeach him, otherwise he’s going to win the election”

    – Congressman Al Green

  9. C.L.

    What’s up with Schiff’s eyeballs?
    Is it a medical condition?

  10. C.L.

    What’s up with Schiff’s [email protected]?
    Is it a medical condition?

  11. JC

    It’s called eyeball protrusion in medical speak :-).

    The remedy is sticking his ridiculous looking head in a vice, locking it up and then pressing down hard on them.

    We learnt this at medical school.

  12. candy

    “The President’s misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won.”

    I get the impression this means the Dems are going to practice electoral fraud to win the election and there is a plan.
    Lefty types always talk a kind of backwards talk, you have to reverse what they say.

  13. C.L.

    Ace:

    It’s hard to take people who are plainly more liberal than conservative shrieking “Trump’s not a real conservative” when for 40 years those same undercover liberals have strongly advised GOP presidents to stay away from the March for Life.

    Read it all:

    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/385457.php

  14. America’s educated numbskulls can’t tell the difference between a man and a woman ….. and those being re-educated by these same morons can’t tell you the capital of Washington …….. The world definitely needs more Trumpster’s .

  15. Roger

    NBC News op ed:

    Voting for Trump is illegal.

    Funny, just last week the Bee had a headline: Democrats Fear Public Will Tamper with Election Result

    Satire quickly becomes reality.

  16. miltonf

    GWB never said boo when Barry O’Bama was POTUS.

    Bush and Blair and Howard- what terrible harm they did with the Iraq war.

  17. 1735099

    Arrant nonsense.
    This has nothing to do with real democracy.
    If it did, Trump wouldn’t be President.
    More Americans voted for his opponent than voted for him.
    His election is a consequence of gerrymanded electoral college boundaries.
    The USA is not, and never has been, a democracy.
    It is a constitutional republic.

  18. Rusty of Qld

    If you are against a March for Life you must therefore support a March for Death.

  19. Iampeter

    Any of the Bow-Tie Intifada want to explain why no Republican President before Trump ever spoke at this rally? Not even the bible-thumping Jesus lover Bush43 could be bothered to show up. What a bunch of dishonest frauds!

    Because even the awful Bush wasn’t left wing enough to want to ban immigration and abortion as much as Trump and his supporters.
    The conservative movement’s decline into far-left authoritarianism has picked up steam.

  20. Iampeter

    If you are against a March for Life you must therefore support a March for Death.

    Except the March for Life IS a march for death.
    A bunch of ignorant death cultists that want to return slavery to America.

  21. Lee

    I get the impression this means the Dems are going to practice electoral fraud to win the election and there is a plan.

    They’ve done it before; why stop now?

  22. Roger

    The USA is not, and never has been, a direct democracy.

    FIFY.

  23. Lee

    Arrant nonsense.
    This has nothing to do with real democracy.
    If it did, Trump wouldn’t be President.
    More Americans voted for his opponent than voted for him.
    His election is a consequence of gerrymanded electoral college boundaries.
    The USA is not, and never has been, a democracy.
    It is a constitutional republic.

    So effing what?

    Australian federal and state governments have also been formed by the party which won fewer votes than the loser.

    I don’t see hypocrites like you whinging when Labor gets into government under such circumstances.

    “Arrant nonsense” indeed, but from you.

  24. struth

    Because even the awful Bush wasn’t left wing enough to want to ban immigration and abortion as much as Trump and his supporters.
    The conservative movement’s decline into far-left authoritarianism has picked up steam.

    FMD.

  25. Roger

    A bunch of ignorant death cultists that want to return slavery to America.

    Damn straight!

    Returning slavery to America is definitely on their ‘to do’ list, right under protecting unborn life.

  26. Lee

    Returning slavery to America is definitely on their ‘to do’ list, right under protecting unborn life.

    Of course, wanting to bring back slavery and being anti-abortion must be mutually inclusive (/sarc off).

    Sounds like something a leftist would say.

  27. 1735099

    So effing what?

    The title of the post is “Elections are apparently the greatest threat to democracy”.
    The premise is entirely false.

    Australian federal and state governments have also been formed by the party which won fewer votes than the loser.

    As a Queenslander who lived through the Jo Bjelke-Petersen era, I’m very conscious of that.

    I don’t see hypocrites like you whinging when Labor gets into government under such circumstances.

    And exactly when was that?

  28. Lee

    And exactly when was that?

    Several times in the last thirty or so years, including when Tony Abbott was opposition leader.

  29. Neil

    As a Queenslander who lived through the Jo Bjelke-Petersen era, I’m very conscious of that.

    The Gerrymander in QLD was started by Labor and then bit them in the rear end. But AFAIK the gerrymander favored the National Party over the Liberals but the Coalition always got the majority of the vote when they won govt.

    Unlike in SA in 2014 Labor won with a minority of the vote. Much lower than 50%. Coalition lost with 53% of the vote. Normally that would be a landslide

  30. 1735099

    Several times in the last thirty or so years, including when Tony Abbott was opposition leader.

    Completely false.
    Let’s look at that Abbott situation in 2010.
    In terms of the popular vote, Gillard didn’t need the cross benchers.
    Labor won 4711363 votes.
    The Coalition 5365529.
    The Greens 1458998.
    The Gillard government was formed with the support of the Australian popular vote.
    The margin was 804832 votes.

  31. 1735099

    The Gerrymander in QLD was started by Labor

    So it’s OK when the Coalition use it, but not when Labor does?
    It doesn’t matter who wins power through a gerrymander – it’s never “democracy”.

    But AFAIK the gerrymander favored the National Party over the Liberals but the Coalition always got the majority of the vote when they won govt.

    More rubbish.
    1972 Queensland state election –
    Labor 424002.
    Liberal 201596.
    Country Party 181404.

  32. 1735099

    Unlike in SA in 2014 Labor won with a minority of the vote.

    SA is interesting.
    The state-wide two-party vote was 47.0% Labor v 53.0% Liberal, but the Adelaide metropolitan area containing over 75% of South Australia’s population and 72% of seats (34 of 47) recorded a 2PP of 51.5% Labor v 48.5% Liberal.

    An anomaly, but still not “democracy”……

  33. Iampeter

    Of course, wanting to bring back slavery and being anti-abortion must be mutually inclusive (/sarc off).

    Sounds like something a leftist would say.

    A leftist is someone who doesn’t understand nor support the concept of individual rights. Once you understand this concept you understand why abortion should be perfectly legal at any stage and for any reason, even if you might morally disagree with it.

    On the other hand, if you think you can force people to be literal incubators, then what can’t you force people to do? The anti-abortionists are on the same side as advocates of slavery in all it’s forms, from forcing people to work the fields, to forcing people to pay for others healthcare and so forth.

    The abortion issue really demonstrates the extent of the political illiteracy and leftism of conservatism.

  34. Roger

    On the other hand, if you think you can force people to be literal incubators…

    Mmm…yes, that’s what the March for Life is all about. Forced impregnation!

  35. Neil

    So it’s OK when the Coalition use it, but not when Labor does?
    It doesn’t matter who wins power through a gerrymander – it’s never “democracy”.

    Like I said it was started by Labor and then bit them in the bum. AFAIK the Coalition did not start the gerrymander in Qld

    OK I was wrong when I said it never favored the Coalition. I had a quick look at the Qld election results but I did not go back to 1972. The gerrymander started by Labor helped the National party at the expense of the Coalition. But I suspect most of the time it did not affect whether Labor won govt

    But what would you call this?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_South_Australian_state_election

    Coalition lost in SA in 2014 with 53% of the vote. Normally that is landslide territory

  36. Rusty of Qld

    At what point in time does abortion become murder?

    What is the legal answer?

  37. C.L.

    To Democrats?
    Age 12.
    Maybe.

  38. Neil

    Wow

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Queensland_state_election

    In 1995 Qld labor won with a primary vote of 43% and TPP of only 47%. Coalition got 53%.

    I was told the gerrymander in Qld started by Labor never kept Labor out of govt. For some reason it started to favor the National party over the Libs at some point in time and kept the Libs from getting to elect a Premier and have more people in cabinet. But it never really kept Labor out of govt

  39. John A

    Lee #3302220, posted on January 25, 2020 at 7:14 pm

    Whoever he was quoting:

    Returning slavery to America is definitely on their ‘to do’ list, right under protecting unborn life.

    Of course, wanting to bring back slavery and being anti-abortion must be mutually inclusive (/sarc off).

    Time for people to read Dinesh D’Souza “Death of A Nation”

    where he traces the origins of present day Democrats and their power-serving techniques back to the antebellum Plantation Model. Democrats were decisively and almost to a man pro-slavery.

  40. Professor Fred Lenin

    I usedto live in a Victorian shire there were 4 wards returning three members each ,
    Ward one was a small fishing village and a few farmers ,
    Ward two was a rural village with a pub and a store and a few farmers ,
    Ward three was entirely rural just a few farmers
    Ward four was the town ,its population was eight times the size of the combined other three wards
    In ward two the dairy cows and vhooks voted ,
    Inward three the large number of sheep voted
    In ward one the fish in the nearby lake voted
    Combined they outnumbered the town .
    There was a revolt and the town separated from the rest and the rates were spent on the townspeople .
    It had been a gerrymander worthy of jo bjelke peterson

  41. Rayvic

    There is no doubt that the so-called liberals in the United States are undemocratic.

  42. Iggie

    Gillard was not elected – she was selected by two independents from nominally Coalition electorates.
    The voters in these electorates never forgot their treachery and they were never elected again.

  43. Iampeter

    Mmm…yes, that’s what the March for Life is all about. Forced impregnation!

    It’s about reducing half the population to the level of farm animal breeding stock.
    But yes, regulating peoples sex lives is a lot closer to what the abortion issue is actually about for religious leftists.

    At what point in time does abortion become murder?

    What is the legal answer?

    Abortion is never murder, that’s the legal answer.
    But why would someone even ask such a ridiculous question?

    I mean, it’s not like everyone opposing abortion have no knowledge of politics and therefore no political arguments for why anything should be legal or not, instead resorting to an appeal-to-emotion fallacy by trying to compare abortion to murder, right?
    I mean, it’s not like a movement that cares so much about this issue that it would organize massive annual marches and even get the President to speak at their event has literally no arguments on the subject to offer?
    How does one not regard that as a show stopping problems?
    Or maybe there’s something in these arguments you don’t want to see? Maybe it’ll be impossible to pretend to not be horrific, far-left authoritarians if you clearly stated your own positions.

  44. Spurgeon Monkfish III

    Why is that monumental imbecile Syphilis von Spuddentropp commenting on election results after his “93.1% of the US electorate didn’t vote for Fatty Trump” beclowning?

    What a moron.

  45. Lee

    At what point in time does abortion become murder?

    What is the legal answer?

    Abortion is never murder, that’s the legal answer.

    Only someone like you could reduce a moral argument (being anti-abortion) into a political one. But then I am not accusing you of having any morals.

    As for saying being anti-abortion means you’re pro-slavery, also only you could make a puerile and utterly statement such as that.

    Everything is about politics for leftists like you.

  46. Rockdoctor

    Neil
    #3302350, posted on January 25, 2020 at 9:08 pm

    Ah 1995, the stench of ALP corruption that the MSM still studiously ignore. Mundingburra & Shephardson, interesting read especially the cockroaches that still infest sinecures in NQ that LNP fail to clean out each time they are elected… Some other cockroaches held posts in Beatties reign. Notice Fitzgerald hasn’t even uttered a squeak about Trad but was quite vocal about Newman for less.

  47. Kneel

    “It’s about reducing half the population to the level of farm animal breeding stock.
    But yes, regulating peoples sex lives is a lot closer to what the abortion issue is actually about for religious leftists.”

    Well, yes – obviously it’s better to kill your children than to take responsibility for your actions.
    If you want your sex life, you can keep the kids the come with it – or use birth control of some sort.
    So Petee, when the state forces you into having sex, then you can claim a universal right to abortion. Otherwise, use the pill – if you’re catholic, hold it between your knees, otherwise swallow it – or deal with the consequences as a responsible person.
    You know – like making sure your guns aren’t kept loaded and where kids can get at them, not driving at 100km/h past a school at 8:30 AM on a school day, not demanding others pay for your lifestyle choices.
    You know – infringing others rights for your own pleasure.
    See, it’s not just rights, it’s the concomitant duties as well. But like all leftists, you only care about rights – duties be damned!

  48. Iampeter

    Well, yes – obviously it’s better to kill your children than to take responsibility for your actions.

    Abortion doesn’t involve the killing of any children. Facts don’t care about your feelings.
    This failure to grasp observable reality is why conservatives can’t win the gender wars btw.
    And forcing people to be “responsible” is the position of socialists with no political arguments.

    If you want your sex life, you can keep the kids the come with it – or use birth control of some sort.

    Great, so it’s only people that become pregnant via sex that can’t have abortions. I guess you have no problem with those who are artificially inseminated. Good to see you’ve thought this through and literally everything you have to say on the subject isn’t complete nonsense.
    Also good to know that the abortion issue is really just about regulating peoples sex lives without having to be direct about it.

    You know – infringing others rights for your own pleasure.

    So being carried to term is a right?
    It’s almost like you don’t even know what rights are and are advocating for socialism without even realizing it…

    Given conservatives position on abortion it’s no wonder they couldn’t repeal Obamacare.

  49. stackja

    Petering out still angry?

  50. Iampeter

    Angry? No, I’m just laughing at the politically illiterate leftists pretending to discuss politics on what is advertised as a right wing blog.

    It’s like The Onion but without the self awareness…

  51. Lee

    Angry? No, I’m just laughing at the politically illiterate leftists pretending to discuss politics on what is advertised as a right wing blog.

    It’s like The Onion but without the self awareness…

    Your level of projection is absolutely astonishing.

  52. Fisky

    Great, so it’s only people that become pregnant via sex that can’t have abortions. I guess you have no problem with those who are artificially inseminated.

    Pahahahahahaha!

  53. Iampeter

    Your level of projection is absolutely astonishing.

    Oh LOL.

Comments are closed.