[lolinder]

We got here because both sides have for the last 8 years consistently failed to treat one another as human beings with opinions rather than the literal devil incarnate.

There are a substantial number of people on this forum who sincerely believe that if Trump is elected there will not be another election. If enough people sincerely believe that, one of them will eventually decide that it's worth it to sacrifice their own life to ensure the survival of democracy in America.

[Larrikin]

There were 16 years of bad faith negotiations from one side

[lolinder]

Case in point. Show this comment to either side and they'd heartily agree with you.

[IAmGraydon]

That's correct. And the idea that Trump will end democracy is a core part of the left's fear campaign. They share responsibility for this.

[bamboozled]

I'm quite sure he is open about ending democracy from day one?

[voisin]

Oh come on man. He clearly tried to subvert the last election and came within steps of his VP being killed by a mob he encoded while trying to certify the election. This isn’t just a fear campaign.

[lolinder]

It's a fear campaign, and the leaders of the Democratic party know it.

Trump regularly behaves completely irresponsibly and is a terrible loser, and Trump is definitely capable of (intentionally and otherwise) inciting violence, but if you compare the actions of the Democratic leadership to their rhetoric you can clearly see they don't believe the full extent of their own rhetoric about him.

They play up the apocalyptic fears for democracy itself because they know it's the only card they have left after nominating Biden. If they were serious about protecting democracy they'd have kicked him out last year when there was still time to build momentum for an electable candidate, rather than continuing to protect his ego. If they were serious about protecting democracy they would have tried harder to court the moderate voters (who are very courtable right now if anyone cared to try). If they were serious about protecting democracy they would have done anything other than focus exclusively on how terrible Trump is for the last four years, because they know that you don't beat a fire by fanning it. They would have deescalated, but instead they escalated, and they absolutely share responsibility for this.

[yongjik]

I remember seeing a comment in HN that went like "So some group of people walked into a government building. Big deal."

I guess, for people whose world view is so malleable that they can look at an attempt to overthrow the government and say "Some people walked into a government building," it makes perfect sense to feel sorry for Trump being demonized by the Left.

[mlindner]

What actually constitutes an "attempt to overthrow a government"? Do you think a random mob would be followed by the country as a whole? Do you have so little faith in the government's institutions that they'd just agree to follow them? Do you think the military would?

If an "attempt" is so far flung from reality as to be impossible does it actually make it an attempt? If the mob had been half its size, or a quarter its size, or even one person, is that still an "attempt to overthrow the government"?

Even if they'd literally walked in with their guns blazing and killed every single politician they could find, while it'd cause a ton of chaos, the government would still have elections to replace those people killed and government would continue.

[verzali]

That's an extremely naive statement. Massacres of politicans are rarely followed by everything going calmly back to normal, it's much more likely to be followed by more violence, a crackdown on freedoms and liberties and a slide away from democracy.

[ithkuil]

Yes institutions and democracy can resist and win against a small group of armed people taking over the physical seats of the government.

But in order to win people have to agree that the act is profoundly antidemocratic and a punishable offence.

It becomes more problematic when a sizable part of the population dismisses it as a non-issue. That very fact raises the level of concern several orders of magnitude. The more people dismiss the level of severity of an act of subversion the less faith you can have that the problem will just fix itself.

So yeah, it's not a big deal, provided that we all agree it is a big deal. Otherwise it becomes a big deal.

[willcipriano]

Lucky they all forgot their guns that day.

[Timon3]

Multiple people were convicted of carrying firearms inside the Capitol on Jan 6th, and it's been documented that weapon caches were prepared close by.

[mistermann]

> He clearly

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/perception-problem/

These conversations (this entire thread and all(!) others like it, with perhaps a few exceptional comments here and there) are like listening to my uneducated family members discussing AI at my last family reunion.

Noteworthy: they show no signs that they realize the predicament they are in.

Why are people like this?

How can there be no exceptions?

Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy...

[energy123]

Look only at the Trump-Raffensberger phone call. You're asking me to ignore the evidence of my senses. The transcript is there for you to read.

The 22nd amendment is the only thing that gives me confidence, but it won't be for lack of trying on his part.

[hindsightbias]

Trump is completely normal - let’s roll the dice after his Jan 6th performance and hope for the best.

We’ve got a SCOTUS that says he can be King. Surely he won’t use it, because…

[energy123]

It's wild how the Overton window has shifted for the worse. Back in 2015-2016, supporting Trump was politically incorrect because of what he theoretically might do. Now after he actually tried to do the thing, the floodgates seem to have opened and all the scum have given each other confidence to come out showing their true colours.

[bitnasty]

Are you forgetting what happened after the 2020 election? This “both sides” shit is a bunch of fucking baloney.

[bitnasty]

Trump tried to cling to power once after losing a fair election. You don’t think he’ll try again?

[lolinder]

I realize the phrase "both sides" is triggering for anyone who sees the other side as completely insane and their side as correct and rational, but I stand by what I said. I live among rabid right-wingers and work among rabid left-wingers, and neither group sees the other as anything other than evil or stupidly deluded.

They're both wrong on that front and both need to stop and actually try to understand each other before we see more violence.