Now that we know Bragg's case is on the weaker side(because we're reading an indictment rather than relying on the people the Trump cult calls fake news), I'm honestly not sure how much it matters. The idea that "if the first case Trump is indicted for is not serious enough, voters will view subsequent indictments more skeptically" assumes that voters are persuadable. Ezra Klein has talked before about how our politics are calcified. Trump behaved like a corrupt madman for 4 years and the results in 2020 were very similar to the results in 2016. We all know that whatever any indictment says, Tucker Carlson will get on television and tell his viewers what they want to hear... it doesn't matter what the facts are, or that he hates Trump passionately.

On the other hand, we have outlets like CNN who look at this indictment and have a lot of commentary about how underwhelming it is. When Trump is indicted for more serious wrongdoing, CNN's commentary will change, but will voters outside the cult care all that much? Will it change their basic stance of being pro or anti-Trump? I doubt it.

You could argue Trump being indicted by multiple prosecutors is enough to cost him a percentage or two, and that's a big deal in a general election. I'm not sure I buy it, partly because his 4 years of mayhem resulted in 74 million votes, and also because I think the indictments could actually fuel more turnout among right-wing America. The outlaw figure has historically been appealing to dumbass rubes, and it's a compelling storyline in our age of politics as entertainment.

This post was edited by IceMage on Apr 5 2023 12:45am

Lets say Bragg drags this out and Trump campaigns for the presidency under its cloud and it 'costs him a percentage or two'. If he wins anyway, it won't matter, and with luck we could flush this sorry escapade into the history books. But if he loses, what would happen to our democracy? The use of direct, baseless weaponization of law enforcement to persecute your rivals to win elections? Or worse, they actually try to lock Trump up during the election. I mean, it doesn't matter how phony the charges are, even if CNN calls it, because in New York a judge and jury would convict Trump on charges of necromancy and insulting the prophet muhammed (peace be upon him).

Do you think, on the backdrop of a population in a plummeting qualify of life and economy, as we're poised to lose our geopolitical hegemony to China, that our democracy can actually survive this? The fact is, the constitution is just a piece of paper. Democracy comes from a shared civic identity and collective deference to our rule of law. If our democracy becomes truly delegitimized in the eyes of the public, no amount of handwringing by the liberal media would calm everyones tits. Take a population already riled up, one with growing dissatisfaction, then try to blow up our elections right in front of them? We're not europe, we don't have a history of tolerance for authoritarian regimes dressed up in democratic pretense and embracing bullshit like ASBOs, hate speech laws, 'macron's article 49.3'


There's a lot to be said for those hypotheticals of 'charging a different, better case first' or finding a better excuse, or the off-ramps that still exist to avoid this constitutional crisis. Maybe the arithmetic would be different if Trump were credibly accused of an actual crime, but we're in this position where even the liberal side openly acknowledges how contrived this is. So the public can't just brush it aside as another scandal, another partisan grievance to take dueling sides. Even the Georgia case, no matter how much it infringes on the 1st amendment, at least concerned actual shameful conduct by Trump. And we're still in a position where Bragg could back down or implode, saner courts could intervene and strike this all down before it can taint an election. So there are still recourses that exist

It is hilarious seeing people celebrate this like it's justice when they voted for someone who committed the same crimes.

I'm not against this either. I wish they shared the same energy when it came to their own party. Both sides are fucked but the mentally ill TDS weirdos are blinded by stupidity and the pathetic idea that they are somehow on the good side of a shit sandwich.

I mean trump did it, there is zero debating that.. so a shitty person did a shitty thing and saw minimal consequences, if he loses an election over it.. GOOD!

Why didn't the left think that after Hillary lost an election due to shitty things she did that resulted in minimal consequences (for herself*)?

TDS

Lets debate it. What did "Trump do"?

By November of 2024 it's highly likely that this won't be the only prosecution Trump faces, and the other ones are far stronger. So the premise behind your question will be wrong... he won't lose(in part) because of a meritless investigation, he'll lose(in part) because of legitimate investigations. Although I happen to think Trump is going to win the presidency.

There's nothing much to be done about the segment of the population that believes in bullshit. Reasonable people are not responsible for the beliefs of unreasonable people. Should those in authority not enforce the rule of law, because an evil scumbag as president(and ex-president) broke the law, he's running for president again(partly to escape justice), and his supporters would be upset if he faces consequences for his criminality? My answer would be no. And you don't get a free pass to do whatever you want simply because you are running for president.

This post was edited by IceMage on Apr 5 2023 02:11am

isnt that what putin has done with his political rivals? have them arrested? lefties a bunch of putins.
bu bu bu buttt whats bout democracy............

Putin typically has his opposition jump out windows.