Nightwingdragon

I just want to point out that this woman pulled this stunt without the slightest clue what she was actually doing or what that A represented.

and she got re-elected.

Let that sink in.

How did we create such a toothless system of checks and balances as to render them non-existent when someone just decides to ignore them?

Because it was created 250 years ago by a whole bunch of people who seem to have believed that laws would just be enforced via gentlemans' agreement/honor system and therefore was no need to call for actual consequences for breaking those laws. It just took over 200 years before someone came around and figured out that there weren't a whole hell of a lot of teeth to those pesky amendments and it was off to the races......

If this would have been literally any other President in this country's history, he'd have been impeached before the week's out. Even the most polarized pre-MAGA Republicans wouldn't have put up with that shit. But here we are.

And with that said, there's a non-zero chance that Mills bends the knee. So far, every time there has been an opportunity for Democrats (or anyone else, for that matter) to put up some opposition, they have rolled over and played dead at the slightest whiff of pressure.

"Ladies and gentlemen, please note that the part of 'Joe Manchin' will now be played by John Fetterman."

That's my point. It only backfires on them if there are even 2026 elections at all, and if Republican voters don't just continue voting against their own interests. And those are very, very big ifs.

Isn’t this some real nazi fascist like tactics? Are they just testing the waters?

No, this is exactly what they're trying to do. So far it's worked with media outlets, law firms, and colleges. They keep their own ranks in line via either threats of a primary challenge backed by Musk, or outright death threats from Trump's followers. They are experimenting with disappearing people to foreign countries, and Trump has already openly threatened to ship US protesters there.

Really? Because I haven't seen them doing a whole hell of a lot about it besides issuing the occasional court orders that the Trump administration continues to ignore without consequence.

There's already a path for them to do this.

Trump is already calling for a ban on nationwide injunctions, saying that any injunctions or rulings can only be applied to the specific people involved in the lawsuit and are not binding anywhere else.

If Congress passes such a bill, Trump will certainly sign it.

And once that happens, the Supreme Court could at that point just anoint Trump with whatever powers he wants and not have to worry about those powers being used by the next President, since their rulings would only apply to Trump by default, which is exactly what he wants. It would literally turn our judicial system into Calvinball.

Democracy was fun while it lasted, wasn't it?

Here's the problem

Under anything resembling normal circumstances, I agree with you. Because senior citizens vote. Politicians had something to fear because senior citizens are the largest voting bloc by far.

But what happens when Trump and the GOP feel their vote is no longer needed? The GOP have traditionally coddled senior citizens because they tend to vote and tend to skew Republican. But lately, they've instead been responding to their town halls by telling voters to suck it up and deal with it. If the politicians feel that the fix is in and the senior vote is no longer a priority, it has the side effect of basically relegating seniors from an influential voting bloc to a whole bunch of old people sitting in a room screaming. Granted, that line of thinking might backfire spectacularly in the 2026 midterms if seniors actually vote accordingly instead of just continuing to blame Democrats, but if Trump throws a monkey wrench into the works (or just suspends elections, or is successful in getting seniors to believe that it's all the Dems' fault, or whatever), then they basically win. They're going all in and are definitely overbetting the pot, but at the same time, they also overbetting with a very winnable hand given the current situation.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a relatively recent case (as in the past couple of years) that all-but-legalized bribery in politics anyway?

Yes, and he's already said as much multiple times. Why is this a question?