Assuming the political leanings of the populous are measured in a vacuum, sure. But they aren't.

Right, we also aren’t measuring political leanings worldwide. We are measuring them in the United States.

In the United States leftist have very few voters and candidates because of its lack of popularity.

When your only options of votes are "guys who have a hard-on for fascism" and "let's appeal to those who aren't entirely sold but are willing to see where the fascism goes",

The reason these are the two options are because these options win in the primaries by the majority of voters choosing them in a democracy.

Leftists run in the primaries and lose fairly, even to AIPAC candidates.

If the majority of voters are centrists then shouldn’t the policies reflect that?

Do you think leftist policies should be forced onto voters that don’t want them and vote against them?

I read the article and don’t understand your comment. How is this an example of democrats trying to get “center voters”?

Not that they shouldn’t be trying to win over centrists, they definitely should because there are more centrists than leftists by a lot and those centrists are constituents.

Not to mention that is how democrats have won the majority of nation wide elections in the last several decades.

“Both sides are the same so I’m not voting”

-Leftists

Tater

Biden locking up the coup leaders on day one without the support of voters would be the move of a dictator and would require Biden to pull off a coup first because the president otherwise doesn’t have the ability to do what you are suggesting.

Trump is only able to get away with his crimes because of the support he has from voters, billionares, Russia, the GOP and all the corrupt judges and Judicial roles he has filled with loyalist (just to name a few examples).

Biden never had that kind of support.

The point was that in the example of the terrorist attacks that there wasn’t anyone to hold accountable because as far as the majority was concerned there was nothing to be held accountable for.

With the example of Jan 6th U.S. tried to hold Trump accountable but was prevented by Trump himself with the help of a majority of the voting populous.

In a democracy it’s the voters that decide if there is something to be held accountable for. In both examples the voters decided there was nothing to be held accountable for.

In addition to that there are plenty examples of the U.S. holding the powerful to account. Here’s what I found in just a few seconds:

• George Santos: The former New York Republican Congressman was arrested and indicted on a 13-count federal indictment in May 2023 for charges including wire fraud, money laundering, theft of public funds, and making false statements.

• Chris Collins: The New York Representative was indicted and arrested in 2018 for tipping off his son to confidential corporate information regarding an Australian biotechnology company. He resigned and pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit securities fraud and lying to law enforcement.

• Duncan Hunter: The California Representative was indicted in 2018 and eventually pleaded guilty to misusing over \(\$150,000\) in campaign funds for personal expenses, including family vacations, movie tickets, and extramarital affairs.

• Larry Householder: The former Ohio Speaker of the House was arrested and convicted in March 2023 in a \(\$60\) million federal racketeering and bribery scheme—one of the largest public corruption cases in state history.

• Steve Watkins: The former Kansas Republican congressional candidate and Representative was charged with three felony counts and one misdemeanor regarding voter fraud and illegally registering his residence at a UPS store ahead of the 2019 election.

• David Rivera: The former Florida Representative was arrested in Atlanta in December 2022 and indicted for federal charges including acting as an unregistered foreign agent for a Venezuelan national and conspiracy to launder money.

MAGA is made up of people with systemic power like judges, cops, military leaders, the billionaire class.

The occupy Wall Street movement never had members with that much power. Or anywhere near the same numbers.

The majority of Americans were ok with the reactions to 2001 terrorist attacks.

It took that long because Merrick did things by the book. Because any other way would increase Trump’s chances of winning.

In the end the timing didn’t matter because U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon permanently blocked the Department of Justice from publicly releasing Special Counsel Jack Smith’s final investigative report regarding Donald Trump’s retention of classified documents.

Starting earlier would not change that outcome.

In the aftermath of the 2001 terrorist attack the court of public opinion was in agreement that it was justified as exigent circumstances. No Americans were defending the terrorist.

In the aftermath of the nation’s democratic institutions being attacked, it was a large portion of the voting populous that was actively contributing, primarily due to psyop campaigns from Russia and the Trump administration that convinced a large amount of the populous that the election was stolen. The people that were victims of this campaign were judges, politicians, military leaders and many other roles that allowed them to do things like Judge Cannon when she dismissed the 40-count federal indictment against Donald Trump and two aides, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s appointment violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution.

The difference between these two scenarios are so obvious they shouldn’t need explaining.