• nomous@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    Ā·
    edit-2
    12 days ago

    Why wouldnā€™t they try? Theyā€™ve done everything they could so far and face no repercussions, why not go ahead and try to be king? A few people will fret and tut-tut but if nobody is going to do anything it doesnā€™t amount to much.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      Ā·
      11 days ago

      Well, Trump specifically may not try because the risk/reward isnā€™t really good for him.

      As it stands, he gets to declare an unambiguous ā€œvictoryā€ where he won at life. He got to be president with ultimately a clean sweep of the swing states and the popular vote and served as many terms as he is allowed to serve. Thanks to the rules, he doesnā€™t need to compete again, and he can stop even pretending to work after 4 years.

      Meanwhile, a push to establish him as ā€œdictator for lifeā€ might at best buy him another few years in office before his health will fail. Such an effort comes with high risk, of him going down in history as more of a ā€œbad manā€, of personal risk for being targeted by violence.

      Now JD Vance might be game to make a go of it, heā€™s got decades left in the tank. Of course broadly speaking thereā€™s a balance of power, with those currently in power relatively comfortable knowing that the vote serves as a nice way to get pushed out of office before people get pissed enough to put you in real physical danger. Plenty of opportunities to be self-serving with a pretty safe retirement should things start going awry. Fanaticism can drive people to go further, but I would like to think a pragmatic person with a sense of self-interest can see the value in a peaceful voting out versus having those same millions of people losing their political voice.