> "In our nation's 248 year-history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump And yet, the same person has

> "In our nation's 248 year-history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump And yet, the same person has advocated and pushed for greater powers to the presidency increasing the risks of such individual threats. It's no coincidence that in the list of countries in the last 50 years that drifted from democracies to authoritarianism the tier of those that succeeded (the likes of Russia, Belarus, Nicaragua, Philippines, Turkey) are ALL presidential republics. Poland, Hungary, India, Israel, while not being shy of power hungry smart individuals? None of them is a presidential republic. The play in such countries is the party-state identification, where the party takes control of key institutions, press and in the right situation can also grab more. But it's never as simple or easy as in presidential republics. In fact, I think that Sri Lanka is the last fully parliamentary democracy to shit into full authoritarianism, and that happened almost 50 years ago. I can't but wonder whether US citizens realize that the constitution is dated, written for different times and with much less experience and lessons to learn from other democracies. It shows all the cracks of presidential democracies: - constitutions where 2 or more branches of government can claim public mandate through elections (in US case president + congress) which unavoidably clash, for no greater good. - hard to impeach/remove branch. Say what you want about many democracies in Europe for changing governments frequently, but you're always one single majority vote away from having to resign. - cult of personality. Presidential republics, by electing an individual instead of a parliament/coalition are much more prone to personality cults. US has all of those ingredients and Cheney made sure to make these problems worse.