4 ms·

Here’s a recent example of him stating the lack of need for elections: “He boasted that he had accomplished so much that ‘when you think of it, we shouldn't ev

Here’s a recent example of him stating the lack of need for elections: “He boasted that he had accomplished so much that ‘when you think of it, we shouldn't even have an election.‘“ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/five-takeaways-reuters-interview-president-trump-2026-01-15/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/five-takeaways-reuters-inte...

andsoitis 8mo ago
But you left out: The president expressed frustration that his Republican Party could lose control of the U.S. House of Representatives or the Senate in this year’s midterm elections, citing historical trends that have seen the party in power lose seats in the second year of a presidency. “It's some deep psychological thing, but when you win the presidency, you don't win the midterms,” Trump said. He boasted that he had accomplished so much that “when you think of it, we shouldn't even have an election.” There's a difference between what he believes or wishes for and what you know the reality. He is self-aware enough to know that Americans will only put up with so much. When you look at his rhetoric in totality and actions, you quickly realize he is paying attention to where the voter is and knows that he cannot do just whatever he wants, no matter what he might wish for.
- kenjackson 8mo ago
  Re-read what you wrote. Nothing you said helps your point. We are talking about his desires. And yes, he’s not a complete idiot - of course he realizes that he can’t implement whatever he wants to right now. But his stated and implied desire is to end elections, which is the point of this thread.
  - andsoitis 8mo ago
    > But his stated and implied desire is to end elections, which is the point of this thread. We're debating two different things. I'm arguing that the adminstration's goal is not to get absolute power no matter the cost. The thread started because I pushed back agains the assertion that the administration is willing to inflict unlimited pain on Americans (no electricity, no water) to get and maintain power. The evidence points in the other direction. You, and others, have latched narrowly on "goal".
    - 5upplied_demand 8mo ago
      > the assertion that the administration is willing to inflict unlimited pain on Americans (no electricity, no water) to get and maintain power. The assertion was that the administration is ok with collateral damage that might further their stated goals. Did anyone use the term "unlimited pain on Americans" or just you? You latched narrowly on "American who depends on running water, electricity" and turned it into them doing things "no matter the cost." Nobody was making that argument. The entire country doesn't even run on the same water or electricity services. It's a made up scenario you created to paint the people using the President's own words as overreacting.
    - hackyhacky 8mo ago
      > the administration is willing to inflict unlimited pain on Americans (no electricity, no water) to get and maintain power. You haven't done anything to cast doubt on this premise. The administration has already taken drastic action that inflicts pain on Americans (unconstitutional searches and detentions, tariffs, disabling or dismantling important agencies) in the name of the keeping power. It's not hard to imagine that they are willing to continue to inflict pain on Americans. If you're quibbling about whether that pain can be "unlimited," I would argue that yes, it can be, insofar as that pain doesn't stop them from getting power. I can hedge this by saying that Trump still needs some support from the American people, as I described in another comment. In particular, he needs support of wealthy donors and local officials, and especially in purple states. But he has proven he will hurt people in solidly blue states [1] [2] because he's already decided he doesn't need them. Concrete example: would Trump turn off the entire electrical grid? Yes, if he thought it would help him. Whether it helps him depends on weighing the pain that it causes his supporters against its benefits. In other words: yes, he is willing to inflict unlimited pain, including for utterly petty reasons, but not if he thinks it will stop him from holding power. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/04/climate/wind-solar-projects.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/04/climate/wind-solar-projec... [2] https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/gateway-tunnel-project-funding-deadline-trump-administration-ny-nj/ https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/gateway-tunnel-project-...

andsoitis 8mo ago

But you left out: The president expressed frustration that his Republican Party could lose control of the U.S. House of Representatives or the Senate in this year’s midterm elections, citing historical trends that have seen the party in power lose seats in the second year of a presidency. “It's some deep psychological thing, but when you win the presidency, you don't win the midterms,” Trump said. He boasted that he had accomplished so much that “when you think of it, we shouldn't even have an election.” There's a difference between what he believes or wishes for and what you know the reality. He is self-aware enough to know that Americans will only put up with so much. When you look at his rhetoric in totality and actions, you quickly realize he is paying attention to where the voter is and knows that he cannot do just whatever he wants, no matter what he might wish for.

kenjackson 8mo ago
Re-read what you wrote. Nothing you said helps your point. We are talking about his desires. And yes, he’s not a complete idiot - of course he realizes that he can’t implement whatever he wants to right now. But his stated and implied desire is to end elections, which is the point of this thread.
- andsoitis 8mo ago
  > But his stated and implied desire is to end elections, which is the point of this thread. We're debating two different things. I'm arguing that the adminstration's goal is not to get absolute power no matter the cost. The thread started because I pushed back agains the assertion that the administration is willing to inflict unlimited pain on Americans (no electricity, no water) to get and maintain power. The evidence points in the other direction. You, and others, have latched narrowly on "goal".
  - 5upplied_demand 8mo ago
    > the assertion that the administration is willing to inflict unlimited pain on Americans (no electricity, no water) to get and maintain power. The assertion was that the administration is ok with collateral damage that might further their stated goals. Did anyone use the term "unlimited pain on Americans" or just you? You latched narrowly on "American who depends on running water, electricity" and turned it into them doing things "no matter the cost." Nobody was making that argument. The entire country doesn't even run on the same water or electricity services. It's a made up scenario you created to paint the people using the President's own words as overreacting.
  - hackyhacky 8mo ago
    > the administration is willing to inflict unlimited pain on Americans (no electricity, no water) to get and maintain power. You haven't done anything to cast doubt on this premise. The administration has already taken drastic action that inflicts pain on Americans (unconstitutional searches and detentions, tariffs, disabling or dismantling important agencies) in the name of the keeping power. It's not hard to imagine that they are willing to continue to inflict pain on Americans. If you're quibbling about whether that pain can be "unlimited," I would argue that yes, it can be, insofar as that pain doesn't stop them from getting power. I can hedge this by saying that Trump still needs some support from the American people, as I described in another comment. In particular, he needs support of wealthy donors and local officials, and especially in purple states. But he has proven he will hurt people in solidly blue states [1] [2] because he's already decided he doesn't need them. Concrete example: would Trump turn off the entire electrical grid? Yes, if he thought it would help him. Whether it helps him depends on weighing the pain that it causes his supporters against its benefits. In other words: yes, he is willing to inflict unlimited pain, including for utterly petty reasons, but not if he thinks it will stop him from holding power. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/04/climate/wind-solar-projects.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/04/climate/wind-solar-projec... [2] https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/gateway-tunnel-project-funding-deadline-trump-administration-ny-nj/ https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/gateway-tunnel-project-...