Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said the reelection of former President Trump would be the “end of democracy” in an interview released Saturday by The Guardian.
“It will be the end of democracy, functional democracy,” Sanders said in the interview.
The Vermont senator also said in the interview that he thinks that another round of Trump as the president will be a lot more extreme than the first.
“He’s made that clear,” Sanders said. “There’s a lot of personal bitterness, he’s a bitter man, having gone through four indictments, humiliated, he’s going to take it out on his enemies. We’ve got to explain to the American people what that means to them — what the collapse of American democracy will mean to all of us.”
Sanders’s words echo those President Biden made in a recent campaign speech during which he said that Trump’s return to the presidency would risk American democracy. The president highlighted the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol in an attempt to cement a point about Trump and other Republicans espousing a kind of extremism that was seen by the world on that day.
That’s absolutely delusional. The only way he has a chance is if both Biden and Trump die and the Democrats and Republicans both say, “never mind, we’re sitting out this election.” Which is like saying “a polar bear could live in Antarctica.” Yeah maybe, but polar bears don’t live in Antarctica.
you don’t know that. try to be civil. we can disagree with out calling each other delusional.
I didn’t call you delusional. I said that idea is delusional. And if it isn’t delusional, please explain exactly how Cornel West would achieve becoming president.
please explain to me exactly how Joe Biden is going to win every one of his votes.
your standard is far too high for what we’re discussing here.
The fact is that Cornel West is running for president. if he is elected, Trump is not elected.
I’m not saying that I know how it will happen. I’m saying you don’t know.
I did not claim anyone will or even has a chance of winning.
And I do know he doesn’t have a chance. I explained why.
You don’t know he has a chance. You, again, have religious faith.
>And I do know he doesn’t have a chance. I explained why
you gave an analogy that you could have applied to just about anything you don’t think has a good chance of happening. it’s not proof that he can’t win.
I do not have to prove you wrong. That is not how the burden of proof works. You have to prove yourself right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)
you said that you know something. in order to know something you must have a justified true belief. justification is the proof. you don’t know what you claim to know. q e d
You justify your faith first. Go for it.
You’re the one disagreeing with him, you have to justify why you’re disagreement is the correct answer.
You can’t just say you’re right and wave your hands around and expect people to believe it.
>You, again, have religious faith.
I don’t. I’m the authority on what I believe so I’d appreciate it if you stop putting words in my mouth.
Fine. Provide evidence. Evidence-free claims are religious faith.
>I didn’t call you delusional. I said that idea is delusional.
You’re splitting hairs. and apology is better than getting defensive.
I have nothing to apologize for.
Unbelievable, isn’t it?