If they do believe that, I'd have to wonder why. Having people that don't look like you or disagree with you on school boards and in military service doesn't mean you've been "infiltrated" by an adversary. Liberals certainly don't act that way towards conservative service members or even private schools.
No, they claim that the far left has been doing it as an excuse to do the same. It's lesson one from the authoritarian textbook: always accuse the enemy of your own misdeeds. Very similar to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARVO.
All my Republican friends tell me this kind of talk is 'shrill' and would never happen. I certainly hope they're correct, but that story about Pinochet is terrifying.
We currently have this problem in Germany. The right-wing party AfD is claiming to be constitutional and democratic, yet they have constantly shown through small actions that they are 1. extremists, 2. unconstitutional and 3. not democratic.
The most clear example happened last year, when they tried to take power of the parliament of the state Thuringia. They attempted to remove voting rights to parliament members during a transition in order to strengthen their position.
While this was clearly unconstitutional, they pretended it wasn't, until the Federal Constitutional Court ruled that they were in the wrong. Only then they were like "Of course we accept this ruling", just to pretend to be democratic.
Their current path is to attempt to gain power in the Federal Constitutional Court, in order also influence future rulings so that the they can succeed next time.
This now brings the problem, that while there are many who want to rule the AfD to be unconstitutional, that is, to forbid the party to exist, it is a risky move to bring this case to court, because if it fails just barely to succeed, it would strengthen that party.
So they are always walking on the edge of legality and democracy in order to stretch the bounds, to get away with shortly doing illegal things like saying banned slogans to show the right-wing extremists that they can rely on this party to work for their interests or saying things like "Real men are right-wing, then they will be capable of getting girlfriends" [0]
In the case of the US, I think they now crossed this line. Let's hope that democracy is strong enough, but I still believe it is. In both countries.
> Says the democrat who did nothing when Gavin Newsom made it illegal to check for ID at California polls. All these other countries check ID for voting, you democrats don't want it, why is that? https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/california-gover... Here you go, I know
I'm a little confused as to your point here.
The article you link says that to register to vote, you have to prove your identity and validity to vote via a driver’s license number, a California identification number, or the last four digits of their social security number.
To vote, you need to verify your voter registration information.
What exactly does requiring you to verify your registration in addition to the information previously validated to register? Is the belief that illegal voters are able to fraudulently register but wouldn't use the same fraudulent information the day of the vote?
CarRamrod|1 year ago
>Taking over school boards and local boards of elections
Just to play devil's advocate, is it possible that the far right has been under the impression that the far left has been doing the same thing?
talldayo|1 year ago
archagon|1 year ago
relaxing|1 year ago
cocacola1|1 year ago
vincnetas|1 year ago
vincnetas|1 year ago
jaybrendansmith|1 year ago
archagon|1 year ago
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
HPMOR|1 year ago
popcalc|1 year ago
qwertox|1 year ago
The most clear example happened last year, when they tried to take power of the parliament of the state Thuringia. They attempted to remove voting rights to parliament members during a transition in order to strengthen their position.
While this was clearly unconstitutional, they pretended it wasn't, until the Federal Constitutional Court ruled that they were in the wrong. Only then they were like "Of course we accept this ruling", just to pretend to be democratic.
Their current path is to attempt to gain power in the Federal Constitutional Court, in order also influence future rulings so that the they can succeed next time.
This now brings the problem, that while there are many who want to rule the AfD to be unconstitutional, that is, to forbid the party to exist, it is a risky move to bring this case to court, because if it fails just barely to succeed, it would strengthen that party.
So they are always walking on the edge of legality and democracy in order to stretch the bounds, to get away with shortly doing illegal things like saying banned slogans to show the right-wing extremists that they can rely on this party to work for their interests or saying things like "Real men are right-wing, then they will be capable of getting girlfriends" [0]
In the case of the US, I think they now crossed this line. Let's hope that democracy is strong enough, but I still believe it is. In both countries.
[0] https://www-br-de.translate.goog/nachrichten/netzwelt/wie-di...
vincnetas|1 year ago
So they came with a bit adjustes slogan "Alice für Deutschland" (Alice Weidel Afd candidate)
awesomeMilou|1 year ago
dzhiurgis|1 year ago
ChrisNorstrom|1 year ago
[deleted]
throwawaymaroon|1 year ago
[deleted]
ChrisNorstrom|1 year ago
[deleted]
unsnap_biceps|1 year ago
I'm a little confused as to your point here.
The article you link says that to register to vote, you have to prove your identity and validity to vote via a driver’s license number, a California identification number, or the last four digits of their social security number.
To vote, you need to verify your voter registration information.
What exactly does requiring you to verify your registration in addition to the information previously validated to register? Is the belief that illegal voters are able to fraudulently register but wouldn't use the same fraudulent information the day of the vote?