America as failed state: Colorado v Trump

Caught snatches of the live argumentation in front of the Supreme Court on NPR. Here's one of the stories from Thursday. SCOTUSBlog has more.

A few thoughts, with an intro before that.

First, not only poor countries "out there" can be failed states, i.e. Afghanistan. The tail end of Weimar Germany was quite arguably a failed state even before Hitler took the oath of office as chancellor.

Second and related? If not a failed state, the USofA, aka Merikkka, is a failing state. Period and end of story, especially to backers of both duopoly parties.

OK, to the story itself.

First, this is obviously a reason to get rid of the electoral college. That's what, reason No. 412 or something?

Second, this is a good reason to move beyond that and officially make the election for president a national, not a "federal," election. If that meant different rules on absentee ballots, etc., than currently more restrictive states, so be it. Arguments by various justices in the SCOTUSBlog piece underscore that.

Third, it's also a good argument to, if possible, truly overhaul our government into a parliamentary system. It's harder to do the Hillary Clinton attempt at controlled opposition when a prime ministerial candidate is already leader of the opposition and depends on coming to power on nationwide vote for MPs. Arguments by various justices in the SCOTUSBlog piece underscore that, too.

That said?

A. Parliamentary systems are no guarantee against becoming a failed or failing nation. On the former, see Weimer Germany, above. On the latter, see post-Brexit Britain. 

B. The mechanics are partly at issue. Westminster-type systems with first past the post single-member districts tend to squeeze out third parties. Systems that are purely proportional and don't have modern Germany's 5 percent hurdle let in all the nutters.

Fourth, and related, we'll likely have more and more Russiagate-type bullshit claims in the future. After all, the NYT tried to revive it for the 2022 midterms. Note also former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, not content with anti-Republican smears, claiming that Russia and president Vladimir Putin are behind pro-Palestinian protestors. (Code Pink and founder Medea Benjamin recently confronted her on this.)

Fifth, it's funny how people can always shape shift on federalism = states as "laboratory of democracy" when their ox is being gored. That includes, per the top link, a possible majority of the black-robed Kourt Klan Konklave thinking Colorado can't do what it did.

As for the black-robed KKK trying to reason its way to keeping Trumpy safe?

The only reason I would agree is "ripeness" grounds. Trump hasn't been directly charged with insurrection, or aiding and abetting. Blame Jack Smith, #BlueAnon. Trump's attorney, Jonathan Miller, tried to put a spin on this by differentiating between an election and actually serving. (Not that he thinks Trump should be disqualified should he be re-elected, of course.)

Otherwise? John Roberts et al seem to have a semi-novel interpretation of the 14th Amendment being written to rein in state powers.

If he, Slammin Sammy Alito et al are worried about different states reaching different conclusions, see the top of this piece. Colorado's attorney, Jason Murray, addressed much of his objections, and his fellow travelers, per SCOTUSBlog. Besides, there's that old Gorsuch ruling.

I will actually credit Alito for discussing what all might count as "insurrection." This gets much deeper, really, and beyond both duopoly parties, to things like undeclared wars and "cold wars."

There's also the issue of general deference to political parties on primary election ballots vs general election ballots. That said, given that Trump's going to win, it would be stupid to put him on a GOP primary ballot, if the Colorado plaintiffs are right about the 14th Amendment in general.

Sixth, doesn't this ultimately show what a clusterfuck the Constitution of the United States is? And, that gets us back to America as failed state.