Indeed 20th century fascist revolutions used the guise of law for their takeover. Following them would include banning the existence of other parties, changing the constitution to give all power to executive, cancelling elections, etc.
I assumed the poster was using facist to mean “bad authoritarian government” - not that trump is actually a disciple of Mussolini style philosophy.
Right now the democratic system is working as designed, minus the incredible power of the executive branch which has been built up since FDR. Obama pioneered this approach to executive order.
Basically, your argument boils down to "you're wrong, the current sitation is not fascist enough yet"?
banning the existence of other parties
They don't need to. Similar to Russia, they will allow the appearance of other parties and elections, but the outcomes will be pre-determined.
changing the constitution to give all power to executive
SCOTUS has already done that: everything the president does is legal by default.
cancelling elections
Again, they won't need to. They proved in November that they already have done the right amount of voter disenfranchisement and gerrymandering to secure a win.
You took that burden upon yourself by choosing to deride the GGP above, who said "The US is undergoing a fascist takeover basically". Don't put this on me, you opened this line of argumentation. I am merely trying to get you to commit to an actual argument with substance rather than deflecting and whining.
>Following them would include banning the existence of other parties, changing the constitution to give all power to executive, cancelling elections, etc.
Let's check back on these in a few years (months?).
