It is pretty clear to me now that the Republican Party belongs to Trump and must be outlawed

[Samrob]

as we would if there were a party called USA ISIS. The remnants of the old GOP must rename, rebrand, and reform themselves into an acceptable opponent of the Democrats with respect for humankind, our Constitution and ability to change it when necessary to protect the Republic, and respect for JUST and fair law and order.

We can not and will not survive with power resting in a party hell-bent on our destruction as a nation with democratic ideals and laws.

[Ocelot II]

1. The First Amendment is a messy little thing, isn't it?

[Samrob]

3. It's more than the 1st Amendment. It about a clear and present danger. nt

[tritsofme]

4. Yours is the siren's song of authoritarians and tyrants across history.

No difference.

The First Amendment exists to protect everyone from folks like you.

[Ocelot II]

6. Thank you.

It makes me sad and frustrated to see authoritarian sentiments expressed on a purportedly liberal forum. Unfortunately, too often the response to authoritarianism is more and worse authoritarianism.

[BettyonRed]

7. Agreed! Turn this around and post it on

a republican paper and we would be up in arms.

[stopdiggin]

10. +100. It's truly mind boggling ... -(nt)-

[mahatmakanejeeves]

16. Thanks. NT

[uponit7771]

25. 1st amendment doesn't protect terrorist organizations or those who sympathize with them

[Ocelot II]

26. Only - maybe - if the organization in question has been designated

a foreign terrorist organization in accordance with the Patriot Act. https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1458/holder-v-humanitarian-law-project

[tritsofme]

2. What kind of nonsense is this?

Embarrassing.

[onenote]

5. Uh. No.

[Ocelot II]

8. So which political party do you think would be banned

if the GOP managed to seize all three branches of government? There's a damn good reason the First Amendment protects the right to free expression and the right of assembly.

[stopdiggin]

9. Outlawed?

So - how does that work exactly? Going with re-education camps? Purges? McCarthy hearings?

Giving your post more credit than it is really due ...
The radicalization of the GOP (and other fringe groups) needs to be opposed - and strenuously. But ...
The term 'outlawed' is severely misplaced here. Either that - or you're just about as dangerous as the other guys.
------ ------

[mcar]

11. How do you propose it happen?

Be specific.

[AnyFunctioningAdult]

12. Nonsense like this

Only helps convince people not to vote for anyone proposing it. It honestly sounds like something Trump would propose.

[MyMission]

13. I've been contemplating this question

Because after the hearings, when most is said and done, and some have been convinced of 45's involvement, there will still be a substantial number of cult 45 members who would vote for and support 45 and his designated representatives. They are crazy, angry, hateful, delusional, dangerous, unpatriotic, deplorable and so many more adjectives. They need the party to give them legitimacy, and they control the GOPQ now. Many have left that party over the last 5+ years, but many have stayed. Could we label it a hate group? I don't think they qualify quite yet.

But what do we do about the millions of them ready, willing and able to lie, steal, cheat, and wage war to subvert our government, commit treason, sedition, and anything needed to install their warped leaders and followers. This includes the planners, leaders, followers, and enablers. They are a clear and present danger. We can't lock them all up (although if we built more mental institutions and prisons, I'm sure many of them would qualify for a spot=harsh sarcasm) Maybe we can strip them of their citizenship, and deport them to Russia and other authoritarian regimes. Or send them off into space, with Elon musk. I clearly went all over the place thinking about how we might be rid of them, because they're a danger, even if the majority of us want to peacefully coexist. A few (or just one) can ruin it for the rest of us. Outlawing the party won't stop their agenda or their reach.

We do need to avoid responding in an authoritarian manner, but it's understandable to me how thoughts can move in that direction. It's very frustrating and scary, they are an infection in our society. My scientific mind suggests we isolate and remove them, and reprogram them from a cult mentality, if possible. But I'm aware that's an extreme and authoritarian response, which is why it's used to control the masses.

What's most troubling to me is the realization that we are at war against this internal enemy, and we must be ever vigilant, and it's exhausting.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

14. It's as if DU is turning into a drinking game. NT

[Hekate]

15. No. That is not how it goes.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

17. Ain't the 1st Amendment a wonderful thing?

But apparently you want to violate that Amendment.
Any other Amendments you want to violate?

[LudwigPastorius]

18. _

[UnderThisLaw]

19. Congrats

Deliberately or not, you found the post which the usual suspects can use as today’s rallying point

[MarineCombatEngineer]

20. Congrats.

[Jarqui]

21. It doesn't belong to Trump

It enabled Trump.
It will throw Trump under the bus and replace him with DeSantis or whoever when it feels like it.
It is a corrupt party but not something that Trump owns.
They own Trump.

[Fiendish Thingy]

22. Supporting fascism, are we?

Instead of unconstitutional actions like banning political parties, I support aggressively prosecuting groups and individuals who seek to overthrow democracy.

I’d be fine using the Patriot Act or Military Commissions Act to declare Proud Boys, Oathkeepers, etc. terrorist organizations, and seize their assets. Hidden benefit might be that those actions help get those 9/11 era laws repealed.

[Roy Rolling]

23. Clumsy Wording

But let me express a generic version of what I think was said.

Trumplicans should be ostracized from the legitimate political organization that was once the Republican Party. If Republicans claim to be a responsible and peaceful political organization participating in U.S. elections, they must outlaw the nutjobs in their party and declare themselves Trump-free. Republicans cannot shield criminals in their club, like the insurrectionists who they say violence is legitimate discourse. If those people want a political party, break off and call it the “Moron Criminal Hater” party or something. The change must be enforced by Republicans, not the government as I understand the OP.

It’s a worthwhile concept but easily misunderstood as government declaring a political group ineligible for participation in the election process.

And thus, this thread. As for me, if Republicans self-implode I’m all for it. It’s much more better than now with every moron with a hateful grievance flying under the Republican flag. Make the criminals declare their opposition to a legal, peaceful, and free election process and enforce current criminal statutes they blatantly and proudly violate.

[uponit7771]

24. Yep, Putin's Whore controls /20% of GZP base