Well, I’m mean, it’s some blog. It sounds plausible but we should probably be surprised if it was true, anyone can make s**t up to get clicks. It’s probably educated supposition and might not be far off the mark.
But saying “this would be the end of democracy” wouldn’t mean the speaker thought we were “A democracy”. “Democracy” ie people voting for our leaders is something we (unfortunately) do.
Frankly, Senile Chinese Asset Biden getting to be President because a bunch of stupid masking wearing women, country clubbers, and barely literate ghetto dwellers allegedly voted for him makes as much sense to me as Lizzie II sitting on the throne of the UK cause her great great great great great grandma was was the most senior protestant decedent of the French asshole who conquered England in the damn 11th century. Neither is a good way to choose a leader.
People whine for “term limits” and “Article V” and “Repeal the 17th” and yada yada. DJ mentioned it the other day, the one reform that would actually matter, restrict the damn franchise (along with abolishing this mail voting crap, as GOPster mentioned the other day, no one sure as hell trusts the post office with any other important deliveries.)
First off, like I have posted many times: Make good with The Lord.
This is especially true if the “Pedo/Kumagain” abomination comes to pass.
The basic underpinnings of “America” have been under constant attack for decades; we’re now seeing the end results.
You can’t stay on defense forever. And the option(s) that “our” side are looking at now should have been implemented decades ago when this sh*t was kicking off. But the “sitting on a sofa on a Sunday afternoon” crowd, either tacitly or outright approved of the actions and we have what we have today.
Action, including inaction, can have very long lasting and dire consequences.
I had a similar gut feeling of "he wouldn't talk that way" when some UK newpaper quoted Obama (who was out trying to bully the brits into NOT voting for Brexit after hypocritically getting elect on a campaign pledge to stop America from forcing our will on other countries). Supposedly Obama said the UK would "find themselves in the back of queue" if they voted for Brexit. Now, that terminology is way too british to imagine it coming out of Obama's mouth. It would like him quoting as saying "I bet Michelle fifty quid that Donald Trump won't stand for election at the annual Republican conference" or "Conservatives says this is about religious liberty, I say bollocks! They're all a bunch of homophobic wankers" or "Boris Johnson's a bit of a nutter, isn't he?"
Most likely, Obama DID make some threat to the British along those lines, and the British newspaper simply quoted him using a paraphase that the average Brit would understand easier.
And I think that only the "abolish the 17th amendment crowd" and "we need an article V convention" types are offended by the term "democracy" being used in reference to America. They have things backwards, we need MORE democracy in America, not less (and I have no doubt Clarence Thomas agrees with me... if the 2020 election had actually been transparent and democratic, we would not be in this mess). I think its because they associate the word "democracy" with "Democrats", even though the RAT party is about as anti-democratic as it gets. Democrats are no more for democracy than the People's Republic of China is for a Republic of the people. They just CLAIM they are.