Do you concede that we already live in a post-constitutional, full-spectrum surveillance state? If not, then can you explain why thousands of private citizens, and then a presidential candidate, were openly spied upon, with multiple dozens of government employees privy to their private record & communications?
If yes, then the next question is very easy: would you prefer to live in a police state that enforced AA, PC, open borders, muslim infiltration, IRS harassment, etc OR one that protected private property, the 1A with respect to not only speech, but association (religion, business service), used 4A surveillance against our opposition, encouraged domestic investment and job growth, etc?
Remember, you don't have the choice of deciding whether or not to live in a police state. You already do - the essential question is: who should be in charge?
There's no doubt the US as conceived is doomed. But you have conflated modest surveillance and sporadic anarcho-tyranny with a police state like Cuba. Frankly, giving in is the same as giving up. The best part of Trump is his respect for the Constitution and the rule of law. That is ingrained and he has hired people with the same philosophy. The media will lie and accuse Trump of all sorts of law breaking, but Trump has and will answer those lies.
I think the only real answer is to start over but until the balloon goes up we should do the best we can to keep within the confines of the law.
You have been completely fouled in your reasoning. NO I do not contend we live in a post Constitutional state. Maybe we’re in the fourth quarter, but we now have the ball and the game clock is on our side. I am not ready to throw in the towel and believe now that the sleeping giant is awake, much can and will be accomplished to restore our Constitution. Quitters are always losers. Never never never give up.