Those whose livelihood depends on this being “the most consequential election of our lifetime” are not the most trustworthy people to determine whether or not this is actually the case. The fact that it has been said about each of the past dozen elections should also cause us to reconsider.
@frjon And yet, the fact that one candidate fomented an attempted coup the last time around lends a certain novelty, at least, to this election. I'd go so far as to say "consequence."
@JimRain certainly not without consequence, and perhaps even more than the last one. (Although we were in a fairly similar situation then, too.)
While I may just also be wrong, my point is also in part that in calling every election the "most consequential" we render both of those words meaningless.
@frjon For elections before 2016, I agree with you. But because Trump is a president whose actions are not only unpresidential but also unprecedented in American history, I think "most consequential in our lifetime" was an accurate assessment in 2016, and was again in 2020, and will be again in 2024.
@JimRain 1. I imagine we agree entirely on all things related to DJT. I probably think the system can survive his attemps more than you do, though I certainly hope we don't ever find out who is right! 2. I trust you thinking this is the case more than I trust a pundit or politician saying the same thing.
@frjon Re: your points: 1. I'm sure we agree about Mr. Trump. I also feel confident in our system when at least two branches are doing their jobs. But I'm concerned that a malign executive and malfunctioning legislature during Trump 2 would stress the system a LOT. 2. You, sir, are too kind.