> It doesn't occur to them that whether they're smarter or not, they don't deserve to rule because they do not have the support of the people
How doesn't it occur to them when they accepted it as a fact? For the second time. Unlike the stupid which up to today tell the story of the "stolen election".
> It doesn't occur to them that whether they're smarter or not, they don't deserve to rule because they do not have the support of the people -- that's the very mathematical basis of any democratic country.
I'm happy that you admit that most of those voters are in fact stupid. I still don't understand though why you would like to be ruled by the kings of stupid. I mean, you've become a joke on this planet. Every leader of stupid creates chaos and harm for everybody besides them (for now). So what are you proud of here exactly?
> You know what I call "A minority of highly-educated self-righteous elites get to pass all the laws to govern those stupid rural dummies"? An aristocracy.
Well, yeah, of course you'd call that because you don't know what the word means but how would you call what Trump does? I mean he literally employs his family...like...you know...in classic aristocratic systems. What do you call this?
> On the left, their idiots has rendered the party incapable of being taken seriously by grownups -- to an even greater extent than Trump's Republicans. That's the point.
So above you just talked down those grown-ups in favour of the stupid. Now grown-ups are the level a ruler needs to reach. So which is it?
You should leave the continent for some time and live somewhere else. You would recognise the damage the stupid have caused to the reputation of the whole country. You'd have to go very far back in history to find a Government so ridiculous as the current one.
I'd say Caligula would be a good candidate. Ludwig II of Bavaria for Trumps first term, where he didn't cause SO much damage.