Internet Poll: 29% of Americans Could Support a Military Coup

(courtesy sites.google.com)

Sixty-two percent of TTAG’s Armed Intelligentsia think that Internet polls are worse than useless. True story! Internet “opt-in” surveys are the dictionary definition of a self-selecting sample. They have zero scientific credibility. They are inherently, profoundly misleading. And fun! “Almost a third of Americans could imagine supporting a military coup against their own government, according to a new poll,” theguardian.com reports. The result is roughly similar to the number of men who could imagine sleeping with Jessica Ashley in the next twenty-minutes. And not so favorably with the number of men with whom Jessica Ashley would sleep, ever. Again, who cares? OK, Ms. Ashley makes her living appealing to carnal desires. I mean, who cares about the coup stat? Still, check it out . . .

The YouGov survey showed 29% of Americans could imagine supporting a coup. Yet, 41% said they could not imagine supporting such an event . . .

They found that 43% of Republicans would support a military coup in certain instances, while only 20% of Democrats and 29% of independents would.

The overall numbers increased when participants were “asked whether they would hypothetically support the military stepping in to take control from a civilian government which is beginning to violate the constitution”. 43% said yes to this, and 29% said no.

Before the Campaign to Stop Gun Violence takes this poll and runs with it – suggesting that gun-clinging Republicans are all proto-insurrectionists – I’ve never met a gun rights advocate who supports a military coup. OK, maybe as the last resort in the face of a full-on, death-dealing, Constitution-shredding fascist dictatorship. And they dread that possibility with every fiber of their being.

All they really, really want is a democratically elected government that stays within the boundaries established by the U.S. Constitution. Ninety-five percent of those I surveyed said so, in fact. [h/t JoR]

comments

  1. avatar pwrserge says:

    So what’s worse? A government violating the constitution or a military removing said government as part of their oath to protect the aforementioned constitution. I know what I swore to protect when I enlisted. It sure as hell wasn’t the government.

    1. avatar Fred says:

      It would depend on the nature of the violation.
      Since the poll leaves that open to the audiences interpretation, we don’t know if they’re saying yes/no that coups are possible or if one is necessary. We just know that more republicans trust the military to lead it.

      If the military leadership had gone off the rails tho, we might just as soon change our minds.

      1. avatar JSF001 says:

        Pretty much this. I really don’t see our military ever preforming a coup, especially if our government became tyrannical. The reason being there is really only two way a tyrannical government can come to power, either they take power by force, or they are voted in. If they try to take power by force the military would already be fighting them before they gained power. On the other if they were to be voted into power things would probably happen to slowly to cause the military to attempt a coup before those in power managed to realign the military behind them.

        The first thing those in power would do is purge the military high ranking officers and enlisted that don’t agree with them, and promote those that do to fill those slots. From there they simply start changing the culture to support them. Cause moral to plummet and soon you find those that don’t support the ideas of this new government will leave in droves allowing them to be replace by people that do agree with those in power. Wait a couple of years before to any thing to outrageously tyrannical and the military will be firmly behind you.

        Hell something like that is happening within the military right now. There is a massive PC push within the military coming from the top, and moral has plummeted. I know that last year the Air Force was looking to downsize it’s personal by 35,000 people. They offered some incentives to try to encourage as many people to get out, and than have a review board going though every ones records to determine who else to let go to make up the difference. They had to put a hold to the program because 70,000 people elected to get out. I know people that had crossed the half way point to retirement that decided to get out and throw that all the way because they could not stand it any more.

    2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      I’m not at all surprised at the opinions on insurrection many Americans share. This kind of stuff is always is always shocking to Europeans (and sure-fire click bait for thegaridan.com). A couple of years ago a Duchman I was talking to almost fainted when I casually mentioned that half the guys at our dinner table were armed. Many Europeans (and many cosmopolite statists, most of whom seem to live in LA, DC and NYC) just can’t seem to wrap their brains around that fact that America is a revolutionary society. Well, we are.

    3. avatar DMB says:

      Something about from all enemies both foreign and domestic.

  2. avatar Jim R says:

    Truth be told? If it came down to it, if our government went rogue in such a manner, I WOULD support an armed revolution. I wouldn’t LIKE it, and I don’t WANT that to happen–but I would rather die fighting an oppressive rule than live with their boot on my neck.

  3. avatar Craig says:

    The military is the government. Look at Latin America – one tin pot dictator overthrows another.

    If, and this is a huge and terrible and inconceivable if, this country divides, it would hopefully just be a dissolution of the Fed and would leave the states intact.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      “If, and this is a huge and terrible and inconceivable if, this country divides, it would hopefully just be a dissolution of the Fed and would leave the states intact.”

      If the 1860’s are to be any historical lesson at all it’s that that experiment has been done. The Fed won’t go down and leave the states intact.

      1. avatar Craig says:

        I actually just watched Gettysburg before seeing this article and I agree.

      2. avatar neiowa says:

        1860 was a regional disagreement. Settled without reference to the Constitution.

        1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          However, comma, a good number of folks these days make reference to “secession is not outlined in the Constitution” as basis to justify going to war to prevent it.

          It was not a “regional” Army Lincoln sent to war…he was the President of the Federal government. He fought to keep the Union a union, and there is no shortage of people that believe (a) it was the right thing to do then and (b) it would be the right thing to do now.

      3. avatar Bob102 says:

        I doubt the outcome with be the same, though. First, from my experience in the military, most people who serve in the military are from red states. Second, Progressives expect others to fight their wars, and it is unlikely that they would willingly fight for their own cause. Drafting people to fight a war they do not believe in does not work either. Third, if the head were severed, the fed would collapse. Although the “United States” would fundamentally survive a severed head simply because we have 50 sovereign and independent states to take the flag and run with it. The fed’s control today, they part that is destroying our freedoms, comes from a single location in North America — D.C. — and perhaps a handful of states. Do not assume the same outcome simply because a war was fought and lost over 150 years ago. Disclaimer: Do not misunderstand me. I am not a proponent of this action anytime soon. I firmly believe We The People are going to win back the country in the 2016 election. The Democrat Party tried to fool most of the people, and now, the people no longer trust them.

        1. avatar God says:

          “We the people” are a bunch of underachieving redneck ammosexuals. Not going to happen. No matter what side wins you clowns have a FEMA camp in your future. Domestic terrorists, indeed.

  4. avatar Hawkeye says:

    I wouldn’t support a military coup.

    I would support every single citizen and business owner refusing to participate in any form of government. “I will not comply” or thereabouts.

    1. avatar WedelJ says:

      Real quick, what would you call the American Revolution? It was an armed coup. It was fought by a military that was created for the sole purpose of the coup who then relinquished power as soon as the fighting was over. I know of no other military coup with the same ending, though, so it is definitely dangerous.

  5. avatar Guest says:

    If the South and most of the Western states succeeded it would be legal contrary to what the feds would have you to believe,and this time,the north would be at a severe disadvantage.I seriously doubt the northeast and the left coast could put up much of a fight against the rest of the country.

    1. avatar Publius says:

      Exactly. You’d basically have the handful of states on each coast versus the other 35-40 states (not like Alaska or Hawaii would be involved though). The “evil” states trying to leave would not only have the majority of gun owners, but they would also produce the majority of the nations food. If they raving liberals wanted it to go from peacefully leaving to a violent fight, they’d lose incredibly fast.

    2. avatar That Guy says:

      Hey, you are forgetting about those of us in the Northeast that would support succession! I know I would be making my way to fight alongside the successionists, while along the way wreaking havoc on the oppressors.

      1. avatar triple banger says:

        Why not stick around for some sabotage missions instead?

        1. avatar God says:

          The far right is already well infiltrated. But it won’t matter, judging by the infighting that you clowns do. You’ll shoot each other first.

  6. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    It will happen eventually. Probably not in my lifetime but governments don’t last forever. And when it does it will probably have the support of a lot more than 29% of the people.

  7. avatar actionphysicalman says:

    As long as Oddball is in command, I am good with it too.

    1. avatar actionphysicalman says:

      Or maybe Strawberry….

    2. avatar JoshtheViking says:

      Positive waves, man.

    3. avatar Mark Lee says:

      Woof Woof!

  8. avatar Stoopid says:

    History tells us it is a matter of when, not if.

  9. Nobody wants war. War means we all lose everything and we’ll never get it back. A coup is a war and it will certainly kill large wads of the patriots of the country in the early hours. A war means we will have to undertake the building of a new nation and we don’t know what sort of nation will end up being built. We certainly won’t get the original one back nor the broken one that the original had become and which was thrown off. A coup/war/revolution is the last step available to an oppressed people and it’s one the government needs to understand is always available to us and which we will choose given no other way to enjoy the blessings of liberty that the nation was founded to enshrine. There is currently no need and even the most venomous anti-government people in the country are content to work their way through the courts for redress of their disagreements with our government. If freedom loving right wingers were as bad as the left would have people think, there’d be nobody but right wingers left.

    1. avatar Stoopid says:

      The Bundy incident proves your assertion that people are still willing to use the court system as false.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        Let’s see. 1 incident involving 4-6 hundred people out of a nation of 319 million proves what?

        1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          That 4-6 hundred were willing to stand up, armed and against one or more Federal agencies, for what they believe in?

          That alone is rather significant. How often in the last 40 years has that happened?

        2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

          “That 4-6 hundred were willing to stand up, armed and against one or more Federal agencies, for what they believe in?”

          Bundy Ranch = Concord Bridge

        3. avatar God says:

          The Feds have quietly rounded up most of the Bundy fools. Even Bundy’s son found himself on the No Flight List and facing drug charges.

      2. avatar Chris T from KY says:

        I’m glad the people took up guns against the acts of evil by the government. The purpose of the second amendment was on display for all to see. I do not recall a report of a shot being fired. Do you?

  10. avatar ThomasR says:

    There has already been a coup.

    Leftists/statists have control of the schools, universities, media and the presidency.

    The USSC is one vote from saying the second amendment does not defend an individual right to KABA and it has voted to support the NDAA, the Patriot Act, Obama Care and no knock warrants. All clear violations of the constitution.

    The velvet glove over the steel fist of the police state just needs one major terrorist attack or economic collapse to be stripped away and then all of us will feel it’s grip around our throats.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      +1

      The National Defense Authorization Act is an abomination. Under that act, government agents can declare that someone is a “terrorist” and a “threat to national security” … and then take them away for indefinite “detention”. No attorney. No trial. No jury. Nothing. Do not pass GO, do not collect $200. This is a blatant violation of our Fifth Amendment right to due process.

      1. avatar triple banger says:

        You say “person” but did you mean “citizen?”

        1. avatar int19h says:

          He didn’t say either word, actually, but constitution generally uses the words “person” and “people”, rather than citizens, for a good reason (where it outlines the rights and privileges that are specific to citizens, it uses the word “citizen”). In particular, Fourth and Fifth apply to anyone under US jurisdiction, citizen or not.

      2. avatar God says:

        Who cares? Keeps the good people of this nation safe from ammosexual domestic terrorists.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          Are you seriously cheering the arbitrary detention powers based solely on labeling someone a “terrorist” with no due process to speak of?

          Guess who’s going to be a terrorist if Republicans manage to get Trump elected?

  11. avatar Publius says:

    It depends on what you define as a “coup”. I for one think that our military needs to grow a spine and actually fulfill their oath to defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic and arrest politicians who violate the Constitution. Egypt’s military actually honored their oath after it became a democracy and a few years ago they told a corrupt president (or whatever their term is) that he had a few weeks to either step down and allow for a new election or he would be removed from office. Sadly, our soldiers lack any integrity and are simply obedient dogs for our corrupt politicians. Some of you would call this a “coup” because it would mean the military not sitting there waiting for a dog biscuit from politicians, but others like me would call it “actually doing their goddamn job”.

    1. avatar jwm says:

      Yes, pubes. Let’s let the soldiers decide who’s guilty and who’s not. Let them decide when to remove a legally elected .gov. And since they’re not removing a legally elected .gov that you don’t approve of, they’re wrong.

      I was a soldier and I believe that’s a terrible idea. If the majority of Americans, civilians, rise up against their .gov then the soldiers have a duty to join and support the people. Only to support. Not to appoint a junta or control.

      Let me know when the majority of Americans want to become a third world crap hole.

      1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        ” Let’s let the soldiers decide who’s guilty and who’s not.”

        Where did he say that?

        He said “arrest.”

        I’m not sure if you have checked lately, but arrest is only the first step (well, really the second, since establishing PC should be the first step…) for judicial proceedings. It is not a decision of guilt or not.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          OK. Arrest. Let this happen once and every time bored or pissed off soldiers feel they have a grievence pols will be getting arrested.

          Our system was set up so that soldiers follow orders from citizens. Soldiers don’t decide policy or constitutional legality.

          Quit looking to soldiers or any others to do your heavy lifting. As American citizens it’s up to us, the people to set right the wrongs of our elected officials.

        2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          “Our system was set up so that soldiers follow orders from citizens. Soldiers don’t decide policy or constitutional legality.

          Quit looking to soldiers or any others to do your heavy lifting. As American citizens it’s up to us, the people to set right the wrongs of our elected officials.”

          I don’t disagree with what you are saying here. This makes a ton more sense than how you worded it the first time.

      2. avatar Publius says:

        You’re a wonderful example of the unthinking, obedient dog I was talking about. It’s hilarious that you have such blind loyalty to the government when they’ve shown time after time that they don’t give a damn about soldiers / former soldiers. It’s like watching a woman with a black eye insist that “He really does love me!”.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Nice, pubes. You’re a perfect example of why our country is such a mess. You spit on soldiers but don’t have the balls to confront your .gov you claim is acting outside the boundaries of the constitution.

          No, you want the same soldiers you denigrate to do your job for you.

      3. avatar God says:

        Or one of those evil socialist nations. Like Sweden and The Netherlands. Where the citizens are educated, health care plans and pensions are solvent. And the standard of living for middle class is higher than in the USA.

    2. avatar Joseph Yanos says:

      Yeah, what he said…..

    3. avatar Tim L says:

      Big words, Pubes, from someone who obviously has no goddamned idea what he is talking about and never served a day. In my 20+ years I have not seen any milk bones thrown in my units…what I did see was us protecting YOUR sorry ass. And if the SHTF and unconstitutional/immoral actions are taken by ANYONE (public or private entities) then it is our DUTY to make them desist.

      1. avatar Publius says:

        I’d love to hear how terrorizing third world countries that pose no threat to use was “protecting” Americans in any way. I’m not sure if you’re just regurgitating the bullshit propaganda to try and make up for you inadequacies or if you’re actually dumb enough to think that killing children in Who-gives-a-crap-istan as is actually protecting Americans.

    4. avatar int19h says:

      In case you haven’t noticed, the Egyptian military has delayed the elections for over a year, and in the meantime they have been engaging in a massive campaign of suppression of any political dissent. I’m not a fan of Morsi and his Islamist buddies, but there’s a difference between imprisoning people when they take up arms, and imprisoning people for voicing an unpopular political opinion.

  12. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    That was how the Roman Republic fell. Corruption followed by a military takeover. How well did that work out?

    The real, scientific opinion polls that tell you something significant are the ones that tell you how little we trust our government. What’s the latest rating for Congress? Look how well Trump is doing, his entire campaign is based upon the fact that most Republicans, Libertarians, and independents feel lied to by the people they elected. How many Americans are saying “why bother to vote, the outcome will be the same?” Are they wrong? Do you think either party will do something other than raise your taxes, and then give themselves a raise and pat themselves on the back, and then tell us how good a job they are doing for us?

  13. avatar LarryinTX says:

    I think a lot of those commenting have gotten away from the question. My input would be, “what does ‘support’ mean?” Sitting in front of your TV and nodding your head in approval? And non-approval means shaking your head? Does anyone believe that those Dems who *disapprove* will put their asses on the line to STOP a coup? Because I do not. OTOH, having been career military, I don’t think it will ever happen. The best we could hope for is that the military would refuse unlawful orders to intervene when the PEOPLE stage a coup. And yes, I do expect that. The military has no active role within the boundaries of the U.S.

    1. avatar Bill Kohnke says:

      Larry, I too was career military (retired 2007). It’s changed a lot since then thanks to continuous politically correct social engineering. I keep wondering at what point the oath of allegiance will be changed by deleting such words as “lawful orders” and “Constitution”. In the past I’ve argued with fellow officers over what constitutes a lawful order and what one should do about it when a conflict exists. If ordered to fire into a crowd, some believe you do not question it, you obey it. Others say never. It’s not so cut and dried, but situational dependent, and trying to predict the correct response becomes an exercise in futility. My fear however, isn’t the disagreement that exists within the ranks. My fear is that resistance may dwindle if the military drifts away from us over time, and its members no longer reflect society as a whole. There appear to be many who already believe this has happened in the law enforcement community. If true, then it would behoove us as a society to reverse course before the “us against them” mentality infects even more people. Divide and conquer, peer envy, favoritism, cronyism – all have been used by politicians for centuries to achieve short term goals of power and office retention. In the long run it is a recipe for national failure. Internecine warfare is the ugly outcome of bad leadership and corrupt ideology. What comes after cannot be gleaned in advance, but I would not be optimistic.

  14. avatar DerryM says:

    I think a Military Coup would quickly devolve into a Civil War among the States because even if the Military seized the POTUS and dissolved the Federal Government in Washington D.C., they could not seize all the State Governments nor guarantee the allegiance of all States, Military Facilities and National Guard Units scattered around the Country. The States would factionalize roughly along “Red” and “Blue” lines while National Guard Units and impromptu “Militias” could/would rebel within the States (particularly the “Blue” States) over local/regional issues. The result would be chaos.

    So notwithstanding the fact a Military Coup violates the hell out of the Constitution, it would be unworkable.

    1. avatar Stinkeye says:

      “So notwithstanding the fact a Military Coup violates the hell out of the Constitution, it would be unworkable.”

      Hmmmm… It’s almost as if the country’s founders, in addition to being opposed to a standing military in the first place, deliberately designed a system that would be as difficult as possible for a tyrant to seize control of…

      1. avatar DerryM says:

        I am not sure the Founders intended it that way, or if the Republic, evolving along the path they set forth in the Constitution, became that way. I do feel fairly certain the Military (or a Tyrant Individual) could not achieve a classic “coup d’etat” because significant power to resist is spread across the States and the People.

  15. avatar Sgt Frank says:

    A third is the key number……just has it always has been….Revolutionary war only one third wanted to fight against the British, one third wanted the British, and one third was willing to go either way the pacifist crowd….that same number held up in WWi and WWII…..Korea and VietNam……it has always been the one third that has carried the nation forward……during a revolt the military has very strict guide lines no interference and to insure that the country remains safe from outside forces……what happens to the administration in office is up to the revolutionists……there is no public or gov’t police force obligated to protect the administration. for they serve at the public’s behest ……one third would say Whatever, one third would Run and one third would Reelect a govt more inline with our beliefs. We are a Capitalistic Republic based on hard work and freedom and no govt intrusion into our lives….it’s all down on paper…it’s called the Constitution .

    1. avatar God says:

      Find any reference to a capitalistic system in the Constitution, Einstein.

  16. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    One of the most ironic things about a potential military coup in the US is that, in general, I’ve found men in and retired from the US military to have a greater respect and adherence to the US Constitution, especially as it was written and originally intended, than the jacksnipes, grifters and rent-seekers, most of whom are from the Ivy League club, who are running the government now.

    As a result, I think it would take some truly egregious violation of the Constitution before the military would act in a manner that could be called a coup. I think it is more likely that a coup would happen as a result of armed insurrection by a small cohort of the population, with small groups or individuals taking out politicians and bureaucrats. Rather than watch the whole situation develop into a third world civil war, the military would be pressed by various leaders to “take action” to prevent descent into chaos. Elites like order, even if it is military order, and that’s the point where people would need to quickly reach out and start dropping bodies – the elites behind the scenes and the media/press, directing and encouraging a coup, would need to be killed ASAP to prevent a lasting military coup.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “I think it is more likely that a coup would happen as a result of armed insurrection by a small cohort of the population, with small groups or individuals taking out politicians and bureaucrats.”

      Bingo.

      I can easily see congress-critters and senators unexpectedly leave office with a strong message sent to whoever takes their place…

      1. avatar God says:

        Never going to happen. You rednecks are all talk whereas those “Ivy League” types are going to put you into prison they have already built.

    2. avatar Grindstone says:

      Being a recent vet and still working with the DOD, I’ve found the average enlistedmen and -women to be utter morons who couldn’t tell you what they had for breakfast this morning. There are exceptions, but the majority are just meatshields who had no other real options in life than to join up. Leadership is completely political (with top brass being extremely narcissistic) with politics split between right and left among them. I’d wager if it did come to a military coup, a good third of the enlisted force would just desert and go home or whatever.

      “I think it is more likely that a coup would happen as a result of armed insurrection by a small cohort of the population, with small groups or individuals taking out politicians and bureaucrats.”

      Which would lead to more catalysts to increase “security theater” and gun control.

  17. avatar Ralph says:

    According to a recent poll, seven out of three Americans think that a “military coup” is a two-door Army vehicle.

    As Mencken said, “Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”

    1. avatar DJ says:

      Doesn’t seem like the most scientific poll ever.

  18. avatar William Burke says:

    Here she comes, you better watch your step
    She’s going to break your heart in two, it’s true
    It’s not hard to realize
    Just look into her false colored eyes
    She builds you up to just put you down, what a clown

    ‘Cause everybody knows
    (She’s a femme fatale)
    The things she does to please
    (She’s a femme fatale)
    She’s just a little tease
    (She’s a femme fatale)
    See the way she walks
    Hear the way she talks

    You’re put down in her book
    You’re number thirty seven, have a look
    She’s going to smile to make you frown, what a clown
    Little boy, she’s from the street
    Before you start, you’re already beat
    She’s going to play you for a fool, yes it’s true

    ‘Cause everybody knows
    (She’s a femme fatale)
    The things she does to please
    (She’s a femme fatale)
    She’s just a little tease
    (She’s a femme fatale)
    See the way she walks
    Hear the way she talks

    ‘Cause everybody knows
    (She’s a femme fatale)
    The things she does to please
    (She’s a femme fatale)
    She’s just a little tease
    (She’s a femme fatale)
    Ooh ooh oh
    (She’s a femme fatale)
    Ooh ooh oh

    1. avatar jwm says:

      William Burke? The William Burke? Back from self imposed exile? Still a conspiracy nutter?

  19. avatar Grindstone says:

    A violent coup right now, given the political climate, would have one of two results: A far-left communistic dictatorship or a far-right tyrannical theocracy.

    Neither would be for Liberty for All.

    1. avatar Chris T from KY says:

      Since the far right clings to it’s religion and guns I don’t see how a left wing communist government could win. Slide fire stocks, ARs, go faster triggers and ammunition are every where in the bible belt.

      The left does not cling to guns and Karl Marx at the same time. It is a true statement that the police are out gunned by the civilian population. One SWAT unit per major city, so what?

      1. avatar Grindstone says:

        Slide fire stocks? Are you being serious?

        Civilian firearms ownership isn’t the same as enacting a coup. Most coups are a small, dedicated minority deposing current leadership, not a massive civil war. Though they do sometimes descend to a war, but by that time anything could happen.

        1. avatar Chris T from KY says:

          The fact that American citizens have more weapons than the organized government makes a take over by one side or another very difficult. Slide fire stocks and anything else that private individuals can buy are better than what the police have. Also the police have fewer resources. Local officials will not allow police to purchase flame throwers for example. But you can if you wish.

          Try as they might the left has no knowledge of weapons and tactics. Right wingers with their study of history know how to fight. The left does not. The left can only hope American police will shoot unarmed citizens when ordered to.

          Has it occurred to you why in Baltimore or Ferguson the police have not just shot people in mass? Kent state was a long time ago. With that history it is the left that is against having armed students on college campus. Students with guns are more scary than armed national guard on a college campus because the guard represents government control. Right wingers putting guns in the hands of students makes them free.

      2. avatar God says:

        Your “analysis” goes a long ways towards demonstrating why Kentucly is consistently 49th in the nation in education. What’s that motto in Frankfort? “Thank God for Mississippi!!”

        Anyway, you clowns are all talk and zero action. This gets discussed regularly and not a single one of you morons has ever stepped forward to set an example.

    2. avatar int19h says:

      A military coup bringing a left-wing dictatorship? In the USA, where all the branches of military lean notoriously to the right?

  20. avatar Raul Ybarra says:

    OK, maybe as the last resort in the face of a full-on, death-dealing, Constitution-shredding fascist dictatorship. And they dread that possibility with every fiber of their being.

    I’m seeing far to many instances of people believing that is exactly the direction we are headed. When you tie in gun control, FCC regulation of the internet it’s not hard to take that conclusion.

  21. avatar DDavis says:

    There is a great deal of bullshit in the Guardian’s polls, and on the internet in general. This is a case in point. If one supports a military coup, I would consider them to be a traitor. Just my two cents.

  22. avatar neiowa says:

    29% think a coup is a really bad cough or the kind of haircut that Rangers wear.

  23. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    I think ‘Murica! will crumble from within before there are any coups…what with cop worship, miliary can do no wrong and obey the authorities preached from so many right leaning repub type churches(like mine). Huge # of guns in my very large Baptist Indiana church. Yeah the Bundy ranch meant SOMETHING-I’m just not sure what…the left anarchist types are not armed to even a tiny degree as the right…

    1. avatar Rambeast says:

      “the left anarchist types are not armed to even a tiny degree as the right…”

      If you think Anarchists are left leaning, you are completely daft. That word has a completely different meaning than the Mad Max vision that statists have prescribed for it. Anarchists are indeed very well armed and prepared to function in a post government collapse society. “Conservatives” and “Progressives” are the ones (no matter how well armed) that are not prepared for what comes after a national collapse. They MUST have some hierarchy to have a semblance of order. Most of them cannot dream of the lack some authority doing their dirty work for them.

      No, Anarchists are the ones that you will want to turn to to avoid the specter of government returning after another’s fall.

      1. avatar int19h says:

        >> If you think Anarchists are left leaning, you are completely daft.

        Or maybe he is just aware of the history of the movement and prominent figures such as Bakunin and Proudhon, and movements such as mutualism and anarcho-syndicalism, which were and are very much left-leaning.

        1. avatar Rambeast says:

          Except Anarchism is by definition society without government. Those two oxymorons are as off target as Anarcho-Communists. Just slapping the label of anarchist on something doesn’t make it so.

        2. avatar int19h says:

          Those strains of anarchism are also very much about the society without government (seriously, have you at least read about Bakunin?).

          They just don’t believe that private property is a natural right – quite the opposite, they think that for true (unlimited and not tied to use) private property, you need a government to enforce it, otherwise it doesn’t meaningfully exist. And guess what? They’re in good company here; Thomas Jefferson believed the same, though he drew different conclusions from it:

          “It is a moot question whether the origin of any kind of property is derived from nature at all… It is agreed by those who have seriously considered the subject that no individual has, of natural right, a separate property in an acre of land, for instance. By an universal law, indeed, whatever, whether fixed or movable, belongs to all men equally and in common is the property for the moment of him who occupies it; but when he relinquishes the occupation, the property goes with it. Stable ownership is the gift of social law, and is given late in the progress of society.”

  24. avatar Col. Angus says:

    General James Mattoon Scott: Where are you now that we need you?

  25. avatar Jeremy Hatfield says:

    The wording of the poll item in question read, “Is there any situation in which you could imagine yourself supporting the U.S. military taking over the powers of federal government?”

    The key word is “any,” which stands a better chance of answering positive than an outright “no.”

    So, what you have here is that Republicans are able to conceive of situations where military intervention against a rogue government would be possible. Our founders wrote about this fairly frequently, even after the Constitution had been drafted.

    Obama’s allusions to circumventing constitutionally-prescribed processes for governance make such scenarios that much more believable.

    Democrats tend to place too much stock in the benevolence of government, especially when “their man” is in power (Republicans can be found guilty of much the same). Thus, the policies and agencies they vilified during the Bush years (Patriot Act, FISA, DHS, TSA) they embraced when Obama was inaugurated. Thus, they have a hard time believing that any situation could arise that would warrant a coup.

    I’m pretty sure the results would be much different if a Republican were in the White House.

  26. avatar anomad101 says:

    Don’t think I would get any sleep with Jessica. Pass out would be more like it.

  27. avatar Henry says:

    The military instagating a coup to protest unconstitutional government is like boning for chastity. The only constitutional coup is a civilian coup. And the only interesting survey would be to find out what the numbers are on that.

  28. avatar Vitsaus says:

    Ever since MacArthur, the government has been smarter about what sorts of men lead the military. It should come as no surprise that our major military campaigns have been somewhat inconclusive in results, but the purpose was to ensure that no general or commander of men under arms would ever go against congress or the white house. All that being said, we are in dire need of a coup or so other way to sort out this “culture war.”

  29. I am a veteran and it is time that someone that has singed the dotted line was President. Those that prevent a peaceful revolution will guarantee a violent one JFK. I will also eliminate the double standards put DC politicians on Obamacare and SS.
    Thanks for your support and vote.Pass the word. mrpresident2016.com

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email