I sometimes practice my debate skills with AI. I like to stay abreast of the arguments liberals make, and asking questions of ChatGPT allows me to understand the prevailing thought on issues and prepare thoughtful responses. I don’t know if ChatGPT is fully “leftist” because of algorithmic training or just a robust absorption of mainstream media, but it is. I usually come away with more questions than answers about the premises the Left builds its arguments on.

Yesterday, though, I got a win from my AI debate -- and some validation that we, as conservatives, are not the party violating so-called “democratic norms.”

I started our very respectful debate with a basic premise, asking the AI program, “Is Kamala Harris a communist?” I got a predictable answer: “No, Vice President Kamala Harris is not a Communist. She is a member of the Democratic Party, which is a centrist political party in the United States.”

I pressed on, asking about the current VP’s desire for “equity” rather than “equality” -- something that is central to Communist beliefs. I was introduced by ChatGPT to “historically marginalized or disadvantaged groups”. We talked about my poor grandparents coming to this country from Ireland and I asked if they would be considered “historically marginalized” and got a very respectful lecture about not confusing individual prejudices with “systemic inequities.”

We went on, debating whether Donald Trump would be a dictator and whether he had violated democratic norms. (The answer, as you might expect, considered Trump’s ”authoritarian rhetoric and behavior” and “disregard for established norms” and gave a qualified “yes,” concluding with, “Ultimately, the legacy of Trump's impact on democratic norms will likely be debated for years to come.”

I followed up with this question:

“Could it be said that the Democratic National Committee, in installing VP Harris to take over the position of presidential candidate without any kind of primary or voter approval, is also a violation of "democratic norms”?

The answer, from ChatGPT, was eye-opening. I am including the entire response below.

The scenario you're describing -- where the Democratic National Committee (DNC) would "install" Vice President Kamala Harris as the presidential candidate without a primary or voter approval -- would indeed raise questions about democratic norms if it were to happen in the way you suggest.

Democratic Norms and the Role of Primaries:

Primaries as a Democratic Process: Primaries are a key part of the democratic process in the U.S. political system, allowing party members and voters to choose their preferred candidate for the general election. Skipping this process could be seen as bypassing the will of the voters, which would challenge the democratic norms of candidate selection.

Party Leadership's Role: While political parties do have some control over their nomination processes and can influence outcomes (such as endorsing candidates or setting debate rules), an outright replacement of a candidate without any input from voters or party members would be highly unusual and controversial.

Past Precedents and Context:

Party Influence: Historically, party leadership has had significant influence over the nomination process, especially before the primary system became as widespread as it is today. However, in the modern era, the expectation is that candidates emerge through a competitive primary process, reflecting the choices of the party's base.

Exceptional Circumstances: There have been situations where a party has had to replace a candidate due to illness, death, or other extraordinary circumstances, but even in those cases, the process typically involves some level of consultation with party members or delegates, rather than an imposition from the top.

Conclusion:

If the DNC were to bypass the primary process entirely to install a candidate like Kamala Harris without voter input, it could certainly be viewed as a violation of democratic norms. Such an action would likely provoke significant backlash from both within the party and from the broader electorate, as it would undermine the principle of voter participation in the selection of candidates.

However, it's important to note that this is a hypothetical scenario, and the actual processes and decisions made by the DNC would depend on the specific circumstances and party rules in place at the time.

Since AI is several weeks to months behind real-time due to its need to “train” on existing information that is available to form its “thinking,” I got the truth (a “win” for sure) -- that removing a sitting president and installing another candidate would absolutely violate democratic norms. Even in its “exceptional circumstances” section, AI acknowledges that “the process typically involves some level of consultation with party members or delegates, rather than an imposition from the top.” That, to me, is the ultimate violation of democratic norms!

If you are suffering through the Democratic National Convention in Chicago (or any onslaught of bogus allegations, accusations and fake facts from leftists) and feeling like you’re witnessing the destruction of democracy in America, ask AI a few questions -- you might be shocked at how close you are to the truth!

Image: Jeremy Barande