I found it quite interesting that both the Illing and the Foa/Mounk articles noted the erosion of informal aspects of democratic checks as a potential trigger of the collapse of American democracy. These informal societal and cultural attributes appear to be needed now more than ever as some of the institutional checks have been done away with, most notably now having direct election of senators (Illing) and less strict campaign funding regulations (Foa). The two articles, however, seem to be at odds with each other over the biggest threat to American democracy. The Illing articles addresses President Trump’s populism, coupled with a lack of formal and informal systematic checks, as a danger. Conversely, the Foa articles points out the extreme influence of a small segment of the population, rich elites and specialized interest groups, on elections and policies. Both cases appear to be bad for American democracy, but the tyranny of the majority that the Founding Fathers were so insistent upon eradicating seems to be the bigger threat at the moment. As seen in the case of Putin’s Russia, populism can be very dangerous when the appropriate systematic checks are not in place. I believe the saving grace of American democracy will be something not even the Founding Fathers enacted, the presidential term limit via the 22nd Amendment. While the cultural aspects that have kept a liberal democracy in place might be eroding, many of the systematic checks are still in place. Even with a tyranny of the majority it would be quite a feat to dismantle the democratic system within 8 years, or two presidential terms. Culturally America seems to be at a crossroads as to which governing system should be utilized, but the institution is robust enough to weather a temporarily unsettled public.