| ▲ | malfist 3 hours ago |
| There is no crisis in the US that results in canceled elections |
|
| ▲ | lesuorac 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| We're talking about the same guy that sent a second slate of electors for the 2020 election. The same guy that told the government of Georgia to add 10,000 votes to his total so he'd win. The same guy that received 0 punishment for either action. Why wouldn't he try something for the mid-terms? |
| |
| ▲ | epistasis 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Of course Trump will try something outrageous that would result in prison time for any other person. But I think that the states are also still independent, mostly ruled by law rather than man, and there's limited troop power to interfere. Trump is not all powerful, unless everybody gives up their power. Not everybody is as weak as the SV elite, and the failures of Big Law and others that bent the knee were very instructive to everybody else. Bowing down to the king makes you his servant, but it does not protect you in any way. | |
| ▲ | spwa4 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Let's hope next year we laugh about this with the question with "And why did he have any expectation it was going to work?". | | |
| ▲ | wheelerwj 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | No man, thats not going to fly. No one ever got anything done by just hoping. Get started now. | | |
| ▲ | 1-more an hour ago | parent [-] | | Started doing what? Distributing Maoist literature and rifles, or donating to Act Blue, or something in the middle? |
|
| |
| ▲ | skywhopper 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yes, and Georgia refused. American elections are a lot more complicated than you seem to believe. There’s plenty to worry about in specific locations, but the federal government has no direct control over any of the voting processes or policies. | | |
| ▲ | bryanlarsen 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The Federal government has some direct control and lots of indirect control. Relevant right now is the horrible Save America act. | | |
| ▲ | malfist 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It doesn't. This is a power specifically granted to states. The Save America act is unconstitutional. | | |
| ▲ | lamontcg 40 minutes ago | parent [-] | | More than half the SCOTUS is corrupt and bought off, and the Republican Party in congress is just rubber-stamping what Trump wants. I don't have a lot of faith in the word "unconstitutional" anymore. |
| |
| ▲ | 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
| |
| ▲ | FireBeyond 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > The same guy that received 0 punishment for either action. and > but the federal government has no direct control over any of the voting processes Coming soon, to polling booths near you, "random" ICE activity. |
| |
| ▲ | gdulli 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Well he and his people are far too stupid and incompetent to have come close to succeeding. While it's not great that there was no punishment, we should at least be thankful that they act on emotion and can only loosely follow playbooks for corruption from the past rather than write new ones for modern times. | | |
| ▲ | nemo136 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | They still kill a lot of people and, through their actions/inaction, let many others be killed. | |
| ▲ | Gud 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yeah so stupid he managed to become president | | |
| ▲ | krapp 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes. He wasn't elected for his intellect, because Americans don't trust intellect. He was elected for his attitude and personality. |
| |
| ▲ | xbar 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I am surprised to see that this kind of complacency remains. The corruption competence of this body of actors is as impressive as it is horrific. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | scruple 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What's the basis for this war in Iran? Did that stop this administration? This is akin to pointing out that it's actually illegal to drive 30 mph over the speed limit. |
|
| ▲ | jagged-chisel 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I’m keeping a link to this comment to see how well it ages |
| |
| ▲ | margalabargala 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's currently historically accurate. It's aged 250 years so far. Civil war? Elections. WWII? Elections. Covid? Elections. | | |
| ▲ | Teever an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | In your world view is it possible for empires to fall? If so, why do you think this is not relevant to this particular empire at this particular time? | |
| ▲ | financetechbro 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Wake up. Things are different this time in case you haven’t noticed | | |
| ▲ | malfist 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Things are absolutely different, but there is no mechanism in the constitution for canceling elections. | |
| ▲ | margalabargala 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yes, of course they are different. We're not embroiled in an active Civil War with tens of thousands dead and a third of the country having seceded. Most things are different from that. | |
| ▲ | nostrademons 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | They may be, but if there are no elections, there is no United States. Constitutionally, its government is predicated on having elected representatives. I could see Trump trying this, but I also can see dozens of other people or groups, some richer, more powerful, more competent, and more ruthless than Trump, just waiting in the wings for the guardrails to come off to make a play to rule the territory of the former United States. If he tries and succeeds at this it's open-season. It's not a Trump dictatorship, it's a civil war, akin to the Chinese Civil War after the emperor fell or the Syrian civil war after the Arab Spring. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | AftHurrahWinch 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Agreed. The United States had an election in 1864, while the states were literally at war with each other. |
| |
| ▲ | miltonlost 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yeah... because Lincoln wasn't a wanna-be tyrant like Trump. The leaders in charge of the elections are diametrically different people. Lincoln fought to keep the Union together; Trump tried to cause a coup to stay in charge in Jan 2020. My god. | | |
| ▲ | Imustaskforhelp 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The name of Lincoln and Trump cannot and shouldn't be used within the same sentence. Lincoln's story is inspiring and you can see him worried about his country and he grew up learning law books being poor and rose up to power. Lincoln says, "With malice toward none, with charity for all" Trump is the exact opposite of Lincoln being "With malice towards all, with charity for none" The irony of the situation is that they are from the same party. He believed that the greatest danger to America came from within, warning that if the nation faltered, it would be due to self-destruction rather than external forces Lincoln's famous speech: , "At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide." Lincoln was ahead of his time and might as well have predicted something like Trump. | |
| ▲ | NetMageSCW 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | SideburnsOfDoom 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | This is just not thought through. If I try to rob a bank with a plastic toy gun, the charge which I would be arrested for would not be "bad behavior that had no chance of accomplishing anything", it would be "bank robbery". Just "bank robbery", full stop. The abject failure of my attempt would have no bearing at all on that charge. The argument that "he had no chance of accomplishing anything" has no bearing at all on intent. "He didn't try" is not in any sense the same thing as "he was nowhere close to succeeding". The goalposts have moved between those 2 statements. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | esalman 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yet. |
|
| ▲ | augusto-moura 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| In the current laws you mean, dictatorships usually start by throwing current laws out of the window. Not that I believe Trump would do that, but it is not unheard of in other parts of the world |
| |
| ▲ | readthenotes1 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | If they have one, First they start by replacing the Supreme Court with their own minions. Start to worry of the Republicans start talking about expanding the Supreme Court to add their own to it | | |
| ▲ | NetMageSCW 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | That play already showed its limits with the tariff decision. They can’t stuff the Supreme Court with followers. | | |
|
|
