view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:

- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
What part of “vote in rigged election” is a “viable” strategy?
1964, Presidential Election (LBJ vs Goldwater):
Johnson won 61% of the popular vote. Even if there had been a concerted effort to rig the election against Johnson, it would have had to be so widespread and obvious that it would have been either stopped immediately, or it would have resulted in a new civil war. Getting that many people voting the right way should be the goal; make the margin of victory so wide as to be impossible to overcome via subtle chicanery.
If they still try to steal the election in those circumstances, then there will be violence, which is the only other option for changing government, so we might as well try having the election before the violence.
TLDR:
There have already been extremely obvious attempts to steal US elections. The guy in charge right now tried to lead one. Some were even successful. People weren't rioting in the street or overthrowing the government when Bush got handed the election by the supreme court, and that's a much more recent precedent that refers to a successful steal, rather than a failed one.
Did anyone who tried to rig this one election 80 years ago face consequences? Were any measures taken by those in power to prevent another attempt?