700
submitted 3 months ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/politics@lemmy.world

cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/42694823

Trump has no power to “decree” that voters must present ID or to end mail-in balloting. But that doesn’t mean he can’t at least try both. Under the Insurrection Act or some other dusty statute, he can declare a state of emergency. Then he can decide that said state permits, nay requires, him to take extraordinary measures. On October 5, say, that might mean outlawing early voting. By October 13, it might mean no mail-in voting. By October 29, a reminder that all voters must present ID to vote. And by Sunday, November 1, two days before the election—an announcement that all these “reasonable” measures have alas failed, and he is now forced, against his will, to postpone the election.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 187 points 3 months ago

Back in 2024, Kamala Harris and the Democrats struggled to convince voters that a second Donald Trump term would constitute a serious threat to democracy. We can debate the effectiveness of her, and their, rhetoric. But on a certain level, it was a hard argument to make because it was hypothetical.

On what planet was it hypothetical.

Honestly. It's like everyone's still using fucking Windows. Fuck levels critical.

[-] johncandy1812@lemmy.ca 75 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

He couldn't have made his intentions any clearer. I think people just figured the Senate, SCOTUS and the DOJ would keep him in check. They didn't see him taking control of those to this extent.

Now people are about to find out just how much control he has over the military.

[-] nile_istic@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

Frankly, I don't really blame people for having faith in the guardrails. Generally speaking, whenever any truly progressive legislation (often labeled as "extremism") has been pushed forward, those guardrails have come up real quick. I understand why people thought that that would hold true for extremism in any direction. But it... well, doesn't.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] doesit@sh.itjust.works 28 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It's like people don't understand what happened and almost happened on J6.
If all fails he'll definitely do this again.
edit : grammar 🫣

[-] bearboiblake@pawb.social 19 points 3 months ago

"Trust me", said pro-genocide candidate Kamala Harris, who shows no interest in reigning in the billionaires and corporations rushing to support fascism. "I'm better than Trump. I support US imperialism politely."

[-] PoastRotato@lemmy.world 75 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

You're right. This is so much better.

[-] MooseWinooski@lemmy.ca 15 points 3 months ago
[-] username123@sh.itjust.works 16 points 3 months ago

The meme has a point, but thinking there are not degrees of undesirability  and instead equating everything undesireable is downright retarded. 

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] bearboiblake@pawb.social 12 points 3 months ago

I wonder if there is an option beyond simply picking between fascism and blue fascism

[-] MrVilliam@sh.itjust.works 57 points 3 months ago

Harris was imperialist and colonialist, but not fascist. It's ludicrous to equivocate trump and Harris as both being fascist.

And in any case, yeah, vote for progressives in primaries. I know that there wasn't a real primary for 24, but that has more to do with Biden not stepping aside soon enough than anything else. Dem voters are getting tired of establishment enablers, and DNC leadership is no longer interfering to pick favorites (see Mamdani's victory) so we could actually see progressives taking over the party.

You're painting a false equivalency (both sides the same) and pining for other options without actually offering a solution for how to get there, implying that we just stay home and not vote at all. You're the problem. If you don't like the fascism, vote against the fascist. If you don't like the non fascist option, tough shit because there may not be a next time if the fascist wins (and he did and here we are talking about suspending elections). If you actually want better Democrats in the general for the 26 elections, you need to start paying attention now because it's primary season already, and you can and should be donating/volunteering for who you believe in.

If you're being serious about wanting an option outside of the two parties, only one of them is open to things like ranked choice to get rid of first past the post and eliminating the electoral college so that it's people and not land doing the voting. Spoiler alert: convincing people to withhold their vote helps the other guys win, and they're thrilled to keep it a two party system. You may not like somebody milquetoast like Biden, but he course corrected and arrested the slip into fascism while getting some progressive stuff through. Not enough, but it's fucking silly to say that Harris was the same as Biden and also Harris is the same as trump.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 19 points 3 months ago

Oh no a reasonable rebuttal! Look at ‘em go! They cleared the fence!

[-] flandish@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

They are both capitalists and will therefore both trend toward fascim, albeit at different rates. But that trend toward is a very slippery one way street with entire world wars being necessary to only temporarily revert it and try new ways.

This is why it’s such a depressing mindfuck that the dems would rather remain the way they are instead of change. They want it. Just in a gaslit “guess we gotta be fasc” manner instead of trump’s “we are” manner.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zone 18 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Gotta break the two party system and the electoral college for it to be feasible. I would love for that to happen.

[-] Hapankaali@lemmy.world 51 points 3 months ago

"Yes, of course I will choose the pile of rusty nails dipped in horseshit over the stale sandwich for lunch. As the sandwich is not very appealing, this seems like the logical choice," said the well-balanced, rationally thinking individual.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] beelzebum@lemmy.world 31 points 3 months ago

Ive noticed that these guys are trying to start the same moral panic shit among Democratic voters to demotivate them this time around. For example, with Talarico - a key senate seat flip.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago

It’s definitely going to happen again. So-called moderate trump voters and our own LemLeft have learned nothing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

Shove it up your ass. We tried to save the Democrats from themselves in 2024 and people like you ran static interference so that the Dems could run on "more of the same" and ultimately lose the election.

[-] null@piefed.nullspace.lol 24 points 3 months ago

Funny, I don't remember seeing you promoting any progressive candidate for the the primaries.

Saw you wokescolding Kamala voters a lot though...

Must just be that you do the first part in communities I'm not in.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Throbbing_banjo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 3 months ago

Yeah you tried real hard, great fucking job

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Y'all wanted to lose the election, so thanks for ensuring that outcome.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 63 points 3 months ago

I mean, before he become president the first time he literally said that he would only accept the results if he wins.

I too hate how obvious and predictable it all was but people finally getting it is surprisingly also very annoying.

[-] WanderWisley@lemmy.world 26 points 3 months ago

He also said that if he was elected we would never have to vote again…

[-] jif@piefed.ca 49 points 3 months ago

Trump will never willingly step down.

[-] NutWrench@lemmy.ml 35 points 3 months ago

Trump doesn't get to say shit about how the States run their elections. Even if he "Hereby Do Dee-clares it."

[-] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 36 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

He isn't technically able to do most of the stuff he does do. He just does it, and then time passes and then it gets declared retroactively illegal... but it still happened. He'll probably get punished at some point... right?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago

That's true. The states can constitutionally tell him to go fuck himself. But I read a key phrase in another article that I tried to find and can't, to the effect that his plan involves ally states.

So lets say all but five states tell him to fuck himself and hold their elections. Five do not. They have just thrown the entire election and its results into massive constitutional confusion, with lawsuits for years to come while he just sits up there shitting his Depends and grinning. And it would work: whatever anyone says should be the answer, someone else will sue over.

Elections are a huge power grab for anyone who wants even a little power. No one is going to let their piece of the pie go easily, whether that means holding an election or not holding an election, or fighting those who want the opposite, in court, forever.

All he has to do is introduce confusion, and then it will be up to SCOTUS to decide.

And SCOTUS is as corrupt as the day is long.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 34 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Democrats couldn't resist letting trump run again.

[-] Wataba@sh.itjust.works 16 points 3 months ago

Non-voters couldn't resist letting him win again.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Formfiller@lemmy.world 32 points 3 months ago

Pedolini is at war with everyone

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 29 points 3 months ago

Back in 2024, Kamala Harris and the Democrats struggled to convince voters that a second Donald Trump term would constitute a serious threat to democracy.

I don't think anyone in the political space failed to recognize it as an existential threat; its that Harris didn't campaign as if it was an existential threat.

If it was such an existential threat, why would you actively disenfranchise your base?

If it was such an existential threat, why would you say things like "I would do nothing fundamentally different than the current administration", when the administration was DEEPLY unpopular?

If it was such an existential threat, why did you spend 1.5 billion dollars trying to court voters which you have never been able to get, specifically by elevating some of the least popular voices within their own party (eg, Liz Cheney and Republican voters)?

Nothing about how the Harris campaign operated beyond selecting Walz as VP demonstrated that they recognized Trump as an existential threat to Democracy. Voices were, in the course of the campaign, CLAMORING, for them to do better. They didn't listen and they chose the approaches they did.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] plyth@feddit.org 27 points 3 months ago

It's the Austin Powers steamroller joke. For some reasons, nothing can be done even though there is plenty of time.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] sturmblast@lemmy.world 22 points 3 months ago

Jan 6th happened once, it can happen again..

[-] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 3 months ago

J6 was a trial run.

They learned their lessons and they will do something else to usurp the democratic process. And this time it will work.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 months ago

A trial run without guns, at that.

This time they will be heavily armed and won't wait until people have voted.

They'll have ICE and other federal oppression agencies preventing eligible voters from exercising their rights.

Primarily nonwhite people and people who have ever been observed protesting injustice, but no vote is safe under fascism.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Ranulph@thelemmy.club 17 points 3 months ago

Well, I guess we will see how far he will go and by he I mean THEM and by them I mean the republicans.

[-] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 12 points 3 months ago

That means we have until October to bring down every data center in the country. Get to work.

[-] SnarkoPolo@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago

"planning"

I'd say it's already done. No one with any power has the balls to remove him.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2026
700 points (100.0% liked)

politics

30003 readers
2384 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS