this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
55 points (95.1% liked)

politics

19073 readers
3872 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter
aidan
jordanlund
HLMenckenFan
little_cow
55
Rachel Maddow: What Worries Me Most About Election Night (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/politics
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 43 points 2 months ago (4 children)

If the Republicans steal the election according to that nightmare house vote scenario, it will not end well for the country.

Democrats have taken the L on the presidency too many times despite having the popular vote. They will not take winning the popular vote AND winning the electoral college, but having it stolen by electors intentionally corrupting the process. There will be riots, in almost every city.

The lack of faith in the electoral system federally would collapse, and you'd see a lot more talk and probably even some action towards independence in certain states.

USSR 2.0

[–] n1ck_n4m3 32 points 2 months ago

Why do you think they keep saying "the transfer of power will be bloodless if the left lets it be"?

They're not even hiding it.

[–] aseriesoftubes 16 points 2 months ago

I agree. And I guarantee that the Republicans will pull some false equivalency bullshit in response: “oh, so January 6 was sooo bad, but it’s fine when the Dems do it?”

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Do you really think there will be an uprising? I feel like the age of revolution is over in the west. Protests yes, but those will ultimately be fruitless. I fear they will actually get away with it if it goes to House vote - the only way out is to win by enough of a margin that they can't bring Harris below 270.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I've thought for years now that the US will fracture during my lifetime. It's something that multiple state actors (like China, Russia, and Iran) are expending significant resources on achieving. Having the US break up would be massively beneficial for these countries.

Unfortunately it's working really well, the political divide in the US is absolutely massive right now. There really just needs to be a spark, and an election where the rest of the modern world actually considers it stolen would definitely fit into that category of possible ignition sources.

It probably won't matter though, having Georgia be the deciding factor has only a low chance of happening. So this may just be something that gets added to the pile of tinder, rather than being the spark.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I have an easier time believing the US fracturing and states declaring independence than I have the people revolting in an uprising should Trump steal the election through the House vote.

But I pray every day neither ends up happening. Despite not believing in God.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think you may have an odd definition of what "revolt" means.

A state declaring independence after having a referendum is well within the normal concept of "revolt"

It doesn't necessarily require people stabbing each other with bayonets on a battlefield or storming the capitol building or anything.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Fair enough.

[–] Eldritch 5 points 2 months ago

When peaceful change becomes impossible. Violent change becomes inevitable.

[–] Pronell 1 points 2 months ago

Damn the peacocks!

[–] Zerlyna 29 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Every state needs to help make Harris a clear winner.

[–] n1ck_n4m3 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Like GA, a battleground state, where they just made it legal for the elections board (3 Republicans and 2 Democrats) to refuse to certify the election results for absolutely no reason, indefinitely, without any burden of proof? Even if 100% of people in GA voted for Harris, they'd find some bullshit reason to refuse to certify the state's results. Kemp is too much of a fickle piece of shit to stand up against it, so we've already lost the state in November.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's literally what the article is about, you clearly didn't read it.

[–] n1ck_n4m3 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I absolutely read it, I was replying to the comment that "every state needs to help make Harris a clear winner" by pointing out that the Republicans literally already made it impossible to make Harris a clear winner in GA.

But ok, tell me more about what I did and didn't read.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It doesn't matter if Georgia certifies or not if Harris clearly wins enough states to get 270.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

both georgia and arizona have recently passed laws that allow their elected officials to effectively ignore the vote and most of the rest of the battleground states will have something similar too before the election; so where are those 270 votes going to come from?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

she'd be guaranteed to win if would say something small and simple like: we should stop bombing defenseless palestinians.

[–] Eldritch 8 points 2 months ago

No she wouldn't. I 100% agree we shouldn't be doing it mind you. But thats ignoring the reality of the situation and just seeing what you want to see.

Morally Israel should have been harshly rebuked decades ago, as well as today. There would be a lot of push back unfortunately. A lot of money, resources, and votes taken from any candidate that pushed back too hard. So it unfortunately becomes an either or choice. And not a simple do it and get everyone to vote for you type of situation.

The problem is ideologues and authoritarians don't understand the need for diplomacy or how it works. They simply jail and Slaughter those who disagree with them. Which in and of itself evolves to immorality. Unfortunately wherever humanity is involved you can have either power or Purity but not both.

[–] Bonesince1997 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

It's sad that this one issue is all that some people see. So much more is on the line.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

and all of it is less pressing than the imminent loss of life that they're experiencing where we can help by continuously applying pressure.

[–] slumlordthanatos 11 points 2 months ago

Since Republicans are using the law to dismantle the law, I fear that we're at a point where it is necessary for Biden and Democrats to break the law in order to save it. I don't have a lot of faith in that happening, but seeing Biden step aside for Harris makes me hope that they see the GOP as the existential threat that they are and weighing every option.

Regardless, we have to lend legitimacy to whatever they try to do, and we do that by running up the score in November. Harris has to win in dominating fashion, and if Republicans try to ratfuck their way into power, we cannot go quietly.

[–] MediaBiasFactChecker -5 points 2 months ago

New York Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for New York Times:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/19/opinion/trump-election-vote-certification.html?unlocked_article_code=1.EE4.lSqS.Z7Ll1PjFo_me&smid=url-share
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support