376
Donald Trump announces plan to change elections
(www.newsweek.com)
This is why he wants to do that.
Thanks for putting that plain text from the top of the post into a jpeg down in the comments.
Not sure if you're being sarcastic, but I couldn't copy the plain text on jerboa, so I had to screen shot.
On Jerboa: Tap the three vertical dots menu in the original post, Copy > Copy post text.
Thank you!
When he declared Nov would be the last election, and winning it meant they wouldn't have to worry about elections again, he meant it!
He's doing exactly what he said he would do.
load more comments
(5 replies)
This is it folks. If he is able to transform our election system with his own two hands, we've had our last fair election, I guarantee it. Fraud will be baked in, circumventing any design elements that are ostensibly there to guard against it.
This is the scariest thing I've read since the election.
I'm expecting a third term now with 110% of the vote. NK style.
Like that scene at the end of The Dictator, when he finally holds election.
There are two vote boxes and all the citizens are queuing in front of the box that will vote for his opposition. A tank drives up next to that queue, and everyone leaves the opposition queue, rushing over to join the queue to vote for the dictator.
load more comments
(1 replies)
They weren't quiet about this being the last fair election we would have. I'm also not convinced it was actually a fair election.
But whatever...too late to bitch about the fascists now.
The writing has not even been on the wall here, it’s been part of the plan all along, he’s been saying it all along and it’s obvious after he tried to violently steal it last time.
We’re in a situation where our only hope I they are too incompetent to pull off the democracy destroying evil they are promising.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Goodbye democracy. We barely knew thee ...
Yeah, clearly opening the door to discuss further changes to the election process. It's dying, and he doesn't want more people voting, he wants less, if at all
Real "stop testing" energy here.
If we stop testing right now, we’d have very few cases, if any
"If we just stop voting, we'd have very few votes against me"
But.. it's the states that run elections, not the federal government. This doesn't make any sense.
Don’t worry, I’m sure all the small government conservatives will stop this!
scotus would have to literally rewrite the constitution for the feds to have that much control over states' elections.
owait.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
And you'll have to wait 10 hours to vote on a workday because they've limited voting locations to one every million people - like they already do in Georgia.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"mandating paper ballots... while eliminating mail-in voting."
Does he not know mail in ballots are paper ballots? 🤔
The point is to eliminate voting options, the "justifications" are made up. Anything that moves closer to "not being able to vote" is the goal.
load more comments
(2 replies)
"We're gonna do things that have been really needed for a long time," he said. "And we are gonna look at elections. We want to have paper ballots, one day voting, voter ID, and proof of citizenship."
This should come with a national day off for voting, and mandatory voting requirement.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Party that loves the troops want to eliminate way the troops vote.
fuck that, mail in voting has done so much good and it's a prime step in stopping all this. if we had national mail in voting things would get better fast so no wonder they don't want it.
what would this mean for states that already do this
I think we all know what the party of small government and states rights thinks of states doing things they don’t agree with.
load more comments
(3 replies)
This motherfucker better be in a Popemobile 24/7. I got a bad feeling about this guy's future existence.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Something something constitution
Article I, Section 4, Clause 1:
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S4-C1-2/ALDE_00013577/
What was that about States rights?
Oh, yeah, they only matter when they do what you want.
Oregon has entirely mail-in voting, since the 1990s. Good luck getting us to give it up.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
Still following putin I see. Wait until he tries to change Presidential term limits.
Wouldn’t he basically need a constitutional amendment to do this. Which would be almost impossible these days.
Hard to say. voting is up to states for methodology but like we did have restrictions on state due to discrimation till recently that would not allow them to change their rules or purge voters like they do again nowadays.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
Too bad for him the constitution clearly states "the states shall decide" - which is why we have the hodgepodge patchwork bullshit we have now. So he may want to change it, but unless he actually does light the Constitution on fire, this is unlikely to go anywhere.
omm... the Republicans have the supreme court and are in the process of lighting the constitution on fire as we speak?
load more comments
(1 replies)
cuts out 80% of the elderly vote in one swift motion
cuts out unprepared idiots who don't know any better before they leave their house
There goes his voters.
If he really wants to standardize voting at the national level, I think this might actually backfire on the GOP in the long run. Mail-in voting and early voting is extremely popular across the political spectrum, while lazy ignorant old people, the life blood of the GOP for over fifty years, often don't carry ID or even know where theirs is.
Shutting down polling stations in democratic areas has been part of the disenfranchisement strategy to-date. I’m sure this policy is one step of a few to try and permanently take power…
'"f I win, you'll never have to vote again!"
-shitler
load more comments
(1 replies)
Anyone else get those Republican mailers that said to be sure to get your mail-in ballot early? (I mean, like, a bunch of them.)
Jesus fuck. If this asshole gets rid of mail-in voting in Colorado...our voting system here is FANTASTIC.
The qons ruin every thing. They plan on making everyone miserable and breaking everything.
I am forced to file taxes every year and being a US citizen fucks my ability to invest in the retirement plans here because they all end up being PFICs which the IRS heavily penalizes. Fuck you, you're not taking my rights away. Forcing me to travel to not only the US, but to the state where I'm registered is not OK as that is thousands of dollars and days to accomplish.
Maybe it's just me, but it feels like a bad idea to do something that disenfranchises people at the moment.
load more comments
(3 replies)
In elections where there needs to be a single winner so proportional representation does not work, how about this (already works in several EU countries):
Round 1: Anyone can participate if they have enough signatures. If anyone gets the majority vote, they automatically win and there is no round 2.
Round 2, 1 or 2 weeks later: Top 2 candidates from Round 1. No votes are carried over. Popular vote wins.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Lmao good luck with that constitutional amendment, Donnie.
This half-baked nonsense is dead at conception because once again Republicans prove they don't understand government.
It's a shame that, despite not understanding government, they're about to have unfettered control of it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2024
376 points (97.5% liked)
politics
19223 readers
2974 users here now
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS