this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2024
466 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19159 readers
4474 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
 

You don’t need to be an expert in electoral politics to understand Rule One of any campaign: Candidates should pursue as many votes as possible. In a democracy, it’s common sense: The more votes a campaign has, the greater the chance of success.

With this in mind, Donald Trump appears to have a counterintuitive rhetorical habit. The New Republic noted:

On Fox News Thursday morning, Donald Trump had a weird instruction for his supporters: they don’t have to vote. “My instruction: We don’t need the votes, I have so many votes,” Trump said on Fox & Friends before going on a rant about how much support he has in Florida.

As a clip from the show makes clear, the former president didn’t appear to be kidding: https://x.com/atrupar/status/1816482779581775943

If the phrasing sounded at all familiar, it’s not your imagination. The day after last month’s presidential debate, for example, Trump held a rally in Virginia and told attendees, “We don’t need votes.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 167 points 3 months ago (6 children)

He's going to attack the capital. Again.

[–] [email protected] 104 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Attacking capital is great, it's attacking capitols I have a problem with

[–] [email protected] 59 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Last time they only got in because Trump stopped the security forces from doing their job. This time it will be different.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

Get rekt, Jackson!

[–] [email protected] 42 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Attacking the capital was a last-ditch hail mary move, and only viable when he controlled the military.

They're going to use baseless conspiracies to try to fuck with the election certification enough (with an assist from the courts) to force a contingent election in the House, where they'll likely have a majority of state delegations.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 months ago

Well, that's terrifying

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The whole Republicans house is in on it again. They have a multi-prong plan to seize the White House, from voter suppression to elector rigging, gerrymandering and outright violent intimidation. The coup will be much better planned this time.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Yeah, but if you know that then certainly the current administration knows that.

Last I checked Biden still controlled the NSA, CIA, and FBI.

Do y'all really thing something being "legal" is all it takes?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Love to see the face of Jan 6 2.0 rioters, when they realized someone in power actually wants to stop them this time

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

You made me think of Vincent Vega, beause this is how I feel about that prospect.

Boy, I wish I could've caught him doing it. I'd have given anything to catch that asshole doing it. It'd been worth him doing it just so I could've caught him doing it.

Bring it on, traitors.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

They don't need a riot this time. Mike Johnson will refuse to recognize the results and then the house will vote for the next president with each state receiving one vote. Republicans control a majority of house delegations, so they will vote for Trump.

The riot was a smokescreen. It was to buy time to strong arm the state legislatures and convince Mike Pence to not certify the results. With Johnson on board, they can forget the smokescreen and just steal the election in plain sight.

They only need the house of representatives to steal a presidential election. The only thing that could stop it is some house Republicans voting with Democrats to remove Mike Johnson as speaker. (Or, I guess, finding their conscience and voting for Harris as a state delegation.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago

Way harder to do when you aren’t the sitting president

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

He's going to attack the ~~capital~~ electoral process. Again.

This is why Democrats are saying the need to win overwhelmingly

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

He doesn't need to. He'll just the the Republican legislatures of swing states to send electors that will vote Trump regardless of November results.

And the worst part is that it's probably legal. The Constitution gives individutal state legislatures the authority to select electors in whatever way they wish, and they can probably change their method between the November election and the meeting of the electors in December if they decide they don't like the outcome.