Straight Dope Message Board

[Mundane Super Hero]

All over the internet there seems to be quite a few Alt-Right, Punk-Republicans attempting to foment some type of Shay's Rebellion from members of the Democratic Party with everything from videos showing assaults of peaceful protesters, to out and out threats from days-old accounts, to threats of a suspended election from the Executive.
It is everywhere I look on the internet, like a well funded and coordinated campaign.

Now, it's easy to tell these people to go F-ck themselves, but this holiday season why not do it with style?

https://action.dccc.org/pdf/knowyour...2019_print.pdf 51

[kayaker]

Originally Posted by jz78817

’cos I’m not your buddy, friend!

Originally Posted by cochrane

Yeah, well I'm not your friend, guy!

Between the two of you, you've got Buddy Guy! 52

[cochrane]

Originally Posted by RickJay

Wanna bet?


The address the last statement first, "refusing to step down" is meaningless. The President doesn't step down. The Presidency isn't something you can possess. If Trump loses the election, what happens is some other person is sworn in on January 20, 2021, and then that person starts doing the job. Trump can actually barricade himself in the Oval Office; he still wouldn't be the President.

As to the former, no he will not. Republicans are liars and cheaters, of course, and will cheat in the election. But the cheating won't be to postpone the election, it'll be to rig it. Most of this is pretty out in the open, but I've no doubt there will be some slimier under the table stuff. If the Republicans wanted to cheat - and they do - trying to postpone the election is the worst way to do so. It would be a far more logical approach to try to win it by nefarious means.

Some of the people putting forth these conspiracy theories seem to have no idea how our republic works. 53

[Loach]

Originally Posted by Smapti

And with Bush in 2004, and Clinton in 2000. I think the only president in my lifetime who I haven't heard accused of plotting to cancel the election was Bush Sr.

Nope heard it then too. 54

[Hari Seldon]

Originally Posted by Northern Piper

I am reassured, but I thought you appeared by hologram in the Time Vault after the Crisis had passed, not in the lead-up to it.

I came early this time. Wait till you see me after the election. 55

[Gatopescado]

Originally Posted by Tim R. Mortiss

Why bother? The Democrats still haven't accepted the outcome of the 2016 election.

Which outcome? 56

[Personal]

Originally Posted by Der Trihs

The American Right has always preferred rigged elections over suspending them. If they were in a position to suspend the elections they wouldn't; instead they'd do something like surround the polling places with thugs with orders to drive off any brown people or women who try to vote.

Try to pull that shit with my mother. I can't believe that people believe this. 57

[Velocity]

Originally Posted by asahi

That's just a patently ignorant response. Check out some of the elections worldwide in which the political loser refuses to accept election outcomes, or in which outcomes are contested. It ain't pretty. I know we're exceptional all, except that, we're not really as exceptional as we think.

Well then, please fight my ignorance. Suppose Trump throws a hissy fit after the votes are counted, in which Biden or Warren has indisputably beaten him by a large margin. What is the response of everyone going to be, but, "Dole lost and left, Gore lost and left, Kerry lost and left, McCain lost and left, Romney lost and left, Hillary lost and left, and you are going to depart the Oval Office at precisely noon on Inauguration Day 2021 whether you like it or not, courtesy of the hands and arms of four Secret Service agents dragging you out to a waiting helicopter?"

Edit: Also, as RickJay mentioned, at noon on Inauguration Day, every branch of the U.S. bureaucracy, military, etc. is simply going to start taking orders from President-Elect Warren or Biden or whomever. Trump can have the White House as his playroom forever and it wouldn't make a bit of difference.

Originally Posted by RickJay

Wanna bet?

MarcusFlavius, I'd like to join in on this bet. Give me odds of anything you want. 100 to 1. Even 1000 to 1. I'll bet you the elections aren't getting canceled. 58

[kopek]

1) There will be a 2020 election.

2) Some of the results will probably be decided in court.

3) No matter what the results about 20% of the people will hate them, 20% love them, and 60% wishing we would just get over it all already. 59

[Inigo Montoya]

The election will happen. Trump may not like the result. I'm not sure he has enough of the right sorts of allies to prevent his being physically removed from the White House if he decides he doesn't agree with handing over power to a new occupant. And the nature of his preferred shenanigans is established well enough that nobody will buy whatever cockamamie scheme he hatches to nullify the result. Which is not to say he won't TRY something, just that it won't come close to working. 60

[Velocity]

Originally Posted by Inigo Montoya

I'm not sure he has enough of the right sorts of allies to prevent his being physically removed from the White House if he decides he doesn't agree with handing over power to a new occupant.

Again, the president and White House are completely separate entities. The new incoming president doesn't need the White House for anything - he or she has power by mere virtue of being president. Ex-President Trump could build a tent fort with blankets in the Oval Office from January 2021 to the end of his life and it wouldn't mean a thing. 61

[Inigo Montoya]

True-ish enough. But the place has infrastructure built in that makes it a really convenient place to preside from. I suppose the new kid could just lock the front door when T goes out to get his daily Happy Meal and that would be that. Now I'm going to have visions of a raggedy old man Trump skulking about the grounds, peeping in windows, and muttering to himself. 62

[skyr]

The odds seem to favor that Trump will be re-elected, but if Trump does actually lose the election, I am pretty confident he will just go back to shitposting on Twitter and there will not be any kind of civil war. After all, there have been very hotly contested elections pretty much every election (except maybe Reagan v. Mondale - which some of the Dem candidates definitely could bring us back to)
There are plenty of fascists in the world, but the POTUS ain't one of them.
If you want to better understand what fascism (or really authoritarianism I suppose) actually looks like, try going to Tiananman Square and yell "FUCK XI JINPING!". See what happens to you after that. Or just look at how people in Hollywood scream about how awful Trump is all day without any fear, yet most of them do not have the courage to confront China (which now owns a good amount of American tech and entertainment, btw) over the Chinese govt's killing of the Hong Kong protesters.
Those are the people you should be really worried about - the people you aren't allowed to criticize. The people that everyone is afraid to criticize.
People like you and Stephen Colbert are in absolutely no danger despite constantly bitching about Trump, and that's all you need to know to realize he is not actually a fascist or authoritarian. 63

[road_lobo]

Originally Posted by Marcus Flavius

I think that there is a possibility that we may not have a 2020 election. In some way or another...

Did Amazon have a sale on weasel words? 64

[RTFirefly]

Originally Posted by Johanna

We wuz robbed. That was the 2017 election for the Virginia House of Delegates in the 94th district. The Democratic candidate, Shelly Simonds, won the recount by one vote. That gave the House of Delegates a Democratic majority for the first time in years, by the slimmest margin: one seat. Thereupon the judges ruled one previously invalidated ballot was now valid and counted for the Republican, making a tie. They pulled the Republican name out of a bowl and made him the winner, giving the House of Delegates back to Republican control by that one seat.

All they did was delay the inevitable Democratic majority by two years. Just this month both the House and Senate flipped to Democratic majorities! All's well that ends well?

Correct except for one detail: if Simonds had been declared the winner in 2017, neither party would have had a majority in the House of Delegates; it would have been a 50-50 tie for control of the HoD. Yancey ultimately being declared the winner gave the GOP a 51-49 majority there.

If Simonds had won, life would have been interesting. In Virginia, the Lieutenant Governor plays a similar role in the state Senate as the Vice President does in the U.S. Senate, so if the state Senate ever was divided 20-20 (there are 40 state Senators in Virginia), the LtGov's party would control the Senate.

But there are no rules concerning who has control if the HoD is evenly divided. Life in Richmond would have gotten really, really interesting. 65

[RTFirefly]

Originally Posted by RickJay

The address the last statement first, "refusing to step down" is meaningless. The President doesn't step down. The Presidency isn't something you can possess. If Trump loses the election, what happens is some other person is sworn in on January 20, 2021, and then that person starts doing the job. Trump can actually barricade himself in the Oval Office; he still wouldn't be the President.

And if Trump barricaded himself in the Oval Office, the Secret Service would remove him - as gently as possible, I'm sure, but firmly. 66

[Mijin]

Originally Posted by skyr

The odds seem to favor that Trump will be re-elected, but if Trump does actually lose the election, I am pretty confident he will just go back to shitposting on Twitter and there will not be any kind of civil war. After all, there have been very hotly contested elections pretty much every election

The fact that the election is hotly-contested is not the basis for anyone here being concerned.
I for one have never worried about the possibility of civil unrest following any modern western election. In 2016, I thought if trump lost there might be a handful of crazies, but nothing large-scale.
This time, I really think there are enough crazies for potentially either large scale unrest / violence for a short time, or some kind of cult that operates on a smaller scale indefinitely.

There are plenty of fascists in the world, but the POTUS ain't one of them.
If you want to better understand what fascism (or really authoritarianism I suppose) actually looks like, try going to Tiananman Square and yell "FUCK XI JINPING!". See what happens to you after that.

Bit of a bait and switch there. That Trump has not yet managed to transform america in this way doesn't mean he doesn't want to.

His actual words advocate for fascist ideals in just about every conceivable way (do we need to go through the definition of fascism side by side with trump quotes?) and his attempts to compress all the branches of government into a united pool of lackeys, use of misinformation / erode all trust in the media etc support this. 67

[Chronos]

[Moderating]

Originally Posted by Ambivalid

Smh. You and the OP would make a cute couple. Maybe you could PM him a sexy selfie?

This is wholly inappropriate. I'm only stepping in here because a lot of folks are unavailable today, and I'll let the regular IMHO moderators decide what sanctions, if any, to take. But I will say that you need to not post things like this. 68

[jz78817]

Originally Posted by Inigo Montoya

The election will happen. Trump may not like the result. I'm not sure he has enough of the right sorts of allies to prevent his being physically removed from the White House if he decides he doesn't agree with handing over power to a new occupant. And the nature of his preferred shenanigans is established well enough that nobody will buy whatever cockamamie scheme he hatches to nullify the result. Which is not to say he won't TRY something, just that it won't come close to working.

Two things about the Secret Service:

1) they DO NOT fuck around
2) they are beholden to the President. If someone new is inaugurated in January 2021, that person is who they are sworn to protect. Not the one who refuses to vacate.

(yes, I'm aware presidents are granted security by the Secret Service after they leave office, but that doesn't mean they're still president.) 69

[Mijin]

That would be a great movie...one Secret Service team protecting trump, and another trying to throw his fat ass out, with shit getting progressively more real.
ETA: White House Clown 70

[Mundane Super Hero]

Originally Posted by jz78817

(yes, I'm aware presidents are granted security by the Secret Service after they leave office, but that doesn't mean they're still president.)

I could have sworn that I read something dating back to the first year of his presidency that he always preferred his 'Trump Brand' private security ( aka Trump MERCs ) to Secret Service.

Of course, that could have all been for show as this president Lies like a Rug. 71

[Ají de Gallina]

Maybe some Americans should go live in countries with actual political problems and acutal compícated elections; man, stop whinning like silly babies.e 72

[Anny Middon]

On a related note, what if something happens that makes it impossible to hold an election in a big section or two of the US?

Suppose there's a major earthquake in Southern California that devastates the state from San Diego to Santa Barbara. At the same time, a hurricane destroys much of Florida, Alabama and Mississippi. Does the election happen as usual in the rest of the country, with the results held until the affected areas can hold their election? Does the whole country wait until elections can be held simultaneously? How big an area would there have to be where elections are impossible to hold results until the people there have a chance to vote? If for instance for some reason, Dayton (population about 140,000) can't hold an election, what happens?

A few years ago, there was speculation that a dedicated group of hackers could take down the entire electrical grid of the US. I don't think it's possible in much (all?) of the country to hold an election without power. So what happens? I think it's obvious that the election will be rescheduled, but who decides when it would be held? 73

[Inigo Montoya]

Originally Posted by Ají de Gallina

Maybe some Americans should go live in countries with actual political problems and acutal compícated elections; man, stop whinning like silly babies.e

jesus. "No crying about domestic politics when there's an Irishman in the room." If you want to summarily dismiss someone's gripe, "First world problems" already has currency. 74

[bengangmo]

What happens if two weeks prior to the election a Trump political appointee uses their position to have the democratic nominee arrested on demonstrably false, trumped up charges?
Takes more than two weeks to sort it out, but is found later that evidence was falsified.
Naturally the perpetrator is guilty of a crime, but the orange one just provides a pardon - a lovely big cash payment
Impeachable offense? Yeah right, with the current crop of republicans like that's gonna happen.
Anyway - even if he is impeached, the next is line is still a republican 75

[Pardel-Lux]

I think a little bit of paranoia can be heathy in bringing up a self-defeating prophecy, so the OP's question can be sane. But do not overdo it, please: then it would stop being healthy and might even turn self-fulfilling. Trump is by nature a cheater and will try to cheat, if he feels like losing he might try to cancel the election. If enough people support him then it would get nasty. And Putin is an opportunist that would gladly stoke the flames. Don't provide them with an excuse. But I think this is not very likely, as I reckon that the majority of US citizens are not evil fools. Only some. 76

[RioRico]

This POTUS has expended extreme effort to keep his financial records secret, likely IMHO because we would learn who/what owns him and that his actions meet the constitutional definition of treason. A fear I've expressed before: He will take horribly drastic steps to prevent such exposure.

How horrible? WMD attacks on convenient enemy states or false-flag WMD strikes on the US; uncovering alleged conspiracies; any excuse to declare martial law, round up dissidents, and impose Order. Citizens not yet jailed had better vote right.

Do I think such WILL happen? Not really. I hope our system is not so fragile. But I fear it COULD happen. 77

[ftg]

The location of PotUS has no bearing at all on his/her ability to be PotUS.

A newly inaugurated PotUS is still PotUS if they are in Minot, SD.

A former PotUS is no longer PotUS even if they are sitting in the Oval Office.

Not a single thing the former PotUS does would be consider an act of office. Could not order the military to do anything, could not sign legislation, could not make appointments, etc. The new PotUS could do all of those things.

As a private citizen, being in the WH without authorization is a crime. All the usual procedures apply just like with anyone else. Police make an arrest, take the person away, charges are filed, etc. The SS would assist in this, not hinder it. 78

[septimus]

Chances are good that the 2020 election will proceed "normally" — i.e. with lots of GOP cheating but without a scandal sufficient to cause major civil insurrection. If Trump loses, many Republicans will be happy to see him go anyway.

But the idea that the GOP observes the rule of law is absurd. Right now, they are defying legally-issued subpoenas. Potus has surrounded himself with criminals. If a GOP state government sees some political advantage in obstructing the election it won't hesitate to do so. For example, if a devastating hurricane shuts down part of Florida on Election Day, the decision to reschedule the election will be based entirely on whether the affected area leans D or R.

Originally Posted by Velocity

MarcusFlavius, I'd like to join in on this bet. Give me odds of anything you want. 100 to 1. Even 1000 to 1. I'll bet you the elections aren't getting canceled.

Define your terms exactly; then we'll talk. I may only want to risk $200 or so. Would it be worth your time to put a mere $200,000 into escrow? 79

[Balthisar]

Is this a joke? The idiot in chief has done stupid shit, but also good shit. We're nowhere close to a Constitutional crisis, popular uprising, or coup d'etat. Where do stupid questions such as this originate? 80

[Bijou Drains]

If somehow things look really bad next summer for Trump I can see him quitting and say it's for health reasons. But the odds of that are 5% at best. 81

[jz78817]

Originally Posted by Balthisar

Is this a joke? The idiot in chief has done stupid shit, but also good shit. We're nowhere close to a Constitutional crisis, popular uprising, or coup d'etat. Where do stupid questions such as this originate?

people who think history started the day they were born. 82

[DrCarioca]

Originally Posted by Marcus Flavius

There has never been a period in American history as crazy as this one...

Well, the Civil War was pretty crazy... 83

[eenerms]

Originally Posted by DrCarioca

Well, the Civil War was pretty crazy...

This..
also,
The Depression was pretty Crazy
Civil rights era was pretty crazy
The Cuban missal crisis was pretty crazy

This is the age of social media and hyperbole.
People don’t like or like the President because either he’s a outsider and that’s bad or he’s an outsider and that’s good. We’ll survive it. Shrug. 84

[ftg]

Look at Agnew/Nixon. First Agnew resigned (not a first for VP). Ford was appointed VP. (A first due to a new constitutional amendment.) Nixon resigned (a first) and Ford became President. First time anyone became President without being elected to at least VP.

And that wasn't the only crazy thing in that era. From ~1964-1974 a whole lot of unusual things happened. Far more unusual than now. (And there were rumors in 1972 that Nixon was going to cancel the election if he thought he was going to lose.)

And, as people have pointed out, this wasn't the strangest period in our history yet. 85

[Saint Cad]

Can we declare that the official first-day of the Presidential election season is when a straight dope member asks if it is true the next presidential election won't be held? 86

[Brayne Ded]

Only if the Democrats can't come up with a candidate. Which they will, even if the main criterion is a pulse. 87

[RioRico]

Originally Posted by Saint Cad

Can we declare that the official first-day of the Presidential election season is when a straight dope member asks if it is true the next presidential election won't be held?

Only if the question is asked immediately after the prior inauguration, which is when the next season starts. We no longer pause between presidential terms; it's continuous. Get the organizing and fundraising started FAST or you're a loser.

Crazy times now, and past? Yes, because crazy country, now and past and forever. Who said America grew from infancy to senility without passing maturity? America is more an idea than a place. No, the country has not yet imploded; but "past performance is no guarantee of future results," as a stock prospectus may warn.

Yes, it can all go to shit... if we let it. 88

[EarlGrayHot]

I'm sorry but no. We will have an election because the Constitution says so. 89

[Mijin]

Originally Posted by eenerms

People don’t like or like the President because either he’s a outsider and that’s bad or he’s an outsider and that’s good. We’ll survive it. Shrug.

I feel that this kind of comment really minimizes what is happening.
Yes Trump is an outsider and so was Reagan (to a lesser degree, but still).

The difference is that we have someone utterly corrupt and craven in the white house, who flouts the law in plain sight, and has found a party and political climate willing to acquiesce to that.
I think the Ukraine thing is worse, and definitely more brazen than Watergate, and yet half the population sees nothing wrong, and a good chunk of those think the real crime is being perpetrated by the "deep state" or whatever. Many on the religious right see trump as some kind of savior.

For me, it's not enough to say we've been through a lot in the past. I see no guarantee that Democracy and the separation of powers is going to survive this, especially since both are already critically damaged at this point. 90

[eenerms]

Originally Posted by Mijin

I feel that this kind of comment really minimizes what is happening.
Yes Trump is an outsider and so was Reagan (to a lesser degree, but still).

The difference is that we have someone utterly corrupt and craven in the white house, who flouts the law in plain sight, and has found a party and political climate willing to acquiesce to that.
I think the Ukraine thing is worse, and definitely more brazen than Watergate, and yet half the population sees nothing wrong, and a good chunk of those think the real crime is being perpetrated by the "deep state" or whatever. Many on the religious right see trump as some kind of savior.

For me, it's not enough to say we've been through a lot in the past. I see no guarantee that Democracy and the separation of powers is going to survive this, especially since both are already critically damaged at this point.

I don’t buy this, just saying. 91

[Inigo Montoya]

Originally Posted by eenerms

I don’t buy this, just saying.

Which part? The accurate stuff about Trump and who supports him? Or the assertion that the USA as we know it is very likely to change in the near future? 92

[begbert2]

Originally Posted by eenerms

People don’t like or like the President because either he’s a outsider and that’s bad or he’s an outsider and that’s good.

I'd just like to chime in that this is ludicrous - it's wrong about the motivations of both pro and anti-Trump folks. As in, absurdly wrong. 93

[RioRico]

Originally Posted by EarlGrayHot

I'm sorry but no. We will have an election because the Constitution says so.

The Constitution says treaties are the supreme law of the land; the US has broken those since Washington's term. It contains emoluments clauses, many voting rights articles, and various other bits this slimeball willfully violates. Dubya called the Constitution "just a scrap of paper" and Tramp wipes his butt with it. Wishful thinking won't ensure an election, especially not a "free and fair" election, which is nowhere guaranteed.

We've no guarantees either of honest, transparent vote counts. And that's just what Team Tramp and their Russian master want: to dis-empower democracy, to dis-unite the American union. Tramp has already threatened civil war. That's the endgame.

Something called an "election" may indeed occur in November 2020. But no guarantees. 94

[RickJay]

Originally Posted by RioRico

The Constitution says treaties are the supreme law of the land; the US has broken those since Washington's term. It contains emoluments clauses, many voting rights articles, and various other bits this slimeball willfully violates. Dubya called the Constitution "just a scrap of paper" and Tramp wipes his butt with it. Wishful thinking won't ensure an election, especially not a "free and fair" election, which is nowhere guaranteed.

The story goes that he called it just a "piece" of paper, and in all likelihood the story is complete bullshit. 95

[Northern Piper]

And even then, if he said it was just a piece of paper, context is important. I’ve heard people say things like «a constitution is just a piece of paper unless the people believe in it.»

Any linky-link-link, RioRico? 96

[Northern Piper]

«Scrap of paper» is more commonly associated with Chancellor Bethman-Holleweg and Germany’s invasion of Belgium in WWI.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_London_(1839) 97