Judges (or at least, some judges) might declare it illegal within minutes.
How does that get the thugs out of the polling places?
Just to be clear, we’re still talking about the thugs that don’t exist, because the government has nowhere near the kind of manpower for an operation of this scale, right?
The threat of holding their bosses in contempt will do just fine, to say nothing of the fact that the punishment under the law for even ordering them to be there in the first place is a lifetime ban on ever holding federal office.
@sSmapti is surely correct that the feds do not run the federal elections; the 50 states do. But he’s utterly missing / ignoring something real key about that correct fact.
All the fascists need to do is mess with a few gerrymandered blue congressional districts in reliably red states with already red already criminal state governments and state electoral authorities who’re partisan hacks.
Every place they do that, using state level manpower and maybe some Proud Boyz, another reliably blue federal rep seat goes red. it won’t take many of those to stop a “blue wave” in Congress dead in its tracks.
Many states that “swing” for the presidency do not do so as much for their federal senators. And especially not for governors. The majority of what were swing states for the 2024 presidential election are hard red in the state legislature and the state executive branch. Those folks push in the right parts of their state and they can flip their statewide senate vote from slightly blue to slightly red. And “slightly” is all it takes in our winner-take-all system.
Democrats only need to flip a net total of three seats to win a House majority. History and current polling suggests Democrats are actually likely to flip 40+ seats.They’d need to “mess with” a few THOUSAND precincts to nullify that, and they’d need to do so without state and federal judges (who are on call on Election Day SPECIFICALLY to prevent such shenanigans) noticing, and it would take the full compliance of elections officials who refused to do anything of the sort when pressed by Trump himself to do so in previous cycles.
And keep in mind that courts can and DO order re-votes when blatant fraud occurs.
I reiterate: the sheer scale and decentralized nature of American eoections makes any attempt to fraudulently alter the outcome on a national scale, or even a local scale, practically impossible. Say you want to stop Democrats from voting in, let’s say, Birmingham, AL. The city has 73 polling stations. You’d need a force of thousands to control them all, and that’s just one district in a mid-sized city.
https://www.bhamwiki.com/w/List_of_polling_places_in_Birmingham
Well, WE should all get hired. Undermine from within.
Plus that juicy signing bonus!
About that bonus - it only pays out at $10k a year over five years, it only applies to retired agents returning to work, and if you leave before your fifth year you have to pay it back.
And agents say they haven’t been getting paid any of it anyway.
I hope your not thinking that the ruling on tariffs was some overarching statement by the SCotUS on the powers of the Presidency, because it wasn’t.
Wrong ruling.
Wow, it’s almost like I was right and SCotUS decisions are only applicable to the question before the court.
The point is that the president cannot arbitrarily declare a state of emergency where none exists and doing so does not give him the power to take control of elections.
If we talk about “blue waves” can we refer to Trump’s victory as a red tide?
Here’s some people who are clearly expecting a blue wave;
I guess they didn’t get the “don’t worry, we’re gonna fix it so you all stay in office for life” memo.
And even if they don’t have the numbers to make a difference in the balance of power, democracy will still be hobbled by forcefully interfering in an election and getting away with it with no consequences. It would be 1/6 on steroids. Even if the Dems actually take over the Senate, which probably won’t happen, they won’t be able to remove Trump. The only thing that will make a difference, treason-wise, is that there would be an actual trial after impeachment in addition to opening more favorable hearings.
But hearings and trials aren’t enough if the GOP has demonstrated being able to violently interfere in elections with no repercussions. The more they demonstrate that there is indeed nothing to fear from efforts to destroy democracy, the more they assuage their cowardly followers to become a little less cowardly.
So they’ll be unsuccessful, but more so?
Kaishi currently puts the odds of it happening at 48%. (The House they put at 84%.) We only need one to block them from passing partisan legislation.
https://kalshi.com/markets/controls/senate-winner
https://kalshi.com/markets/controlh/house-winner/controlh-2026
Making him into a lame duck with no power to pursue a legislative agenda is just as good.
The perpetual sense of pessimism around here is not productive.
Umm, . . . yeah, what’s the point…
I think the memo most of those folks got was “Just being Whoever (R) is not enough. You’re not trumpy enough to be allowed to continue in office. The trumpies will replace you.”
Yes, the replacements for these retiring congresspeople are going to be even more MAGA. And some of them may win.
In all the elections that have been held since Trump took office, I haven’t heard of a single Republican winning. Even in districts that went strongly Trump, Dems have flipped them with 20-, 30-, or 40-point margins.
So instead of stupid ideas coming from Republicans, this thread demonstrates how opponents of Republicans prefer to argue among themselves.
No we don’t!