I don’t. The Electoral Count Act is oddly vague in terms of when it’s supposed to be applied.
Pence would be in the Cyaneidae.
It would become the duty of every American citizen to put down the coup by whatever means were at hand. Trump and his cronies, some of his appointees, and his Justices would not currently be breathing, nor would most of their families and close associates.
What is the process of getting rid of electors and replacing them with some who will vote differently?
The thought that honesty among politicians is the only thing protecting democracy is scary.
Sure, it would be the duty, but how many would answer that call of duty?
I don’t think there is any risk of civil war. What is far more likely is an increase in civil disobediance and state-led rejection of federal law, triggering some sort of constitutional crisis.
We’ve already seen rhis hapoening. On the left you have ‘sanctuary cities’ and refusal to enforce immigrarion law. On the right you have states like Florida promising to protect parents against FBI investigations, election audits, etc.
If a Democratic or Republican president becomes more authoritariarian, I suspect thr result will just be an increase in civil disobedience and a loss of moral authority.
All bets are off if the economy seriously goes into the tank. Not a mild recession, but a Great-Depression level downturn. Then things could get ugly in many countries. We are stretched mighty thin.
I think we’d have to reach a point where a majority of Americans were in seriously hard times, perhaps on the brink of actual economic collapse, to push us to civil war. I agree, what we are likely to see…are seeing already…is various forms of civil disobedience. From rioting and looting to folks not wanting to get vaccinated or wear masks, etc etc. That’s likely to increase, especially considering the looming supply chain issues that are going to be impacting us all over the holiday and could go until next year…or even the year after. Couple that with labor shortages in key areas, the continuing Covid issues both in the US and worldwide, and various other small global issues and you have a recipe for folks to be riled up and disobedient. But civil war? I think that takes a chain of events, one that finally culminates with a fundamental break by a large group of citizens against the system…or, a group who is able to break the current system and impose a new one, but who is then opposed by another large group.
Other than that, I just don’t see civil war in the cards for the US. If we are talking about other countries, well, I think there are several potential nasty ones out there…
The main reason a civil war wouldn’t happen in the same way is because in the 1860s states still considered themselves sovereign entities that formed their own militaries, determined their own paths, etc. The issue lined up well geographically and the relatively high power of states and the low power of the federal government made a states-vs-states conflict practical. The landscape in that regard has completely changed.
I do think we are going to see a dramatic increase in political violence, which is something that the right wing will “win”, which is to say that they will successfully inflict terrorism on the rest of the country. We’ve already seen incidents where organized terrorist groups like the Proud Boys organize violence with the implicit and even explicit approval of the police, who refuse to interfere, or even help with their terrorist actions. This is likely to increase.
The left in this country is way too touchy-feely kumbaya and needs to remember some lessons from their grandparents and great grandparents about the necessity of political violence. The people that actually got shit done, like unions and labor laws. The modern left is rushing to disarm themselves in the face of threats of right-wing terroristic violence, and we’re going to see weird insurgency/terrorism style of political violence in the next decades that won’t quite be a civil war but will serve the right wing’s goal of eliminating democracy and permanently enshrining their power. Right wing politicians will likely endorse this either outright or through dog whistles, “left wing” (ie center right democrats) will helplessly call for decorum or some stupid useless bullshit and mount a completely ineffectual response, and the common Americans will keep convincing themselves that a fascist coup isn’t happening because this is America and that can’t happen here no matter how obvious it’s happening here now.
Police forces are overwhelmingly right wing and toxically so. Not only are they unlikely to maintain a defense against political violence, they are extremely likely to inflict it. There are many departments and agencies that are more or less a right wing gang. They’re already heavily encroaching into inflicting right wing terrorism themselves. Their brutal crackdowns on peaceful BLM protests vs their delicate, kid-glove treatment of right wing terrorism (Jan 6, Kyle Rittenhouse, militia nuts) shows their agenda and willingness to become tools of a fascist takeover.
I actually have far more faith in the US military than the police, because they have a long standing institutional memory and strength and officers are taught extensively about the value and place of the military in our society. The fact that the military had to basically come out after the election and say “Joe Biden is the president and we’re going to support that” was scary enough, but very well might have prevented a more blatant coup attempt.
The danger there is that as we continue through this slow motion coup and fascists keep replacing key people with their own, this will include influential people in the military. I have no doubt that the current US military is on the side of US democracy, but I’m not sure the military of the future will be.
Would you elaborate? Thanks.
How electors are selected is essentially up to state legislatures. It is a huge area of actually vulnerability in the integrity of presidential elections vice some hypothetical “millions of illegal voters” whose votes don’t actually matter anyway.
Yes, those are exactly the same. There is no difference between municipalities not complying with unfunded federal mandates to report and arrest undocumented persons and using the Constitutionally-defined executive discretion for a president to decide how to enforce immigration regulations, and states allowing the conduct of election ‘audits’ by unqualified “CyberNinjas” or actively shielding perpetrators for serious violations of federal law. Also, elephants and mice both have four legs so they are basically the same animal.
Stranger
I couldn’t find the same article I read a whjile ago which emphasized just how unusual such a statement was, that the Joint Chiefs really never make statements of this sort, and it was clear that they were trying to stave off any ideas that the military might support Trump’s attempts at a coup. But this link has a copy of the memo and some analysis.
Thanks again. I have no doubts that the troops were warned. I thought you were saying that the military made a public statement.
Given the situation and we didn’t know who would throw in with the coup/insurrection, having all the joint chiefs come out and make this memo is, I think, more or less the military making a public statement to discourage further insurrection by saying that they wouldn’t be on board.
The fact that they felt the need to make such a statement is further evidence that the situation is far more dire than people are letting themselves accept.
“If they take our guns, armed insurrection!” That’s what’s likely. I lived long in the land of conservative paranoia, and I guarantee you that’s true. I once made the mistake of trying to explain to a group of these folks why the Second Amendment is highly unlikely to be repealed, and they turned on me, convinced I was plotting to lull them into false security so liberals could take their guns. 
There’s still an active militia in my old town–formed with the approval of county commissioners and with the local sheriff as a militia member–ready to fight Antifa and any gun-snatching liberals that come their way.
Should these folks and their ilk become convinced through more restrictive gun laws that the end is upon them, they’ll attack. So will others in other states. On 1/6, a bunch of these idiots in my current state broke through security at the governor’s house. That’s the kind of armed rebellion we’ll see more of in the future.
Think Northern Ireland, not the Civil War.
It wouldn’t be every city. Not every city would be in rebellion. Many cities are close to seaports, others are close enough to secure highway and rail routes. Anyway, air transport is light-years above and beyond what it was at the time of the Berlin airlift, in capacity and frequency and scale.
The US already imports a lot of its food, and these come through urban transport hubs. Much of the food grown in the Midwest is actually grown for export. They depend on it for their livelihood. So in that sense, the hinterlands are actually the end of the supply chain. To the extent that it’s a chain, I mean. It’s actually a web, everybody will feel the pain, but the rural folks on the edge of it will be the first to find themselves isolated.
There’s a reason that the bulk of the population lives in cities and not farms. More connection to everything.
There aren’t very many of those, and remember, they’re unarmed pacifists. I’d expect that in the first few months of famine, those farms will be invaded by starving marauders from the countryside. The invaders will kill the present owners, eat the proverbial seed corn, and ruin the farm in fairly short order.
It’s true there are some people in the backcountry who can truly do sustenance farming, and a few areas with enough crop diversity to survive, but they’ll be vastly outnumbered by armed bandits who don’t have that luxury.
COVID, alone, has caused supply disruptions. We have trouble properly getting supplies to a handful of cities in weather disasters. Shutting down the truck routes would paralyze transport, and while air and sea transport if put entirely to the purpose of moving pure essentials would fill in some of it, it wouldn’t come near doing the whole job. And it would be mostly the largest cities, which pose the largest transport problem, which would be cut off from the red states.
Yup. And if they’re not exporting, the countries they’re not exporting to will be hungry, and they won’t be exporting food to us.
Plus which, a lot of that grain and soybeans is for domestic consumption.
Nitpick: they’re pacifists, but they aren’t unarmed. They hunt for food, and to protect livestock; it’s only humans they’re not willing to shoot.
And many of them have neighbors who will defend them; if only so that they can be fed by them. But I agree that – as I said in my earlier post – that part of the problem for people in the country would be that people starving in the cities won’t stay in the cities. And I agree that they won’t care or understand about never eating next year’s seed.
As I also said in that post: it wouldn’t come out well for anybody.