Election integrity and the transfer of power

[Jaymon]

I would say that the number of Republicans who are outright fascists is pretty small - I'd say essentially just the "christian nationalist" subset of the GOP electorate. And I don't think we have any here. The problem is that there are a LOT of people who will support the GOP on a partisan basis regardless of how accommodating the GOP becomes to christian nationalism, and there are a lot of anti-anti Trumpists. Which unfortunately means that, especially when combined with our anti-majoritarian system flaws, means that the GOP is a great vehicle for christian nationalists / fascists to use to get power and to entrench themselves in power.

This is the "11 nazis at the table" problem. Doesn't matter if its only a small subset of the GOB that is racist, facist, fundementalist, or wacky insane. As long as the GOP majority allows them to maintain party leadership, then that means the entire party is racist, facist, fundementalist, and wacky insane.

[Pyperkub]

DoJ turning up the heat...

The Justice Department has issued about 40 subpoenas over the past week seeking information about the actions of former President Donald J. Trump and his associates related to the 2020 election and the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, according to people familiar with the situation.

Two top Trump advisers, Boris Epshteyn and Mike Roman, had their phones seized as evidence, those people said.

The department’s actions represent a substantial escalation

[LawBeefaroni]

The department’s actions represent a substantial escalation.

Have heard that a few times already. Seems like we're always being led on.

[Unagi]

I would say that the number of Republicans who are outright fascists is pretty small - I'd say essentially just the "christian nationalist" subset of the GOP electorate. And I don't think we have any here. The problem is that there are a LOT of people who will support the GOP on a partisan basis regardless of how accommodating the GOP becomes to christian nationalism, and there are a lot of anti-anti Trumpists. Which unfortunately means that, especially when combined with our anti-majoritarian system flaws, means that the GOP is a great vehicle for christian nationalists / fascists to use to get power and to entrench themselves in power.

Looking the other way didn't work out so well the last couple of times countries tried it.

Also, you need to remember that a whopping 95% of Congressional Republicans voted against Impeachment for January 6th. I'm perfectly fine painting them ALL as refusing to uphold their Oath of Office in support of a fascist, and do think they all should be grilled incessantly, and actually ineligible for office, just like the New Mexico guy.

It sounds like you think we are disagreeing, but we are not. If America ultimately descends into a semi-fascist authoritarian government, it won't matter much who was an outright fascist and who was merely fine with enabling them.

I don't mean to be dramatic, only historically accurate here - but this is exactly how (as I'm sure you are aware) the inconceivable notion of the general acceptance of Nazis in German came to be.

[stessier]

Just finished my online Poll Manager training and got a 98% on the final test (note: parties are allowed 2 watchers per 1000 registered voters in SC). I just have to complete a 75 minute in person class and them I'm set for Nov 8th.

PSA for other South Carolinians - they are still looking for poll managers and it's not too late to sign up. The online class took me about 3 hours and then there is the in person class (75 minutes). You have to be available from 6am - ??? (at least 8pm) on November 8th and you'll get $135 for your time. Help make the process work!

[hepcat]

Excellent. Now, do you have all the fake ballots we sent you?

[geezer]

Excellent. Now, do you have all the fake ballots we sent you?

How can he have those already? The bamboo paper from Xi isn't even here yet, and Hunter still hasn't approved the final copy. (Something about his laptop was missing? dunno...) Jeebus.

[Skinypupy]

It would be totally fine to have someone like this overseeing the next election, right?

[Smoove_B]

"Legitimate votes" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that overview.

[Daehawk]

[Grifman]

It’s really insane, but not unexpected that only 9 Republicans in the House voted for this law:



They are so scared of Trump - the sooner he is gone from the political scene the better.

[Grifman]

Here’s what I don’t understand. While I don’t normally like the Democrats to use the same tactics used by Republicans, I would make an exception in this case. If the Republicans use this to challenge Democratic votes, why don’t the Democrats do the same? Heck, if I were the Dem GA chairman, I’d tell the GOP that for every one of our votes they challenge, we will challenge one of yours. Seriously, why not? Do this a few times and O bet it would stop.

[stessier]

The trick, of course, is that you don't know if you're really challenging one of theirs or one of yours - it's not like they are allowed to wear affiliation patches.

Still, I don't like it. Just play it straight and point out the GOPs unethical ploy. Would also be interesting if there were any legal consequences from someone who fails a bunch of challenges. Also, at least in SC, both the person challenged and the challenger have to go to the hearing that Thursday with the challenger having to bring evidence of why the vote shouldn't be counted. If they fail to do so or are otherwise unable to prove it should be disqualified, the vote counts.

[Jaymann]

The trick, of course, is that you don't know if you're really challenging one of theirs or one of yours - it's not like they are allowed to wear affiliation patches.

Every time they challenge a black voter, you challenge a redneck with a MAGA T-shirt.

[stessier]

The trick, of course, is that you don't know if you're really challenging one of theirs or one of yours - it's not like they are allowed to wear affiliation patches.

Every time they challenge a black voter, you challenge a redneck with a MAGA T-shirt.

MAGA t-shirts aren't allowed within 200' of the polling place (in my county anyway). And no race is monolithic in it's voting profile.

[Pyperkub]

The trick, of course, is that you don't know if you're really challenging one of theirs or one of yours - it's not like they are allowed to wear affiliation patches.

Every time they challenge a black voter, you challenge a redneck with a MAGA T-shirt.

MAGA t-shirts aren't allowed within 200' of the polling place (in my county anyway). And no race is monolithic in it's voting profile.

Eh, the special Senate elections in Georgia Jan '21 were pretty darned monolithic...

[Jaymann]

How about every redneck in a T-shirt or wife beater.

[Zaxxon]

It’s really insane, but not unexpected that only 9 Republicans in the House voted for this law:

Zero Republicans in the House who plan to run for re-election voted for this law.

[El Guapo]

The trick, of course, is that you don't know if you're really challenging one of theirs or one of yours - it's not like they are allowed to wear affiliation patches.

Every time they challenge a black voter, you challenge a redneck with a MAGA T-shirt.

MAGA t-shirts aren't allowed within 200' of the polling place (in my county anyway). And no race is monolithic in it's voting profile.

It's not that hard. You focus your challenges on geographic areas or on demographics that disproportionately vote for the other party. You're bound to disenfranchise some of your own voters, but even if 40% of the people you disenfranchise are from your party, you're still coming out ahead.

Plus on top of that you can set up the MAGA #1 Patriot Voter Protection Group to help any of your voters that get caught up in the friendly fire.

[Grifman]

The trick, of course, is that you don't know if you're really challenging one of theirs or one of yours - it's not like they are allowed to wear affiliation patches.

Still, I don't like it. Just play it straight and point out the GOPs unethical ploy. Would also be interesting if there were any legal consequences from someone who fails a bunch of challenges. Also, at least in SC, both the person challenged and the challenger have to go to the hearing that Thursday with the challenger having to bring evidence of why the vote shouldn't be counted. If they fail to do so or are otherwise unable to prove it should be disqualified, the vote counts.

You can easily go into a MAGA heavy county, pick a precinct and get a Republican.

[Isgrimnur]

Screw that. Challenge every republican on the ballot.

[Holman]

Here’s what I don’t understand. While I don’t normally like the Democrats to use the same tactics used by Republicans, I would make an exception in this case. If the Republicans use this to challenge Democratic votes, why don’t the Democrats do the same? Heck, if I were the Dem GA chairman, I’d tell the GOP that for every one of our votes they challenge, we will challenge one of yours. Seriously, why not? Do this a few times and O bet it would stop.

The game they're playing isn't voter-by-voter. They'll blanket-challenge everyone in whole districts, and they'll choose poorer, blacker areas where voters feel less capable of spending time and possibly money to contest the challenge. If enough targets decide they can't afford to skip work and appear in court, it's a GOP gain.

Dems could attempt to do something reciprocal, but in Georgia it's likely that GOP voters are more economically and professionally able to contest the claim. Plus, state judges are more likely to lean in their favor anyway.

[Jaymann]

I'm convinced the 2024 election results will be tied up in the courts for years. Possibly longer than the presidential term itself.

[hepcat]

That’s what I fear also.

[Pyperkub]

I'm convinced the 2024 election results will be tied up in the courts for years. Possibly longer than the presidential term itself.

We'll know in November (tho 2020 had that potential, but dramatically failed). However, the Dems are being really stupid about this threat growing and not going away, and the GOP is going all in doing *everything* they can to control who votes, with tactics both legal (tho immoral and un-American) and illegal.

[Kraken]

I'm convinced the 2024 election results will be tied up in the courts for years. Possibly longer than the presidential term itself.

Nah, it will go quickly to SCOTUS, and we'll respect their fair and non-political judgment.

[Carpet_pissr]

Yup. Was about to post ‘well, thank goodness the SC is not on Team Election Denier!’

[Isgrimnur]

Yup. Was about to post ‘well, thank goodness the SC is not on Team Election Denier!’

Just the Friends & Family plan.

[Grifman]

Here’s what I don’t understand. While I don’t normally like the Democrats to use the same tactics used by Republicans, I would make an exception in this case. If the Republicans use this to challenge Democratic votes, why don’t the Democrats do the same? Heck, if I were the Dem GA chairman, I’d tell the GOP that for every one of our votes they challenge, we will challenge one of yours. Seriously, why not? Do this a few times and O bet it would stop.

The game they're playing isn't voter-by-voter. They'll blanket-challenge everyone in whole districts, and they'll choose poorer, blacker areas where voters feel less capable of spending time and possibly money to contest the challenge. If enough targets decide they can't afford to skip work and appear in court, it's a GOP gain.

Dems could attempt to do something reciprocal, but in Georgia it's likely that GOP voters are more economically and professionally able to contest the claim. Plus, state judges are more likely to lean in their favor anyway.

Not necessarily. You pick a white working class or rural area that voted Trump. These people would be unlikely to have resources. As to judges, that’s not the issue. The issue is inconvenience. If the voter can’t defend themselves, the vote would be thrown out. And even if they can defend themselves, there’s the hassle factor. If this happens enough, people are going to complain. Eventually the Republicans would see there is no gain for them under the law.

[malchior]

On Tuesday, Sept. 27, the Brazos County Commissioner’s Court took no action to reopen an on-campus early voting location at Texas A&M University (the largest campus in the state) in College Station for the 2022 midterm elections, despite backlash from students and several commissioners admitting it was a mistake to close the site. The Comissioner’s Court voted in July to move the early voting site at Texas A&M’s student center to a location off campus. Now, students will have to travel up to 30 minutes off-campus in order to vote during Texas’ early voting period between Oct. 24 and Nov. 4.

[stessier]

Here’s what I don’t understand. While I don’t normally like the Democrats to use the same tactics used by Republicans, I would make an exception in this case. If the Republicans use this to challenge Democratic votes, why don’t the Democrats do the same? Heck, if I were the Dem GA chairman, I’d tell the GOP that for every one of our votes they challenge, we will challenge one of yours. Seriously, why not? Do this a few times and O bet it would stop.

The game they're playing isn't voter-by-voter. They'll blanket-challenge everyone in whole districts, and they'll choose poorer, blacker areas where voters feel less capable of spending time and possibly money to contest the challenge. If enough targets decide they can't afford to skip work and appear in court, it's a GOP gain.

Dems could attempt to do something reciprocal, but in Georgia it's likely that GOP voters are more economically and professionally able to contest the claim. Plus, state judges are more likely to lean in their favor anyway.

Not necessarily. You pick a white working class or rural area that voted Trump. These people would be unlikely to have resources. As to judges, that’s not the issue. The issue is inconvenience. If the voter can’t defend themselves, the vote would be thrown out. And even if they can defend themselves, there’s the hassle factor. If this happens enough, people are going to complain. Eventually the Republicans would see there is no gain for them under the law.

It probably varies by state, but here in SC, it's up to the Challenger to prove the claim - not the voter to defend themselves.

[Grifman]

Geez, this is just incredibly stupid, what a wonderful family outing:

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/jan-6- ... ison-time/

I guess the family that crimes together goes to prison together.

[Kraken]

They seem nice.

[Unagi]

I guess the family that crimes together goes to prison together.

The family that does crime together does time together.

[Roman]

Wow! Even the dummies are bigger in Texas!

[gbasden]

I guess the family that crimes together goes to prison together.

The family that does crime together does time together.

[malchior]

This is pretty chilling but it really looks like we have a big problem. It might be better to start getting used to the idea of an entrenched autocracy here. And if it happens it isn't likely to be a kind one either.

[Octavious]

It's always been a thing that I have heard Republicans say, but Trump kicked it into overdrive. It's so sad how much damage one freaking person has done. And he's not even done yet.

[malchior]

Man is this a weird piece. I had to think I was missing some level of meta here because I couldn't believe that Nate Cohn really was really surprised that people are upset about corruption and then voting for the corrupt people. We've been seeing this pattern for awhile now! I don't get the surprise. Polling for years has shown stunning decline in trust in our institutions and guess what - conmen are succeeding at their cons. Like they tend to do when things fall apart.



Edit: I ripped this section out because I just blink at it. Does he really not get it or is he just sort of obliquely talking through what anyone who listens to people talk know? Still talk about your ivory towers. Again this is no surprise to anyone paying attention to what people are saying.

The poll results help make sense of how so many voters can say democracy is under threat, and yet rank “threats to democracy” low on the list of challenges facing the country.

When respondents were asked to volunteer one or two words to summarize the current threat to democracy, government corruption was brought up most often — more than Mr. Trump and Republicans combined.

For some of these voters, the threat to democracy doesn’t seem to be about the risk of a total collapse of democratic institutions or a failed transition of power. Or they may not view the threat as an emergency or a crisis yet, like being on the brink of sustained political violence or authoritarianism.

Instead, they point most frequently to a longstanding concern about the basic functioning of a democratic system: whether government works on behalf of the people.

Many respondents volunteered exactly that kind of language. One said, “I don’t think they are honestly thinking about the people.” Another said politicians “forget about normal people.” Corruption, greed, power and money were familiar themes.

Overall, 68 percent of registered voters said the government “mainly works to benefit powerful elites” rather than “ordinary people.”

[Grifman]

Trump is practicing for 2024: