this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
479 points (98.0% liked)

politics

18821 readers
4968 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
 

Given Donald Trump's hostility toward democracy, it's worth pausing when he asks supporters, "Why are we having an election?”

By all appearances, Donald Trump really doesn’t like it when Democrats describe him as a threat to democracy, and yet, the Republican keeps saying things that reflect a degree of animosity toward the American system of government.

Take the former president’s rally in Pennsylvania on Saturday, for example. The New York Times reported:

Trump said polls suggested he was at “93 percent” although it was not clear what that number was referring to. The former president said he responded by saying: “So why are we having an election? They didn’t have an election. Why are we having an election?”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] StrangeQuark@lemm.ee 118 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

We've regressed from Stop the Count! to Why Count?!

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 60 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Next it'll be "how count? "

[–] neidu2@feddit.nl 30 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Didn't GOP try to defund The Count (well, PBS and thereby Sesame Street) some 10-15 years ago? If so, that's on them.

[–] PlasticExistence@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

All because of his filthy mouth, caught on camera 16 years ago

https://youtu.be/6AXPnH0C9UA?si=tzPX7osiVcIajyJl

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ptz@dubvee.org 98 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Trump said polls suggested he was at “93 percent” although it was not clear what that number was referring to

I just assumed they meant his diaper

[–] dogsnest@lemmy.world 61 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)
[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 47 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

My day was better before I had to look at creepy weird old man crotch

[–] dogsnest@lemmy.world 46 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Here's the perfect antidote!

[–] KingJalopy@lemm.ee 22 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This whole thread is just disgusting.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 16 points 3 weeks ago

The name of the sub is Politics so… yea.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 22 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

In the first image, he must be polling at like 110% lol.

[–] dogsnest@lemmy.world 19 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I could see an argument for the first pic being a shadow. Wouldn't believe it, but it's slightly plausible at a glance.

Oh boy, that second pic... That just can't be fat, can it?!

[–] dogsnest@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

There're other diaper photos, but with AI and deep fakes, nevermind shadows, angles, effects, etc. of days gone by...who really knows anymore.

Plus, delete your search history if you venture.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 84 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Well Donald we are having an election so we can show you how many people despise you and your MAGA traitors.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 19 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

51% of the voting population (66%) by the 2020 popular vote. That's what someone might call actually a big fucking problem if you stop and think about those numbers for a moment.

"Dear America: You are waking up, as Germany once did, to the awareness that 1/3 of your people would kill another 1/3, while 1/3 watches."

  • Werner Twertzog aka Professor William Pannapacker

To be fair, Trump actually only got 47%, with the rest going to spoiler candidates.

So it's closer to 30% of America wants to kill 33% of America.

[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 79 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

He should be disqualified for even acting like he’s going to be a dictator. If you can’t understand the point of democracy, you’re not qualified to be President.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 48 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

He is disqualified as per the 14th amendment and the legal fact found in Colorado that he engaged in insurrection. But it needs court enforcement.

[–] bradinutah@thelemmy.club 15 points 3 weeks ago

Not only is he disqualified, but his question about having an election shows his ignorance of the US Constitution itself which states there will be an election for President every four years. Elections for Senators and House Members are also laid out. Maybe like read the foundational document of law for the country you claim you want to run, Weird Orange?

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 66 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

so you can hopefully lose the election a second time, and the popular vote a third time.

[–] Tyfud@lemmy.world 50 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

They're intentionally saying this to cast doubt and challenge the election results, no matter how badly they lose.

If we can't get some of them to turn their conspiracy theory around and establish faith in our fair election process, then we're going to be dealing with this forever and ever.

Bush v. Gore was the end of democracy for us it turns out. That set a precedent we're not able to recover from today.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 34 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Bush v. Gore was the end of democracy for us it turns out. That set a precedent we’re not able to recover from today.

No less than three of Bush's lawyers are on SCOTUS now, BTW.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 20 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Their reward for being good puppets of the heritage foundation :(

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 3 weeks ago

Yep. They are preparing the ground for another putsch. Trump's not legally eligible to hold the office, so maybe he has a point...

[–] grue@lemmy.world 50 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-swing-state-officials-election-deniers-1235069692/

https://protectdemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/PD_County-Cert-WP_v03.1.pdf

Trump and his MAGA flying monkeys (who are not nearly as addled in the head as he himself is) have every intention of disrupting the counting and certification of votes in as many jurisdictions as possible in order to throw the election to the House (one state, one vote) or SCOTUS. When he questions "why are we having an election" it's because he's trying to stop us from having elections under his dictatorship and is floating the idea in advance to normalize it.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 6 points 3 weeks ago

This is why he's going to keep repeating that he's winning by absurd margins. He'll have Magoos convinced that it was an obviously stolen election because "how could he have won 90+% of votes in polls but still lose???"

[–] perviouslyiner@lemmy.world 44 points 3 weeks ago

Even Russia pretended to have an election.

Even Best Korea makes everyone fill out a ballot paper

[–] qantravon@lemmy.world 37 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Who didn't have an election?

I suppose I shouldn't be looking for meaning in anything he says.

[–] xtr0n@sh.itjust.works 26 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I think he’s referring to the DNC not having primaries. But with a sitting president parties don’t really have primaries to pick a candidate. But since Harris moved into Biden’s place on the ticket, Trump has been whining about how it’s unfair 🙄.

But then he gets all discombobulated and complains about having to deal with an election even though he was also just made the GOP candidate without any primary elections (I think?). At that point I lose the thread as he devolves into sundowning.

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 21 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The GOP had primaries. Trump won without attending any of the GOP primary debates.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

As I've been quoting since last year in regards to the GOP:

can't win a primary without Trump, can't win a general with him.

[–] dogsnest@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Where are these rules documented so that the violations may be cited?

"< crickets >"
-- #maga

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (5 children)

The best anyone can make sense of it is that the Dems didn't exactly have an open primary to select Harris. So he's ?? confusing that with why have a general election? Which still doesn't make any sense but that's the best explanation.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

That's definitely what he meant. He's whined about it before.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

Guy’s fucked in the head. It’s all verbal diarrhea.

[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 26 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Oh, he doesn't want an election now? So he just wants Biden or Harris to remain in office?

[–] TallonMetroid@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

I mean, Roberts did basically declare Biden king.

[–] slickgoat@lemmy.world 25 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

In days long ago, one could dismiss such rhetorical musings as fantasy. Then Jan 6th happened, and all that followed, including the GOP falling in behind.

This anti-democratic cult must be crushed.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] collapse_already@lemmy.ml 20 points 3 weeks ago

I just want to be super rude to him. "Because the assassin missed. It's not like you are going to respect the results anyway. The demographics that were against you in 2020 have only gotten worse."

[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 17 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Alright, I’m more than a bit confused about this one. He stated that democrats didn’t hold a real primary and went on to question why they would need a presidential election. How is A related to B? It reminds me of the ubiquitous casual stochastic terrorism of the early 2010s in its complete absence of logic or adherence to reality.

[–] RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

It's a 'why have rules at all if we're going to ignore them' whine about how Harris didn't have to win a primary.

[–] InternetUser2012 13 points 3 weeks ago

Man is that fucking cheeto scared.

[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Not that it makes it much more clear, but he's talking about the nomination. He's saying Harris didn't have to go through a traditional primary, so... either he's saying a) retroactively he shouldn't have had to either, or b) since he won the primaries, and Harris didn't have to... then he should just automatically be president and skip the whole "election where are people can vote" thing.

Probably he meant both, that he shouldn't have to go through a primary or national election. He should just get to hand-pick a poll and get his crown.

[–] RangerJosie@sffa.community 12 points 3 weeks ago

To get rid of him. For good and all.

[–] yuki2501@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

Precisely to stop people like you, Donald.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

Because US Constitution, Article II, section 1?

"Article II

Section 1

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected"

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Trump doesn't even want to win an election. He wants Jan 6th v2.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

Mans is completely fucked.

load more comments
view more: next ›