Summary

Donald Trump announced plans to reform U.S. elections, including mandating paper ballots, same-day voting, voter ID, and proof of citizenship, while eliminating mail-in voting.

Trump criticized California’s ban on requiring voter ID, calling for a nationwide overhaul. Though mail-in and early voting surged during the pandemic, Trump has long opposed these methods, claiming fraud, despite evidence showing fraud rates are extremely low.

Critics argue his proposals could disproportionately affect rural, disabled, and nonwhite voters, potentially disenfranchising key Democratic-leaning groups.

The reforms would mark significant shifts in U.S. election policies.

45 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
12 points

‘Bbbut gaza…’ great job guys.

permalink
report
parent
reply
168 points

This is why he wants to do that.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

When rural voters overwhelmingly voted for you, making it harder for them to vote seems like a great way to shoot yourself in the foot.

permalink
report
parent
reply
82 points

Thanks for putting that plain text from the top of the post into a jpeg down in the comments.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

Not sure if you’re being sarcastic, but I couldn’t copy the plain text on jerboa, so I had to screen shot.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

On Jerboa: Tap the three vertical dots menu in the original post, Copy > Copy post text.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Aren’t rural people more republican leaning?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Aren’t rural people more republican leaning?

In some places only slightly. Like 55/45. So it would still affect Democrats.

Edit: I mention this because a lot of folks tend to assume rural areas are almost exclusively Republican and that’s very far from the truth even in super red states.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Often times yes, but they are in gerrymandered districts with adequate polling locations, plus they love to go out and vote for “their guy”

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

they can also add rules to restrict the number of polling places, resulting in disproportionately long lines in cities where democrats live

permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points

When he declared Nov would be the last election, and winning it meant they wouldn’t have to worry about elections again, he meant it!

He’s doing exactly what he said he would do.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Yup. When a fascist tells you they are a fascist, believe them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Yeah, but something something genocide, so voting is bad actually

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

So tell me why Dems are playing the same game like one hand tied behind their back? Why don’t they do the same shit when they’re in power?

permalink
report
reply
-1 points

Because Democrats love losing. They use that as an excuse to blast their constituents with texts on how to donate. They did that when Roe was overturned and a few days after Kamala lost. As another commenter pointed out, they’re beholden to their sponsors and their sponsors want a return on investment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Because they don’t want to. The corporate Democrats work for their sponsors, not the people. The few genuine progressives are kept around mainly for show.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s partly because Democrats often tend towards being honest and good people that actually care about good governance.

The qons don’t and they can just hold things hostage - they basically grab all kinds of things (like balancing budgets) and hold a gun to its head, knowing their dumbass supporters are too stupid to realize that government does do good things - too many of the idiots in the base buy into a whole lot of Libertarian-style anarchy when it comes to “limited government”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Well the election laws primarily come from the election clause of the constitution. So that couldn’t be changed without an amendment requiring a super majority, which neither party will get. What I assume he is trying to do though, is while having state leaders being majority Republican, have the states update their election laws, because that’s who controls the elections. (Unless the supreme Court blocks it, as we saw with Colorado). Also held by the Republicans.

I assume his attempts are to lock all the states currently red, red. Is it possible, doubtful. As states also may require super majoritys to update their election processes, but that may vary drastically by state. Shit one state was discussing getting rid of popular vote all together and just allowing their representatives to vote leading up to the election.

The country we knew as the U.S. is broken. Only threads to hold it together now

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Conservatives didn’t start it now, it’s a long game they’re playing for decades, it just became obvious now when it’s in final stage.
Their goal always was to break checks and balances for them but only for them, and they are able to because they broke enough already. Id Dems will try to do a fraction of what Cons are doing, they will be politically and judicially murdered, partially because of that, and partially because breaking shit is easy and fixing it requires abiding by the letter of law, and that’s hard when the law was deliberately destroyed

permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points

“We’re gonna do things that have been really needed for a long time,” he said. “And we are gonna look at elections. We want to have paper ballots, one day voting, voter ID, and proof of citizenship.”

This should come with a national day off for voting, and mandatory voting requirement.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

and voting location mandates per capita.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Just the federal holiday would be enough. If someone is too lazy to vote when given a paid day off to do so, then I don’t trust they are informed enough to vote anyhow.

permalink
report
parent
reply
138 points

This is it folks. If he is able to transform our election system with his own two hands, we’ve had our last fair election, I guarantee it. Fraud will be baked in, circumventing any design elements that are ostensibly there to guard against it.

This is the scariest thing I’ve read since the election.

permalink
report
reply

Well, to be fair, elections have always been biased with shit like this.

We never really had a 10/10 fair election, there has always been biases in favor of status quo / regressivism. It always took more than 51% of votes for the less regressive party to win. We’re just regressing back to stupid election shenanigans like those 2000 florida ballots designed to confuse everyone. Shenanigans that had always existed, but we evolved out of, but now we are going through a period of regression, as the country has done many many times before.

permalink
report
parent
reply
50 points

I’m expecting a third term now with 110% of the vote. NK style.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Nah, we are about to have elections like the US used to in the 1900s, filled with political shenanigans. Its bad, but like… that has been how elections have always been run.

Not exactly russia or north korea, but like half way there.

Edit: Basically, instead of 51% of the vote, you need 55% or maybe even more, because some of the votes will get thrown out for made up reasons. Slightly marked off center of the bubble, invalid. Didn’t fill the bubble completely, invalid. And they only scrutinize votes for the opposition, and approve the votes for their candidates even if there are the same errors in the marking of the ballot.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Like that scene at the end of The Dictator, when he finally holds election.

There are two vote boxes and all the citizens are queuing in front of the box that will vote for his opposition. A tank drives up next to that queue, and everyone leaves the opposition queue, rushing over to join the queue to vote for the dictator.

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

They weren’t quiet about this being the last fair election we would have. I’m also not convinced it was actually a fair election.

But whatever…too late to bitch about the fascists now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

The writing has not even been on the wall here, it’s been part of the plan all along, he’s been saying it all along and it’s obvious after he tried to violently steal it last time.

We’re in a situation where our only hope I they are too incompetent to pull off the democracy destroying evil they are promising.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Community stats

  • 9.8K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 214K

    Comments