cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/42694823

Trump has no power to “decree” that voters must present ID or to end mail-in balloting. But that doesn’t mean he can’t at least try both. Under the Insurrection Act or some other dusty statute, he can declare a state of emergency. Then he can decide that said state permits, nay requires, him to take extraordinary measures. On October 5, say, that might mean outlawing early voting. By October 13, it might mean no mail-in voting. By October 29, a reminder that all voters must present ID to vote. And by Sunday, November 1, two days before the election—an announcement that all these “reasonable” measures have alas failed, and he is now forced, against his will, to postpone the election.

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Back in 2024, Kamala Harris and the Democrats struggled to convince voters that a second Donald Trump term would constitute a serious threat to democracy.

    I don’t think anyone in the political space failed to recognize it as an existential threat; its that Harris didn’t campaign as if it was an existential threat.

    If it was such an existential threat, why would you actively disenfranchise your base?

    If it was such an existential threat, why would you say things like “I would do nothing fundamentally different than the current administration”, when the administration was DEEPLY unpopular?

    If it was such an existential threat, why did you spend 1.5 billion dollars trying to court voters which you have never been able to get, specifically by elevating some of the least popular voices within their own party (eg, Liz Cheney and Republican voters)?

    Nothing about how the Harris campaign operated beyond selecting Walz as VP demonstrated that they recognized Trump as an existential threat to Democracy. Voices were, in the course of the campaign, CLAMORING, for them to do better. They didn’t listen and they chose the approaches they did.

      • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        41 minutes ago

        They knew that their base wouldn’t turn out for a candidate who supported a genocide. They decided to run one anyways. They thought making sure Israel could continue its genocide was more important than winning against Trump. But yeah sure blame the people who aren’t sociopaths.

        • null@piefed.nullspace.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          33 minutes ago

          What’s the number of voters who would have voted for Kamala if she had opposed the genocide but didn’t?

          • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 minutes ago

            I can’t give you a specific estimate but the DNC tried to burry a report that showed Kamala’s support for Israel cost her key votes. That should tell you what you need to know.

            That said you can also just look at the vote differences between 2020 and 2024. Kamala lost more votes than Trump gained relative to the 2020 vote counts. It’s clear from those results that democratic turnout was depressed in 2024 when the admin’s policy towards Gaza was one of the most obvious divides between democratic leadership and democratic voters.

            https://www.axios.com/2026/02/22/dnc-2024-autopsy-harris-gaza