politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Ok, maybe I've missed something fundamental to your argument for why Republicans aren't going to use mail in voting restrictions to their electoral advantage. Why do you think blue states need to comply for this to be effective? And why do you think red leadership in purple states won't benefit from it?
Here is a quick summary of how mail in voting works:
trump can say whatever the fuck he wants. He is still dependent on those local election offices which depend on local county and state governments. So, again, the districts where this would matter are generally blue and democratic and run by Democrats who have both a personal and professional interest in not doing this.
So unless he plans to do a military occupation of all of Denver or LA/SF or whatever for the entirety of November? Those states will tell him to pound sand. And if he is doing a full military occupation... we aren't having elections anyway.
And same for red leaders in purple states. No, not "Texas is totally secretly purple" but I am talking places like Georgia where it is ACTUALLY democratic voters and not just "moderate" Americans who don't want to call themselves republicans (and Houston. Houston is actually pretty okay. Less so Austin). That leadership knows the best they can do is avoid rocking the boat because an angry community is a community that votes.
What I DO see happening is exactly what I already said.
Districts that republicans want get accused of fraud with the mail-in excuse. And then big balls is assigned to the case and, what do you know, he just found another 342 million voters for trump... in a local comptroller race.
But the actual mail-in voting won't be obstructed because, like I said, it actually also benefits republicans very heavily in many districts. Particularly the ridiculously gerrymandered ones where there is a tiny sliver that corresponds to Sister-Grandma Jones who lives 30 miles outside of city limits and can't walk because she got pregnant again.
Trump's EOs aren't where the rules will be set (hopefully, unless the SC just fully declares the Constitution void). It'll be a the states. And they'll design the laws on who can do mail in voting to their benefit.
For example, Georgia, with its red trifecta who would like more red votes to be counted both for their own elections and the House, passes a law saying it's only valid of you live in a settlement with less than X density. X is above suburbia but below cities. And since it's targeting areas rather than districts, the gerrymandered districts can boost their red votes and suppress their blue votes.
They don't really care about voters in LA, they care about suppressing Atlanta and Austin so red states stay maximally red. They don't need to take over blue states, just maintain their current dominance despite the electorate turning against them.
If voter suppression reliably caused the offender to lose no one would do it. But it doesn't, not when applied subtly and accompanied by spin about how it's just saving money or securing elections. The people on the margins who are most likely to stay home rather than go to the polls are the same ones who aren't passionate about voter access and voting in general.