this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2025
288 points (98.6% liked)

politics

25292 readers
2845 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.

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

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Electioneering is a power reserved to the states. So, this order is ignorable.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

So are dozens of others, that didn't stop them from being enforced and acted up on.

Unlike the laws that our constitution outlines, which are not enforced or observed.

[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

that didn’t stop them from being enforced and acted up on.

Well, technically congress can invent a financial reward for following its legislative incentives. So, Congress can essentially bribe a state into followibg its ideals, but a state can opt out in favor of self governance so long as it does jot interfere with a power expressed to Congress nor violate the amendments to the us constitution via the 14th and 15th Amendments. So, a state cannot create voting test laws and the such, but they can decide what a district does or doesn't look like.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago

It's an executive order, it doesn't have that power.

Yet states and other agencies will "make it happen" as if it does.

[–] switcheroo@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago

Can't win without cheating or rigging. Sounds right for the Party of Pedos.

[–] MangioneDontMiss@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago

if i had thought there were any actual chance we were going to have legitimate elections in the future i might care a little more.

[–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 19 hours ago

Can we just replace the president with AI? I would be more confident at that point.

[–] WanderWisley@lemmy.world 42 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (3 children)

No, this is one we should be concerned about. Eliminate mail-in voting, and democrats won't win another election again. The vast majority of people vote by mail.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

He can't eliminate mail-in voting by executive order.

And before you say 'he doesn't care about the law he'll do it anyway,' no state that isn't already fallen to the crazy will acknowledge such an order.

This is an obvious distraction. One you are falling for.

[–] greasewizard@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 day ago

he actuy said those words at the last zelensky meeting

[–] MangioneDontMiss@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

as if it even matters at this point

[–] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 118 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

Blatantly unconstitutional. The voting is directly controlled by the state constitutions, not the fed. Even congress would need to amend the constitution to do this, but we'll see how the bench legislators in SCOTUS rule.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Congress could probably do it, but it would have to be functional to do so. Which it very much is not.

[–] MangioneDontMiss@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Republicans seems to interpret the constitution like christians interpret the bible

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

Aka. they don't even read it.

[–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 18 hours ago

Or cherry pick the pieces they want to pay attention to. Well, you must not fuck around on your wife, but if you are crashing Grindr servers at RNC or touching someone's kid, it is obviously okay.

[–] MangioneDontMiss@lemmy.ca 1 points 21 hours ago

tbf, i don't think most of us have read it since grade school. that said, at least some of us respect it.

[–] Tryenjer@lemmy.world 46 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The Constitution no longer matters when all branches of power fail to uphold it and instead collude with the Orange King.

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 28 points 1 day ago (2 children)

SCOTUS already crossed that line with Trump v. Anderson.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 62 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Among other serious problems, this would disenfranchise all military service members stationed or deployed outside their home state. The Democrats really should be making a big deal out of that.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 day ago

Hahaha no. This will not include them.

[–] Hasherm0n@lemmy.world 41 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"Oh but it's not going to effect them at all because you see, they're using absentee ballots which are a totally different and completely secure thing."

Actual talking point I've seen floating around already.

[–] khornechips@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 day ago

Okay! Then let’s just switch everyone over to those! Can’t wait to hear how that’s impossible for reasons.

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Also those of us not in the military but living fulltime outside the US :/

[–] MangioneDontMiss@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

if i were one of those people living abroad i'd probably just renounce my citizenship at this point.

[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Gonna have to draft a constitutional amendment dumass

[–] plz1@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

He'll just shut down USPS for the 6 weeks leading up to the next election.

[–] bluemellophone@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oregon has been entirely state-wide mail-in voting for decades. Good luck shutting down an entire state’s mail for more than a month.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago

I mean, it already worked didn't it?

First term the USPS was taken from a trusted, consistent, and reliable way to move mail. I to something that a considerable number of people no longer trust BECAUSE it was sabotaged.

All he has to do is continue sabotaging our institutions, then they will no longer be effective, and can be cut down with public approval. Since voters have the memories of gnats.

It doesn't need to shut down, it just needs to be made ineffective, gutted, and sold to UPS & FedEx for pennies on the dollar. So private corps can benefit from our public investments, to our detriment.

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago

Release the Trump/Epstein files

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 52 points 1 day ago (11 children)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Neverclear@lemmy.dbzer0.com 44 points 1 day ago (3 children)

"Remember, the States are merely an 'agent' for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes. They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do," Trump wrote.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-vows-target-mail-in-ballots-ahead-2026-midterm-election-2025-08-18/

Just gonna leave that right there.

[–] uss_entrepreneur@startrek.website 29 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Holy shit he really does think he is a king. This is terrifying.

The constitution explicitly gives this power to the states. Even if it didn’t it would be up to congress.

Holy fuck. He needs to be 25th amendmented and drug out of the White House.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Theprogressivist@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago

"STatE rIGhtS"

[–] floo@retrolemmy.com 24 points 1 day ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Executive. Orders. Are. Not. Laws.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

They are not. Only Trump and his sycophants think so.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›