Democrats couldn't resist letting trump run again.
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2026
443 points (99.6% liked)
politics
28602 readers
2429 users here now
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Non-voters couldn't resist letting him win again.
I mean, before he become president the first time he literally said that he would only accept the results if he wins.
I too hate how obvious and predictable it all was but people finally getting it is surprisingly also very annoying.
He also said that if he was elected we would never have to vote again…
Was the 2020 coup attempt too tough to figure out?
Trump doesn't get to say shit about how the States run their elections. Even if he "Hereby Do Dee-clares it."
He and Pete Hegseth have no legal say in how the Scouts should run their affairs, too, but see what happened today?
Trump says a lot of stupid crap. What you do is ignore him. Or say, "no" to him. But never give up without a fight.
He isn't technically able to do most of the stuff he does do. He just does it, and then time passes and then it gets declared retroactively illegal... but it still happened. He'll probably get punished at some point... right?
The states run elections, lease the voting places and employ all the staff.
Unless the federal govt replaces all of them, just waving a chicken leg around and declaring stuff won't do anything.
Or you know he could put ice officers outside strategic polls and block anyone he doesnt like from entering.
That's true. The states can constitutionally tell him to go fuck himself. But I read a key phrase in another article that I tried to find and can't, to the effect that his plan involves ally states.
So lets say all but five states tell him to fuck himself and hold their elections. Five do not. They have just thrown the entire election and its results into massive constitutional confusion, with lawsuits for years to come while he just sits up there shitting his Depends and grinning. And it would work: whatever anyone says should be the answer, someone else will sue over.
Elections are a huge power grab for anyone who wants even a little power. No one is going to let their piece of the pie go easily, whether that means holding an election or not holding an election, or fighting those who want the opposite, in court, forever.
All he has to do is introduce confusion, and then it will be up to SCOTUS to decide.
And SCOTUS is as corrupt as the day is long.
That's if they even lose. They've taken away a lot from me already and conservifascits are loving it. Gen Z swung red because they thought this was an ideology to get behind. You're supposed to trust in God for your healthcare plan if you weren't born rich. This is a Christian nation. I fucking hate my life.
Is this gen z in the room with us?
I think they meant they swung right at a higher percentage than that age range normally does. Link below shows the youngest group voting 60+% for the left.
Yeah, the "kids" in my life did a lot of Joe Rogan research and got suckered into THAT reality like my generation did the "weapons of mass destruction" and 'Merica bullshit.
But it's not their fault. So many people are sheltered in this country and never have to acknowledge that the world is bigger than flag-waiving and honkey-tonkin.
I cant be mad at naive. I can absolutely be mad at ignorant. I think that all we can do is try to introduce critical thinking in a world that otherwise allows TikTok to do the thinking for them.
Pedolini is at war with everyone
Sadly he seems to be winning.
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. We can debate the effectiveness of her, and their, rhetoric. But on a certain level, it was a hard argument to make because it was hypothetical.
On what planet was it hypothetical.
Honestly. It's like everyone's still using fucking Windows. Fuck levels critical.
It's like people don't understand what happened and almost happened on J6.
If all fails he'll definitely will do this again.
He couldn't have made his intentions any clearer. I think people just figured the Senate, SCOTUS and the DOJ would keep him in check. They didn't see him taking control of those to this extent.
Now people are about to find out just how much control he has over the military.
Considering how abusive he is towards members of the military, I think he will find himself frog-marched out of office.
load more comments
(28 replies)
Jan 6th happened once, it can happen again..
J6 was a trial run.
They learned their lessons and they will do something else to usurp the democratic process. And this time it will work.
A trial run without guns, at that.
This time they will be heavily armed and won't wait until people have voted.
They'll have ICE and other federal oppression agencies preventing eligible voters from exercising their rights.
Primarily nonwhite people and people who have ever been observed protesting injustice, but no vote is safe under fascism.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Trump will never willingly step down.
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.
load more comments
(7 replies)
view more: next ›