American Politics

[James Rye]

What if Trump doesn't accept the Midterms results though and just arrest all the Democrats who won their seats for "cheating"? Like what then? Will the reps and military guys then grow a spine or will they keep on going keeping their heads down?

 

[shionoro]

What if Trump doesn't accept the Midterms results though and just arrest all the Democrats who won their seats for "cheating"? Like what then? Will the reps and military guys then grow a spine or will they keep on going keeping their heads down?

That is the big question. Personally, I do believe that if Trump would openly do what you outlined, military and police would not stop protestors from ousting him at the very least. And even the heavily skewed surpreme court would probably not back that. In addition to that, democratic states would have to fight back against that and the corresponding troops and police would probably not back Trump.

So ya, I do not think he can do quite that. But the real danger imo lies in smaller tricks that he might get away with. For example, he could let ICE parade in swingstates on election day and create enough fear among POC that they refrain from voting. That is illegal, but it would be way harder to stop if he ends up winning due to that. He could also try to only manipulate key races. For example, in a state with republican leadership in which democrats narrowly win, it could be possible to throw out some votes on bullshit grounds as long as it is backed by voting boards and the state leadership. Or to influence the way the vote is counted so early on, it looks like a Trump win.

I do think however that if Democrats win convincingly, it is not possible for Trump to cancel or manipulate the vote successfully, even with all the tricks in the book, as that would be far too offensive for botht he establishment and the majority of people in the US.

 

[M3J]

That is the big question. Personally, I do believe that if Trump would openly do what you outlined, military and police would not stop protestors from ousting him at the very least. And even the heavily skewed surpreme court would probably not back that. In addition to that, democratic states would have to fight back against that and the corresponding troops and police would probably not back Trump.

They would stop protestors and back Trump. Why would they do the opposite? He's shat on the military, and they still support him. At the least, he's very pro-cop publicly, so of course they'll back him as well. They'll do what benefits them, and falling in line with Trump is just that.

 

[shionoro]

They would stop protestors and back Trump. Why would they do the opposite? He's shat on the military, and they still support him. At the least, he's very pro-cop publicly, so of course they'll back him as well. They'll do what benefits them, and falling in line with Trump is just that.

Because they would understand that backing Trump would mean a protracted fight against civillians in which they will have to kill lots of them for a president who now openly and obviously ignores the election. That would be a level of escalation, ignoring an election, that goes way beyond anything else Trump has done. 40% of the military voted for Harris in 2024, these people are not likely to help Trump to cancel the election by murdering civillians. That is especially true for the national guard, but also police in blue states.

There is a big difference between suppressing something perceived like a riot by a large chunk of the population and "just doing your job" in a country that upholds the illusion of lawfulness and shooting down droves of protestors for an open dictator so he can ignore the election.

 

[M3J]

Again, why would they care? We're talking about the same country that had no problem setting its cities on fire and bombing its cities because of their prejudice. The cops and military are full of piece of shit bullies who get off on abusing others and flaunting their power, and I think about 40% of cops have been accused of domestic violence? I forgot the specifics, but it's not good.

If the cops and military were good people, then they would not have opposed BLM or incited violence.

 

[shionoro]

Again, why would they care? We're talking about the same country that had no problem setting its cities on fire and bombing its cities because of their prejudice. The cops and military are full of piece of shit bullies who get off on abusing others and flaunting their power, and I think about 40% of cops have been accused of domestic violence? I forgot the specifics, but it's not good.

If the cops and military were good people, then they would not have opposed BLM or incited violence.

It is not about being good. Suppressing the BLM protests was lawful, it is their job to do that. You and I find it bad, but the cops who went there could be assured that the law protects what they do and also that their deployment has public support. That is law enforcement working as it is intended and as they understand their job description.

Similarly, police did protect the capitol on January 6 (while being understaffed and partially overwhelmed) because that is their job. The military similarly accepts even things that are against international law, like abducting maduro, because they can at least rationalize it by Maduro being the enemy and them doing their job.

If Trump would openly and obviously decide to just cancel or ignore the election, that rationalization flies out of the window. It wouldnt just angry democrats that go protest, it would be the open end of rule of law.

If the US military is told to just shoot protestors for demanding that an election result is accepted, many would defect out of political conviction and from the rest, a very big chunk would ask themselves whether they want to risk death for an open dictator who might get overthrown anyway and thus face personal consequences. That is something that is just not true for suppressing a BLM protest.

At least as far as the state troops go, it would be clear that Police and Military would have to face some of their own and that is a decision you do not make lightly when all you fight for is a guy who openly cancels the very thing (public order and rule of lore) that you think you are protecting.

So ya, I think that if Trump wants to meddle with the election, he has to do it in a more sneaky way than that.

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 24, 2026, Original Post Date: Jan 23, 2026 ---

The strike today in Minneapolis and the supportive events all over the US were a really promising sign.

For now, it seems like Republicans are not getting the kind of escalation they are looking for but instead public resistance is growing. With that kind of public outrage, it will be way harder to steal the election and democrats and other such groups can probably fill voting stations with volunteers that ensure no meddling happens (or is detected).

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 24, 2026 ---

Another man just got shot.

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 24, 2026 ---

 

[James Rye]

Poor guy. Seems he has been a really good fellow.

 

[Shobu_Yoruichi]

And Trump is changing the northern american hemisphere into a violent military autocracy. He is also threatening democratic Southern American states. Why do you champion that?

There is only one country in America that can remotely be considered as autocracy. That one is Nicaragua. It would be more accurate to name it as a two-party autocracy, but still is the closest one. USA will hardly become one, the day the constitution on its entirety is changed will slowly morph into one.

About the rest, well... it seems the most diminute outcome compared to the wonderful things he's doing. I'd gladly tolerate it.

 

[M3J]

It is not about being good. Suppressing the BLM protests was lawful, it is their job to do that. You and I find it bad, but the cops who went there could be assured that the law protects what they do and also that their deployment has public support. That is law enforcement working as it is intended and as they understand their job description.

Similarly, police did protect the capitol on January 6 (while being understaffed and partially overwhelmed) because that is their job. The military similarly accepts even things that are against international law, like abducting maduro, because they can at least rationalize it by Maduro being the enemy and them doing their job.

If Trump would openly and obviously decide to just cancel or ignore the election, that rationalization flies out of the window. It wouldnt just angry democrats that go protest, it would be the open end of rule of law.

If the US military is told to just shoot protestors for demanding that an election result is accepted, many would defect out of political conviction and from the rest, a very big chunk would ask themselves whether they want to risk death for an open dictator who might get overthrown anyway and thus face personal consequences. That is something that is just not true for suppressing a BLM protest.

At least as far as the state troops go, it would be clear that Police and Military would have to face some of their own and that is a decision you do not make lightly when all you fight for is a guy who openly cancels the very thing (public order and rule of lore) that you think you are protecting.

So ya, I think that if Trump wants to meddle with the election, he has to do it in a more sneaky way than that.

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 24, 2026, Original Post Date: Jan 23, 2026 ---

The strike today in Minneapolis and the supportive events all over the US were a really promising sign.

For now, it seems like Republicans are not getting the kind of escalation they are looking for but instead public resistance is growing. With that kind of public outrage, it will be way harder to steal the election and democrats and other such groups can probably fill voting stations with volunteers that ensure no meddling happens (or is detected).

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 24, 2026 ---

Another man just got shot.

--- Double Post Merged, Jan 24, 2026 ---

Suppressing the BLM protests was not lawful, it went against freedom of speech, not to mention how cops turned the protests violent. Instead of saying, "hey we will stop being excessively violent and stop killing people," they got offended and refused to do that, and then they got more violent. It seems you are badly misinformed about what actually happened, but it wasn't the law enforcement being good, but being evil just as intended.

The cops did not do more to protect the Capitol on Jan 6. If it was a mob of Black men rioting, we'd have seen multiple deaths by now, instead of one death. They were protecting white men and women, and they did the bare minimum they could to do their job while avoiding hurting or killing the crazed right wingers. If I recall correctly, they did not try to escalate the violence here, as they have many times during BLM protests.

If areas predominantly immigrant or people of color are targeted, cops will be very happy to get violent. Even those that won't will try to justify it. Cops are not there to protect people, they are there to protect the interests of businesses and the wealthy. The military would have no problem doing that either, and they are less likely to have issues going after blue areas as well. Many military members are okay with Trump's bullshit, and they will support republican presidents without issue, usually.

He doesn't have to, at all. They're doing it very openly, even, by gerrymandering. Elon even admitted to tampering as well.

Dems can try to do that, but republicans and ICE can respond in kind, and they can get away with getting violent as well.

Didn't Trump try to do that after Biden won?

 

[shionoro]

There is only one country in America that can remotely be considered as autocracy. That one is Nicaragua. It would be more accurate to name it as a two-party autocracy, but still is the closest one. USA will hardly become one, the day the constitution on its entirety is changed will slowly morph into one.

About the rest, well... it seems the most diminute outcome compared to the wonderful things he's doing. I'd gladly tolerate it.

What wonderful things is he doing?

Suppressing the BLM protests was not lawful, it went against freedom of speech, not to mention how cops turned the protests violent. Instead of saying, "hey we will stop being excessively violent and stop killing people," they got offended and refused to do that, and then they got more violent. It seems you are badly misinformed about what actually happened, but it wasn't the law enforcement being good, but being evil just as intended.

The cops did not do more to protect the Capitol on Jan 6. If it was a mob of Black men rioting, we'd have seen multiple deaths by now, instead of one death. They were protecting white men and women, and they did the bare minimum they could to do their job while avoiding hurting or killing the crazed right wingers. If I recall correctly, they did not try to escalate the violence here, as they have many times during BLM protests.

If areas predominantly immigrant or people of color are targeted, cops will be very happy to get violent. Even those that won't will try to justify it. Cops are not there to protect people, they are there to protect the interests of businesses and the wealthy. The military would have no problem doing that either, and they are less likely to have issues going after blue areas as well. Many military members are okay with Trump's bullshit, and they will support republican presidents without issue, usually.

He doesn't have to, at all. They're doing it very openly, even, by gerrymandering. Elon even admitted to tampering as well.

Dems can try to do that, but republicans and ICE can respond in kind, and they can get away with getting violent as well.

Didn't Trump try to do that after Biden won?

There were violations of the law when it comes to the BLM crackdowns, that is true. What i meant was that the policing of protests (policing as in all police actions, not just violent crackdowns) is a lawful, normal part of the job of the corresponding officers. It is true that, as with all police action, they oftentimes overstep their rights, but overstepping your rights when you are on a generally lawful part of your job is, psychologically, a very different thing from doing something that is openly unlawful.

We can see police, on command of Minnesota State officials, helping ICE indirectly when they stop protests in hotels. But the question is whether the police would intervene if Trump just ignores the Midterms and thousands of protestors would march to the capitol or otherwise wreak havoc. They would, in that case, not have clear command from their state officials (as it is unlikely blue states would give that order, same for state troops) and it would be very clear that the very mission is unlawful (while generally policing BLM protests is a normal part of their job).

I think if push comes to shove, a lot of the police or military would defect of Trump or Vance openly ignore an election and there are violent mass protests. At least if those protests are strong enough for them to understand that they'd risk their own skin here for a dictator.

 

[M3J]

You would still be wrong. Cops were not lawful at all, they were violent and caused violence at peaceful protests. Defending their behavior is wild when they're literally opposing not being able to kill Black people or get violent with them.

Cops would not intervene, especially when many of them support him and/or republicans. They don't care about unlawful, especially when they have no accountability and can usually get away with almost anything. Give them an opportunity to be violent, just as Trump would, and they'll take it.

POlicing BLM protests may be part of their job, but escalating it to riots and violence are not. You should stop watching Hollywood movies, cops in real life aren't as nice as the cops in movies.

 

[xi0]

There is only one country in America that can remotely be considered as autocracy. That one is Nicaragua. It would be more accurate to name it as a two-party autocracy, but still is the closest one. USA will hardly become one, the day the constitution on its entirety is changed will slowly morph into one.

About the rest, well... it seems the most diminute outcome compared to the wonderful things he's doing. I'd gladly tolerate it.

What value is that document when the Executive branch does whatever it wants regardless of what is said in it? and the Leglislative branch does nothing to stop him? The Judicial branch is the only branch blocking some of his administration's orders, but the Supreme court often undoes that, and when they don't he threatens sitting judges. If you're not willing to admit what that looks like, then you're just willfully ignorant. Nothing about this is "diminute".

 

[kkck]

One month since USA abducted Maduro.

*looks around*

No downsides yet.

 

[arrowofsky]

The easiest lever to me is shutting down all European US bases. They are pretty important for international US operations, especially in the middle east, and it does not harm any US civillians. This is something that has to upset a lot of Republican politicians and the military, too, making it much harder for Trump to try to manipulate the midterm result.

I can see the mindset but there are two things that makes this impractical:
1) from what I have seen Europe works with statements, sanctions, and stuff and at most indirect actions. Shutting down bases, maybe closing embassies and stuff against the USA are things I don't expect from them, especially after getting tired from Ukraine-Russia and many other attempts at getting independent from Russian imports.
2) as long as there are bases open in Türkiye, the lever you stated is not at max. effect, and they will never be unequivocally closed with European ones (and Europe itself is not as homogeneous anyway).

 

[xi0]

One month since USA abducted Maduro.

*looks around*

No downsides yet.

Even putting aside whether this is true or not -- how exactly do you evaluate the aftermath of this kind of thing a month out? Much less use it as some sort of justification? Doesn't make a lick of sense.

 

[kkck]

Even putting aside whether this is true or not -- how exactly do you evaluate the aftermath of this kind of thing a month out? Much less use it as some sort of justification? Doesn't make a lick of sense.

I'm looking at this day by day. And so far it doesn't look like the situation in venezuela has deteriorated. I don't particularly care about the justification part, my stance here is fuck socialism. It's not like international law or human rights folk ever did anything against maduro.

 

[shionoro]

2) as long as there are bases open in Türkiye, the lever you stated is not at max. effect, and they will never be unequivocally closed with European ones (and Europe itself is not as homogeneous anyway).

Ramstein in Germany is, for example, a major US relay node for the drone warfare. Closing all german US airbases would destroy a core nerve center of US operations all over the world. Turkey just does not have that infrastructure, it would have to be built up from the ground. And it is a far less predictable partner than the Europeans are. Turkey could never really replace that, even if the US heavily invests into it.

Drone warfare is still really important to the US and this is a huge lever that could deeply cripple it by just closing bases, maybe even just one base in one country.

Definitely would be a big escalation and the current German government would not do it unless heavily threatened, but it is still something to consider rather than a fullblown tradewar. Even just threatening to diminish cooperation with the US would probably be a big stick.

 

[James Rye]

Wow, that's...that's some racist vile shit Trump has posted. Crazy that Republicans are still defending even that. USA has gone completely cocko in the locko.

 

[shionoro]

I find it more and more probable that Trump might actually get impeached. All the republican incumbents resigning, the insanely low poll numbers and generally just the rising chaos is something Republicans cannot ignore forever. And I doubt all of them are on board with cancelling the midterms, as that is a bold move even if you would be willing to do it on an ethical level.

They will have to ask themselves whether they want to own all the shit Trump will do from now until November while Democrats win one special election after another. In addition to that, the way Trump moves forward pushes a lot of democratic leaning voters to the left, getting people elected that make republican donors angry.

If the plan is to manipulate or even cancel the midterms, what Trump does is very counterproductive. His actions, even tho moderate democrats are weak, push so much engagement from progressive movements that Democrats will have a far easier time to get people to observe elections, to help out with counting ballots, to check their voter registration and so on. Even if there is ICE marching around certain voting places, that alone is not going to offset this kind of engagement. It might even push it and it also gives any claims Trump later makes about voting manipulation less credible (as he obviously manipulated it himself and there will be courts certifying that).

Even if the plan is to get martial law into place my some manner, then having soldiers march on street right now without any credible provocation makes that less credible. Maybe the point is exhausting people so they will not stand up when Trump pushes martial law? But I doubt that works, people are getting angrier by the minute and by now there are actual pushes to arm themselves.

It looks more and more like there is no real plan, there are just singular actors with plans that do not go hand in hand.

 

[kkck]

How popular is Donald Trump?

Silver Bulletin approval ratings for President Trump — and all presidents since Truman.

www.natesilver.net

Trump isn't particularly less popular now than he has been before. IIRC with those numbers he is more popular than biden was most of his presidency and more popular than in his 2016 term. I think both got as low as 36-37% approval so 41% with all the shit that's going on is all things considered decent for trump.