webdiplomacy.net

Supreme Court nominations, Senatorial seats in balance (after half-hearted Impeachment) , and voting in a pandemic (with related mail-ins, voter suppression, and fraud acqusations). All combine to make this unlike any other.

And so some are speculating about the worst case scenarios:

Civil war in the US: https://medium.com/@mikeselinker/a-warg ... 5b2e980099

What I would be doing to prepare? If I was an American, probably seriously consider emigration. If I wasn't a pacifist, getting a gun. If I lived in a blue state, probably huddling down and hoping state power was enough to protect me. If I was a blue in a red state, definitely consider relocating.... If I was a red, again, arming myself and looking for the peaceful solutions (which republican leaders/senators will oppose any military action against the citizens).

Are you an American? Cause where I live/work/hang out, almost no one gives much of a shit. In a country where barely half of people even vote, there won't be a civil war over an election. At least not yet.

I am not American, and have not been to the US in the 21st century.

I hope you are correct about the apathy of the electorate. I suspect, given the amount of protest and violence we have already seen this year (both against the corona virus restrictions and against police brutality) there will be limited unrest at the very least.

Many, many people are concerned. What happens if Trump gradually loses as the mail-in/absentee votes come in...and he starts calling the vote illegitimate (he has already prepped his supporters for this) and his supporters start inciting unrest at counting locations (i.e. Florida 2000 on steroids)? What happens if Biden wins the popular vote by far more than Hillary Clinton (6+ million)...but ultimately loses by a few thousand votes in a handful of states (which may have hinged on court challenges to mail in ballots)?

I still hope we can muddle through. I think getting over-excited about it though (e.g. getting a gun) would just make unrest more likely.

@flash, I think you are right, getting a gun makes unrest more likely. If the figures in the article I linked are correct, many Americans have already gotten guns this year (many= millions)

With voting starting in some states, there are complaints of Trump supporters in Virginia intimidating voters at polling places. They stay just outside the legal limit, but being armed they scare early voters.
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-supporters ... 29099.html

I would argue that this kind of intimidation is an act of violence, and doing so at a polling place makes it an act of political violence.

I might stop short of calling it terrorism, but it is specifically designed to terrorise. Even if they think they are protecting the integrity of the election. They are actually normalising the violence, armed groups on the street, and potential civil war to come.

Might there be isolated instances of violence/unrest? Sure. Full blown civil war? Nah. The first group to pull that crap loses big time.

I don't suppose anyone has any images of this supposed intimidation? I'm not entirely sure what what's particularly intimidating about a protest held away from the limits of the polling station, to be honest. Sounds more like an attempt by Democrats to try and invigorate their base with stories of fighting the good fight.

Octavious wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:09 pm

I don't suppose anyone has any images of this supposed intimidation? I'm not entirely sure what what's particularly intimidating about a protest held away from the limits of the polling station, to be honest. Sounds more like an attempt by Democrats to try and invigorate their base with stories of fighting the good fight.

Here you go:

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/loca ... y/2424398/

I don't think this sort of stuff is appropriate.

Another one. Voting is being done inside the building. These people are right out front:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/19/us/p ... ginia.html

This is not normal

There's a reason that polling places have marked signs showing how close protestors can get. Historically in the South, armed police and other white supremacists intimidated Black voters at polling places to prevent their voting. Trump called for Republicans to do that.

Trump keeps pushing anti-Semitic lines:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-said-j ... 49558.html

Which is strange because his son-in-law is Jewish and his daughter converted. Although he yelled at them for going to Canada to observe Passover instead of staying in Washington, D. C. to help push through his budget.

I guess they are more loyal to Herr Trump than daring to correct his anti-Semitic views.

So nobody was blocked from entering the polling station, nobody was prevented from voting, nobody was assaulted, and nobody was threatened? Is any law actually being broken here?

flash2015 wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:34 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:09 pm

I don't suppose anyone has any images of this supposed intimidation? I'm not entirely sure what what's particularly intimidating about a protest held away from the limits of the polling station, to be honest. Sounds more like an attempt by Democrats to try and invigorate their base with stories of fighting the good fight.

Here you go:

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/loca ... y/2424398/

I don't think this sort of stuff is appropriate.

I dunno in what part of the country you live, but when I used to vote in CT, it was normal to have college students out by the voting place working for Democrats. It isn’t intimidating unless you want it to be, or at least it wasn’t intimidating for me.

Frankly I suspect that there's infinitely more intimidation because of postal voting than activists waving flags near voting booths. Take away the anonymity of the voting booth in favour of a letter and you open up the system to all sorts of abuse. Postal voting has a place when absolutely necessary, but the scale being used in the US is ridiculous.

As is voting already starting before even the debates have happened.

As is holding the election in flu season in the middle of the pandemic. Any nation with an ounce of sense would have delayed it until the summer

New England Fire Squad wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:52 am

flash2015 wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:34 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:09 pm

I don't suppose anyone has any images of this supposed intimidation? I'm not entirely sure what what's particularly intimidating about a protest held away from the limits of the polling station, to be honest. Sounds more like an attempt by Democrats to try and invigorate their base with stories of fighting the good fight.

Here you go:

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/loca ... y/2424398/

I don't think this sort of stuff is appropriate.

I dunno in what part of the country you live, but when I used to vote in CT, it was normal to have college students out by the voting place working for Democrats. It isn’t intimidating unless you want it to be, or at least it wasn’t intimidating for me.

I may know something about this as I once was a volunteer for the local member in Australia (before I became old and cynical, I used to a member of the Australian Labour Party) and my wife is a volunteer for the local democratic party candidate here in NY.

If you read carefully I didn't say their actions rose to full on voter intimidation, just that I would argue it was inappropriate. There is a difference between a few kids outfront giving out flyers and throwing a mini rally in front of the polling place.

Octavious wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:35 am

Frankly I suspect that there's infinitely more intimidation because of postal voting than activists waving flags near voting booths. Take away the anonymity of the voting booth in favour of a letter and you open up the system to all sorts of abuse. Postal voting has a place when absolutely necessary, but the scale being used in the US is ridiculous.

As is voting already starting before even the debates have happened.

As is holding the election in flu season in the middle of the pandemic. Any nation with an ounce of sense would have delayed it until the summer

I don't know why voting is so messed up in the US. They seem to not have enough polling booths to handle a proper turnout. Even in the primary which had early voting and generally has low turnout, especially compared to a real election (my wife had been volunteering for several days), there were lines around the corner and down the street to vote...which is nuts.

I am not the greatest fan of mail in voting, but least to my understanding, no one is being forced to vote by mail, it is just another option. And many states have a "double envelope" system to help maintain anonymity (there was a recent court case in Pennsylvania about it). In most states you still also need to formally request a mail-in ballot (my wife just did this in NY). Multiple states have been doing widespread mail-in voting for years without issue. The biggest issue with it is it takes much more time to process...as checks need to be made to verify signatures and verify people haven't voted twice. In many states this process cannot start until election day so the result may take much longer than usual to calculate.

I am not sure why mail-in voting is relevant to this specific issue though. Even if mail-in voting does have issues, it doesn't mean it is OK to engage in voter intimidation at the polling booth...though in this instance I don't believe the Trump supporters actions fully rise to that bar.

The great feature of the polling booth is that you go in on your own, you leave on your own, and the only person who has a clue who you voted for is you. Nobody can force your hand or put pressure on you, intentionally or otherwise, to vote in any way other than the way you want. You can be driven to the booth by Conservative party volunteers and vote Labour and no one is any the wiser. You can tell your Green Party candidate husband that you're supporting him all the way and vote UKIP if you really want. That is something I believe is extremely valuable and well worth defending.

Vote by mail and what you in effect have is a public voting booth at home. The guarantee of privacy is gone. The freedom to vote free from the influence of others is lost. That, to me, is a major issue. Voting by mail should be a last resort only if voting in person is impossible. You should have to apply well in advance and state your reasons for needing it.

We can have a whole separate thread on the good and bad of vote-by-mail. Not sure this is relevant here...unless you are arguing "vote by mail may have problems this means voter intimidation at polling places is OK".

There is also no chance of delaying the election. In the US election dates are fixed.