There’s a lot to digest here.
The thing that struck me most though was the article mentions was the tactic of allowing voters to place their vote in any state. Voter Tourism, essentially.
As the article mentions - expect something similar from the administration.
If that happens then personally I think that’s a huge sign that the mid-terms will be compromised.
Free and fair democracy is so important. It must not be destroyed.
Democrats, election and mistake in the same headline. What else?
Eventually we’re going to have to wake up to the fact that the democrats are owned by the same billionaires and foreign lobby so until we get really serious about cleaning house we’re going to watch all of our rights slip away
I think a lot of people are aware but when your elected representatives won’t represent you, what do you do?
Personally, and I know this would be very difficult to organise, but I believe the most effective tool ordinary citizens have against Trump is a general strike.
The markets have been shown to be the only thing effective at restraining Trump. He only cares about money.
Workers are what make the economy, not the businesses. They have nothing without the hard work of everyday men and women.
Denying them labour in an organised manner could cripple the entire country.
Look at Britain in the 1970s/1980s or The Russian Revolution.
I’m aware it’s very difficult to achieve but I remain resolute in my belief that it is the most effective tool available. By far.
Much if what you said is true, but the strikes in the 70s moves the country right politically if anything - a decade and a half if Tory governments despite the protests IIRC.
That’s a good point!
I’m personally not sure it would because rather than unionised labour with special interests demanding pay increases and better working conditions we are talking about a massive general strike.
It’s true that it may well be like opening Pandora’s box.
The aims of the strike would need to be clear, concise and purely to stop violence. Using it as a tool to force a change of government would likely mean it’s use by others in the future.
I agree
They know they can’t win. They also know they’ll be called crazy if they say it .
The Democrats are working in concert with Republicans, their goals are the same: stop the Overton Window of American politics from moving left, and stop populist uprisings by putting a paramilitary secret police in the streets.
The DNC and corporate Democrats would rather have a fascist takeover than empower actual leftwing policies, so I don’t think that eventuality really bothers them as much as the possibility of losing control over the power structures of the Democratic party does.
For the leaders of the Democratic party, if they complete the parties transition to an entirely controlled opposition party if anything that makes the jobs of dumpsterfires like Chuck Shumer and Hakeem Jeffries easier, whenever their job gets hard they can just threaten anybody left of them that they will get hurt by their Republican colleagues and their violent thugs if they keep talking like that. They don’t have to campaign on doing or accomplishing anything since the fascist regime is in relative terms so horrific people will feel forced to vote against it for “opposition party” politicians who are worse than useless but still technically better.
I think it makes perfect sense for the power structures of the DNC to act like this will be a fair election, the best outcome for them is it won’t be and it will thus make the job of leaders in the DNC far easier. Then they can just work as an advertising campaign for something that doesn’t exist and nobody will have any expectations for them to actually be able to accomplish anything material. This is the dream job description for both Chuck Shumer and Hakeem Jeffries.
I have listened to Hakeem Jeffries a lot in interviews and the strangest thing is that I legitimately believe that he is a true believer in the Democratic project, and not a cynical opportunist. Somehow he believes that the neoliberal project from the 1990s that has already failed is truly the best way forward. Dude is a bit of a moron but I legitimately think he believes everything he says and does is right.
The DNC and corporate Democrats would rather have a fascist takeover than empower actual leftwing policies, so I don’t think that eventuality really bothers them as much as the possibility of losing control over the power structures of the Democratic party does.
I believe, as I’m sure many of you do, that this is because even though open and fair democracy is at stake here, their wealth is not.
A left wing agenda threatens their wealth. That is clearly the thing they care about most, to the detriment of their electorate.
I think it makes perfect sense for the power structures of the DNC to act like this will be a fair election, the best outcome for them is it won’t be and it will thus make the job of leaders in the DNC far easier.
Wow. I consider myself very cynical and but even I never would have thought of it like that. It does make sense though. If they take action now after delaying so long there will be cries of “what took you so long”. They need Trump to do something so awful, like abandon democracy completely, that the finger will only ever be pointed at him as the villain.
The US is crying out for competent third party that better represents the electorate. If funding could somehow be secured (massive or even impossible if) then they would surely wipe the floor with the Republicans and Democrats. By now many people surely feel they are no longer represented by either party.
Anyone paying attention knows the leadership wants to lose. They are doing everything in their power NOT to take advantage of political opportunities and side with the needs and concerns of their own base.
Fucking Federman before the 2024 election castigated his fellow Democrats for daring to use Trump’s actual fucking felony convictions against him as a political tool, because (according to him) Democrats are supposed to be “the party of forgiveness”. Just unbelievable bullshit from him, even worse than his “Trump signs are Pennsylvania’s state flower” comment.
One of many disappointments from the traitorous brain-broken ogre. It’s honestly sickening to see the capitulation, and all for what? Who benefits from the leadership driven cuckholdry that is a key component to today’s DNC?
This may just be me and my wild speculation but I suspect it has something to do with who funds them. Just a guess.
Anyway, flay citizen’s united into oblivion.
There will be ice poll watchers checking ID nationwide, this is the conservative wet dream.
On the plus side the growing number of people openly refusing to support the blue shade of MAGA might start to create progress. Many now see the party can not be reformed.
So when arrogant liberals filled with hubris ask how’s that revolution going I point to this and say it seems to be going fine.
I consider myself a centerist but it’s quite clear that a free and open democracy is at stake. You don’t need to want a revolution to see that it’s hugely threatened.
I am just as disappointed in the centre Democrats lack of action as I am with Donald Trump. If not more so. Their lack of coordinated and meaningful action to protect America’s democracy is criminal.
If free elections are compromised yet again they bare a similar amount of responsibility as the non MAGA Republicans.
Are you a centerist like you agree with half of GOPs policies or something else?
No, just ideologically and traditionally.
They don’t have any policies I’m aware of that are near the center currently, or if they do they are not getting much coverage.
They have had some reasonable ideas in the past, in between their mess of right wing policies that pander to conservatives and nut jobs.
This administration is nothing but a dictatorship without the name. I consider myself center. They are absolutely nowhere near it. It’s a mile down the road.
Center of what then? Stop dancing around it and justify your claimed position, because “centrism” sounds a lot like “I support economic policies that disenfranchise minorities but I don’t like to think of myself as a bigot, I just don’t like paying taxes.”
Why are you so angry at me? I’m just here for a sensible discussion man.
Center as in combining a capitalist free market economy with the social responsibility a government should have when looking after the welfare of it’s citizens and regulating businesses practices in a safe but not overbearing way.
I see myself as a centerist in the traditional way. I don’t believe there really is a “left” much in America. What is considered left wing in America would be classed as virtually center left or centerist anywhere in Europe, for instance. Even progressives in the US would be practically left of center elsewhere. There is no traditional left wing as it’s vilified.
I think minorities and migrants are beneficial to a country both economically and culturally. I do not oppose them in any way, nor support their disenfranchisement in any way. Nor have I said anything of the sort that would suggest I do.
If you’re still offended then you need to calm down.
Let me guess, ‘most important election of our lifetime™’
Or the classic ‘I agree with everything you say but this is the time’
Or are we going with the default ‘you just want Republicans to win’
Sorry? I don’t follow.
I wouldn’t say any of those things.
Are they campaigning?! I haven’t heard anything about what they plan to actually do if they sweep the mid terms.
Yeah, it’s still a bit early for midterm campaigns, but I imagine the “campaigning” they’re talking about is the general campaign stratgizing the election organizations do as a job. Midterms usually start kicking up around springtime.
I imagine at all times that the democrats are using the dumbest possible interpretation of whatever ambiguous concept or word they’ve said.
And what exactly does the author imagine as an alternative?
The Democrats to be talking more about the possibility of election manipulation by the GOP and making the public aware of their intent to fight any such plans, I imagine?
You’re right, it’s short on suggestions.
The big one in there for me is Voter Tourism.
If Trump and the GOP pass a bill allowing that, it’s game over.
The Democrats need to fight that and also I would argue any further changes at all to the electoral system with everything they have.
The article highlight
The Democrats to be talking more about the possibility of election manipulation by the GOP and making the public aware of their intent to fight any such plans, I imagine?
Why? To what end?
There is a political theory that says you should continue to participate in rigged or unfair elections, while explicitly calling them out as rigged, for the purpose of reaching people who are invested in electoralism and convincing them to engage in direct, mass action, such as strikes or revolution. That theory is called Marxism-Leninism. The democratic party are not Marxist-Leninists. They have no interest in getting people to abandon electoralism in favor of other means of resistance, they want the exact opposite of that.
There’s another political theory that says you shouldn’t focus your efforts on elections but should instead focus on building dual power through things like mutual aid networks. This theory is called Anarchism. The democratic party are not Anarchists. If you want to take that strategy, then you shouldn’t even be looking to the democratic party, because it is a political party.
So why on earth would a party that is completely committed to electoralism as the only avenue of affecting change go around telling people the elections are rigged? It’s nonsense. It goes against everything they believe in.
They are intrinsically tied to the system and they will continue to uphold the system until the day comes that they get dragged away to a torture dungeon in El Salvador. It’s technically correct that they should change, but I don’t see how it’s remotely possible that they would change to anything like the extent necessary.
There is a political theory that says you should continue to participate in rigged or unfair elections, while explicitly calling them out as rigged, for the purpose of reaching people who are invested in electoralism and convincing them to engage in direct, mass action, such as strikes or revolution. That theory is called Marxism-Leninism. The democratic party are not Marxist-Leninists
Are you sure on that? My understanding of Marxism is that they believe even fair elections are rigged, so to speak, because they are bourgeois election and they discourage all participation in any election that is a bourgeois election.
So why on earth would a party that is completely committed to electoralism as the only avenue of affecting change go around telling people the elections are rigged? It’s nonsense. It goes against everything they believe in.
That does make sense, you’re right. If the election is truly rigged though then aside from just accepting the doctored result, surely they have to call it out? Either you do or you don’t. It’s a binary decision, no?
By calling it out and stating exactly what they are doing, and how, you bring awareness to it and it shows the world that it is rigged. My hope is that then other countries will take economic action and populations across the world will begin to boycott thing i.e. The World Cup and USA made goods. This hits Trump in the only place he cares about. The economy.
The end goal being that once a stable and non-authoritarian government is in power they can amend the electoral system. That way the public and other nations are aware of why it needs changing and will hopefully support it.
It would essentially like Russia deposing Putin and installing a democratic party at the head of government, who then reform the electoral system.
That’s just my view.
What do you believe the Democratic party should be doing then? You’ve made it clear what you think they will do. Of you were in their position how would you deal with the rigged election situation?
Are you sure on that? My understanding of Marxism is that they believe even fair elections are rigged, so to speak, because they are bourgeois election and they discourage all participation in any election that is a bourgeois election.
Common misconception, but yes, I’m quite sure. Should We Participate in Bourgeois Parliaments? - V.I. Lenin
Even if only a fairly large minority of the industrial workers, and not “millions” and “legions”, follow the lead of the Catholic clergy—and a similar minority of rural workers follow the landowners and kulaks (Grossbauern)—it undoubtedly signifies that parliamentarianism in Germany has not yet politically outlived itself, that participation in parliamentary elections and in the struggle on the parliamentary rostrum is obligatory on the party of the revolutionary proletariat specifically for the purpose of educating the backward strata of its own class, and for the purpose of awakening and enlightening the undeveloped, downtrodden and ignorant rural masses. Whilst you lack the strength to do away with bourgeois parliaments and every other type of reactionary institution, you must work within them because it is there that you will still find workers who are duped by the priests and stultified by the conditions of rural life; otherwise you risk turning into nothing but windbags.
That’s an analysis that I agree with. I don’t think that Lenin’s goal of revolution is necessarily applicable to modern day conditions, but I think there are other methods like strikes that could be encouraged by a radical party.
By calling it out and stating exactly what they are doing, and how, you bring awareness to it and it shows the world that it is rigged. My hope is that then other countries will take economic action and populations across the world will begin to boycott thing i.e. The World Cup and USA made goods.
I think countries are more likely to take action based on the US’s bizarre and imperialistic foreign policy, which directly affects them, than the prospect that elections might not happen.
The thing is that there’s so much horrible shit that the administration is doing right now, in front of our eyes, that I don’t really see much point in messaging about what they might do. At that point, if elections do happen, then everyone who said they wouldn’t looks silly and discredited, and the administration gets to dismiss the opposition as doing paranoid fearmongering.
What do you believe the Democratic party should be doing then? You’ve made it clear what you think they will do. Of you were in their position how would you deal with the rigged election situation?
Well look, I fundamentally disagree with their approach, but if we’re talking about messaging strategy then I think we have to stay within the realm with what’s actually plausible. Since they’re committed to an electoral approach, they can’t cast doubts on the election because it could decrease turnout. They have to operate on the assumption that the elections will happen, and focus on criticizing things like ICE, while promising things that will materially improve people’s lives, like Mamdani’s approach.
Ah that was an interesting read. Thank you! I could also agree with some of what he says there.
As you also say though, strikes would be effective. More effective I believe if they can be organised properly. Trump has proven, as with Greenland amd his tariffs, that if the markets dive he will back down. That said, the aims would need to be clear. If the strikes try to force a change of government then it’s a tool others could also use in future, probably to great effect.
think countries are more likely to take action based on the US’s bizarre and imperialistic foreign policy,
That’s true. If the US is compromised by i fair elections though, I think the governments of other western democracies will see his government as a dictatorship at that point. They would be in for more of the same, supposedly indefinitely if Trump’s replacement was of the same mindset. I truly think that free elections is a red line for them. Just a theory though obviously.
The thing is that there’s so much horrible shit that the administration is doing right now, in front of our eyes, that I don’t really see much point in messaging about what they might do.
Again, true. I get your point! The thing is, Trumps base and his supporters repeatedly claim he is doing what he is elected to do. The idea of democracy and freedom is so rooted in every part of American life that, if it were truly under threat, I think there would be a big wake up call.
It’s one thing to say you are doing what you were elected to do. It’s another entirely to say you are doing things based on an election won very transparently by illegal means. Trump is down in the polls. It’s not like 2024. To pull of a big win he would have to engage in widespread manipulation that will be very difficult to conceal. If you can highlight just how rife it is, were it to happen, you can undermine his authority by pushing the message that he has no right to be in The White House (as long as you have clear proof). I think the Democrats need to be communicating exactly what Trump is doing to manipulate the elections and why he is doing it.
Since they’re committed to an electoral approach, they can’t cast doubts on the election because it could decrease turnout. They have to operate on the assumption that the elections will happen, and focus on criticizing things like ICE, while promising things that will materially improve people’s lives, like Mamdani’s approach.
This is the hard part though. If you fight someone who isn’t committed to free and fair elections in a free and fair election, without telling anyone that it’s not a fre and fair election then you’re setting yourself up to lose. I would argue keeping quiet and going along with it is exactly what Trump wants the Democrats to do.
I mean like, what are we supposed to do with this? You can say that democrats aren’t doing anything about this, but what does that even mean? The author goes on and on about the dangers of fixed elections and all, which, I mean, yeah, but it’s pretty easy to shift the burden of proof by making a claim that people aren’t doing anything about it. Okay? I can’t help but notice the author didn’t mention what they think they should see to “do something about it”. The only thing he mentions the dems are doing is running a campaign like business as usual, but nothing else. He makes the claim that this is the dems just ignoring the threats, but not only is that not necessarily true, it’s actually a legitimate political tactic used to fight said election fraud. I don’t know if the dems are actually doing that or disregarding the dangers and pretending like everything is fine as the author implies, but the author also doesn’t know that. This reeks of doomer/defeatist bullshit.
Let’s not get it twisted; I’m not defending the dems at all. My take is that some of them are doing things, and lots of establishment dems are doing nothing to the point of obstructing any form of resistance other dem officials are trying. I think the reason the establishment dems are like this is just plain apathy and complacency, but that’s just speculation. In terms of democrats resisting election interference, I think they’re just too scattered and aimless in approach to make meaningful progress.
So to my point, if it is the case that dems(or literally anyone else) are actually doing some form of something, then that gives people something to join and something to do. However, if we’re faced with “the dems are doing nothing”, then boy does that sure give fuel to those that want us to be hopeless and do nothing. So, again, what’s the point of this article?
You can say that democrats aren’t doing anything about this, but what does that even mean?
I think the author is drawing attention to the lack of public discussion by the Democrats over whether Trump will try to manipulate the election results. The lack of public statements regarding preparation for such a matter as well.
Have there been any in fact?
When the SAVE act passes, that will eliminate most of the married women voters. They’ll pass it the day before the election because it takes more than a day to get the paperwork together.
Sorry women—no more voting for you.
