Election integrity and the transfer of power

[malchior]

How would a civil war even work with the kind of geographical distribution this country has? Side A is one coast, half of the other coast, a couple of bumps in the center, plus all of the cities. Side B has everything in between. And both sides have a not-insignificant minority in the others' areas. I mean, it would be countryside vs cities, and it would be that way in every state. One side has most of the guns, but the other side has more of the population and most of the infrastructure/manufacturing/most of the shipping/more of the money. The other has the food and transport.

And the military, which is more conservative, but also sworn to the Constitution? And the police, which are in the liberal cities, tend toward the conservative. And then there is the fact that the two 'sides' only represent half of the population. How do the 'undecided' and 'independent' votes fall when it comes to blooshed and coup?

It wouldn't be a war. It would be a mosh pit with guns.

It won't looked like last time. It will be localized flare ups of unrest with politicians fighting to control the government response. It will be a fight for resources as federal troops/agencies, National Guard, and local police forces are pulled at by the various power factions.

80% of the country will continue to get their Amazon deliveries and Chipotle as they watch twitter feeds of isolated uprisings and proxy skirmishes.

Don't forget the assassinations. Judges and various bureaucrats are going to be targets.

[Blackhawk]

Like I said: a mosh pit with guns.

[gbasden]

Like I said: a mosh pit with guns.

If elections were blatantly stolen I could see blocks of states potentially pushing for some sort of secession. But yeah, after that, what happens becomes a lot of internal chaos.

[Smoove_B]

This is fine:

Republicans who sought to undercut or overturn President Joe Biden’s election win are launching campaigns to become their states’ top election officials next year, alarming local officeholders and opponents who are warning about pro-Trump, “ends justify the means” candidates taking big roles in running the vote.

The candidates include Rep. Jody Hice of Georgia, a leader of the congressional Republicans who voted against certifying the 2020 Electoral College results; Arizona state Rep. Mark Finchem, one of the top proponents of the conspiracy-tinged vote audit in Arizona’s largest county; Nevada’s Jim Marchant, who sued to have his 5-point congressional loss last year overturned; and Michigan’s Kristina Karamo, who made dozens of appearances in conservative media to claim fraud in the election.

Now, they are running for secretary of state in key battlegrounds that could decide control of Congress in 2022 — and who wins the White House in 2024. Their candidacies come with former President Donald Trump still fixated on spreading falsehoods about the 2020 election, insisting he won and lying about widespread and systemic fraud. Each of their states has swung between the two parties over the last decade, though it is too early to tell how competitive their elections will be.

America is in trouble.

[El Guapo]

Yeah, and the thing is I'm not totally sure how we're going to stop it. Nov. 2024 - Jan. 2025 is going to be quite the scene.

[malchior]

Yeah, and the thing is I'm not totally sure how we're going to stop it. Nov. 2024 - Jan. 2025 is going to be quite the scene.

Based on what we know now I think we're in big, big trouble. In the very likely chance that the GOP takes the House next year they'll have multiple paths to 'legally' throw democracy out.

[Octavious]

Trump laid the groundwork to overthrow the country and I don't see any reason that they don't run with it. Nobody seems to want to stop them. It's batshit insane what that fucker did.

[El Guapo]

Yeah, and the thing is I'm not totally sure how we're going to stop it. Nov. 2024 - Jan. 2025 is going to be quite the scene.

Based on what we know now I think we're in big, big trouble. In the very likely chance that the GOP takes the House next year they'll have multiple paths to 'legally' throw democracy out.

It's ultimately the House and Senate elected in 2024 that will have the big fight over election certification, right?

The thing is that even if the forces of democracy triumph in 2024 - 2025 (which is far from certain) I really don't see how we get out of it without needing mass protests / rallies, which will probably also mean at least some street fights.

[Smoove_B]

Totally reasonable. I'm sure there's a logical and non-evil reason they're doing this.

Texas Senate bill #SB7 would drastically close polling places in large urban Dem counties. 13 of 24 House districts in Harris County, all represented by Dems, would lose polling places while GOP areas would gain polling places or no change. Outrageous

[Skinypupy]

Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked have been sacked. The auditors hired to continue the audit after the other people had been sacked, wish it to be known that they have just been sacked.

Yet another recount/audit being proposed in AZ. This one from a guy who is pretty sure his homebrew software can manage it, but admits that it may not be up to the task. Oh well...full speed ahead!

The group’s founder Ray Lutz told the Republic that the audit would amount to a “grand test” of his technology, which he calls “AuditEngine,” and which purports to be able to re-tabulate ballots cast on other machines.

“I think it is certainly a big test for me, because I have put a lot of work on it for the last year and a half or so,” Lutz said. “We have enhanced it to the point now where I believe we can do a lot to provide information about how well (this election) went.”

He added later that “sometimes we see mistakes that are made, on our side.”

The grift NEVER ends.

[Smoove_B]

The Texas House of Representatives will take up a bill on Sunday that proposes what would be among the most far-reaching laws in Republicans’ nationwide drive to overhaul elections systems and limit voting.

Taking up a bill on a Sunday during a holiday weekend --in case you were wondering what was important to these clowns the next time legislation in TX stalls out.

[YellowKing]

I don't want to hear another Republican talk about how much they respect veterans and the military. If you can restrict people from voting, one of the most fundamental rights that thousands of veterans sacrificed their lives for, you don't deserve to be breathing the same air on this planet as a veteran.

[Drazzil]

I was listening to podcasts this afternoon and I came across this podcast called "The New Abnormal". Now normally these guys are a little right wing for me to take too seriously but the latest podcast called "Will Biden ever get off his ass to save Democracy?" to be a good one. It features a beltway type guy who says that the Biden administration thinks that he wants to be the one to bring republicans and democrats together and thinks the way to do this is to be bipartisan and try to address "pocketbook issues" of the average American. He also seems to insinuate that the Democrats think that they can overcome the roadblocks being thrown up by the republicans.

[Holman]

I was listening to podcasts this afternoon and I came across this podcast called "The New Abnormal". Now normally these guys are a little right wing for me to take too seriously but the latest podcast called "Will Biden ever get off his ass to save Democracy?" to be a good one. It features a beltway type guy who says that the Biden administration thinks that he wants to be the one to bring republicans and democrats together and thinks the way to do this is to be bipartisan and try to address "pocketbook issues" of the average American. He also seems to insinuate that the Democrats think that they can overcome the roadblocks being thrown up by the republicans.

IIRC, this podcast is hosted by Rick Wilson (ardent Never-Trumper with a dark history of pre-Trump GOP election engineering) and Molly Jong-Fast (a more traditionally liberal-feminist pundit).

[malchior]

That's right - I posted a tweet a few days ago where Rick Wilson was channeling some of that 'WTF is the plan here' frustration. The guy was a bareknuckle politics operator so he knows what he is talking about. The Dems obviously have a different style but he has a point. We're dealing with multiples crises where everyone is acting like everything is fine like it'll will normality into form. It won't and they need to figure it the fuck out soon.

[Drazzil]

I was listening to podcasts this afternoon and I came across this podcast called "The New Abnormal". Now normally these guys are a little right wing for me to take too seriously but the latest podcast called "Will Biden ever get off his ass to save Democracy?" to be a good one. It features a beltway type guy who says that the Biden administration thinks that he wants to be the one to bring republicans and democrats together and thinks the way to do this is to be bipartisan and try to address "pocketbook issues" of the average American. He also seems to insinuate that the Democrats think that they can overcome the roadblocks being thrown up by the republicans.

IIRC, this podcast is hosted by Rick Wilson (ardent Never-Trumper with a dark history of pre-Trump GOP election engineering) and Molly Jong-Fast (a more traditionally liberal-feminist pundit).

Rick Wilson was removed from the podcast about 2 months ago. Now its some other dude who sounds like him, but isin\t as funny. As I said. F the podcast, just listen to the guest.

[malchior]

I was listening to podcasts this afternoon and I came across this podcast called "The New Abnormal". Now normally these guys are a little right wing for me to take too seriously but the latest podcast called "Will Biden ever get off his ass to save Democracy?" to be a good one. It features a beltway type guy who says that the Biden administration thinks that he wants to be the one to bring republicans and democrats together and thinks the way to do this is to be bipartisan and try to address "pocketbook issues" of the average American. He also seems to insinuate that the Democrats think that they can overcome the roadblocks being thrown up by the republicans.

IIRC, this podcast is hosted by Rick Wilson (ardent Never-Trumper with a dark history of pre-Trump GOP election engineering) and Molly Jong-Fast (a more traditionally liberal-feminist pundit).

Rick Wilson was removed from the podcast about 2 months ago. Now its some other dude who sounds like him, but isin\t as funny. As I said. F the podcast, just listen to the guest.

I just read about it. Both Rick and Molly worked at the Lincoln Project. When the John Weaver scandal melted down Molly left and Rick stayed on. They have decided to 'take a pause' on appearances on the podcast until the investigation into John Weaver is completed.

[Drazzil]

Molly is still there. Rick is gone. We're getting lost in the weeds here though.

My point is this. When the Republicans realized that they could just jerrymander and steal their way to elections and that the democrats would do nothing (see Bush v Gore) we got set on a path in which the result was pretty much inevitable. Obama was our last real chance to set this nation right, but then he sorta betrayed the people who got him elected. His presidency became the left's sort of cult of personality in which he could do no wrong. Trump was America's reaction to Obama and his (IMO) betrayals of the poor, working and middle class.

Now the US does nothing but stumble its way from one crisis to the next, with each crisis being used by the politicians and the rich to steal more of our freedom, and or wealth and standard of living.

We're facing too many deep systemic issues to come out of the end of 2024 unscathed. The Democrats will not change anything major, the Republicans won't allow them. 2022 will be a BAD year for Democrats as few, if any of the promises Biden ran on will come to fruition, and all the people who turned out to keep Trump from retaining the presidency, that got drunk on the hopium that Stacy Abrams and her people used to eke out a victory in Georgia will be conspicuously absent this time around. The Republicans (if they don't win outright) will REFUSE to certify the results and that'll be the game.

I doubt Biden or the Democrats will have spine enough to ignore the SC and the house. They will just quietly go away. I think Biden knows this. The Democrats have to know this, they get high level briefings by people who tell them this. I'd be shocked SHOCKED if most of the high level Democrats haven't made deals to sit on boards, or get out of the country, or to be left alone by the R's in return for NOT fighting this. It's just the nature of the game for Democrats to cave. This is no different.

[Holman]

The Texas House of Representatives will take up a bill on Sunday that proposes what would be among the most far-reaching laws in Republicans’ nationwide drive to overhaul elections systems and limit voting.

Taking up a bill on a Sunday during a holiday weekend --in case you were wondering what was important to these clowns the next time legislation in TX stalls out.

Dems in the TX House staged a walkout, preventing the quorum necessary for this vote to go forward.

The governor will surely call a special session and make the bill passable that way, but it was a nice show of spine.

[Isgrimnur]

In 2003, they fled to Albuquerque. They should pick a different state this time.

[Zaxxon]

More concern.

We, the undersigned, are scholars of democracy who have watched the recent deterioration of U.S. elections and liberal democracy with growing alarm. Specifically, we have watched with deep concern as Republican-led state legislatures across the country have in recent months proposed or implemented what we consider radical changes to core electoral procedures in response to unproven and intentionally destructive allegations of a stolen election. Collectively, these initiatives are transforming several states into political systems that no longer meet the minimum conditions for free and fair elections. Hence, our entire democracy is now at risk.

When democracy breaks down, it typically takes many years, often decades, to reverse the downward spiral. In the process, violence and corruption typically flourish, and talent and wealth flee to more stable countries, undermining national prosperity. It is not just our venerated institutions and norms that are at risk—it is our future national standing, strength, and ability to compete globally.

Statutory changes in large key electoral battleground states are dangerously politicizing the process of electoral administration, with Republican-controlled legislatures giving themselves the power to override electoral outcomes on unproven allegations should Democrats win more votes. They are seeking to restrict access to the ballot, the most basic principle underlying the right of all adult American citizens to participate in our democracy. They are also putting in place criminal sentences and fines meant to intimidate and scare away poll workers and nonpartisan administrators. State legislatures have advanced initiatives that curtail voting methods now preferred by Democratic-leaning constituencies, such as early voting and mail voting. Republican lawmakers have openly talked about ensuring the “purity” and “quality” of the vote, echoing arguments widely used across the Jim Crow South as reasons for restricting the Black vote.

State legislators supporting these changes have cited the urgency of “electoral integrity” and the need to ensure that elections are secure and free of fraud. But by multiple expert judgments, the 2020 election was extremely secure and free of fraud. The reason that Republican voters have concerns is because many Republican officials, led by former President Donald Trump, have manufactured false claims of fraud, claims that have been repeatedly rejected by courts of law, and which Trump’s own lawyers have acknowledged were mere speculation when they testified about them before judges.

In future elections, these laws politicizing the administration and certification of elections could enable some state legislatures or partisan election officials to do what they failed to do in 2020: reverse the outcome of a free and fair election. Further, these laws could entrench extended minority rule, violating the basic and longstanding democratic principle that parties that get the most votes should win elections.

Democracy rests on certain elemental institutional and normative conditions. Elections must be neutrally and fairly administered. They must be free of manipulation. Every citizen who is qualified must have an equal right to vote, unhindered by obstruction. And when they lose elections, political parties and their candidates and supporters must be willing to accept defeat and acknowledge the legitimacy of the outcome. The refusal of prominent Republicans to accept the outcome of the 2020 election, and the anti-democratic laws adopted (or approaching adoption) in Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Montana and Texas—and under serious consideration in other Republican-controlled states—violate these principles. More profoundly, these actions call into question whether the United States will remain a democracy. As scholars of democracy, we condemn these actions in the strongest possible terms as a betrayal of our precious democratic heritage.

The most effective remedy for these anti-democratic laws at the state level is federal action to protect equal access of all citizens to the ballot and to guarantee free and fair elections. Just as it ultimately took federal voting rights law to put an end to state-led voter suppression laws throughout the South, so federal law must once again ensure that American citizens’ voting rights do not depend on which party or faction happens to be dominant in their state legislature, and that votes are cast and counted equally, regardless of the state or jurisdiction in which a citizen happens to live. This is widely recognized as a fundamental principle of electoral integrity in democracies around the world.

A new voting rights law (such as that proposed in the John Lewis Voting Rights Act) is essential but alone is not enough. True electoral integrity demands a comprehensive set of national standards that ensure the sanctity and independence of election administration, guarantee that all voters can freely exercise their right to vote, prevent partisan gerrymandering from giving dominant parties in the states an unfair advantage in the process of drawing congressional districts, and regulate ethics and money in politics.

It is always far better for major democracy reforms to be bipartisan, to give change the broadest possible legitimacy. However, in the current hyper-polarized political context such broad bipartisan support is sadly lacking. Elected Republican leaders have had numerous opportunities to repudiate Trump and his “Stop the Steal” crusade, which led to the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6. Each time, they have sidestepped the truth and enabled the lie to spread.

We urge members of Congress to do whatever is necessary—including suspending the filibuster—in order to pass national voting and election administration standards that both guarantee the vote to all Americans equally, and prevent state legislatures from manipulating the rules in order to manufacture the result they want. Our democracy is fundamentally at stake. History will judge what we do at this moment.

Signatures at the link.

[Drazzil]

More concern.

We, the undersigned, are scholars of democracy who have watched the recent deterioration of U.S. elections and liberal democracy with growing alarm. Specifically, we have watched with deep concern as Republican-led state legislatures across the country have in recent months proposed or implemented what we consider radical changes to core electoral procedures in response to unproven and intentionally destructive allegations of a stolen election. Collectively, these initiatives are transforming several states into political systems that no longer meet the minimum conditions for free and fair elections. Hence, our entire democracy is now at risk.

When democracy breaks down, it typically takes many years, often decades, to reverse the downward spiral. In the process, violence and corruption typically flourish, and talent and wealth flee to more stable countries, undermining national prosperity. It is not just our venerated institutions and norms that are at risk—it is our future national standing, strength, and ability to compete globally.

Statutory changes in large key electoral battleground states are dangerously politicizing the process of electoral administration, with Republican-controlled legislatures giving themselves the power to override electoral outcomes on unproven allegations should Democrats win more votes. They are seeking to restrict access to the ballot, the most basic principle underlying the right of all adult American citizens to participate in our democracy. They are also putting in place criminal sentences and fines meant to intimidate and scare away poll workers and nonpartisan administrators. State legislatures have advanced initiatives that curtail voting methods now preferred by Democratic-leaning constituencies, such as early voting and mail voting. Republican lawmakers have openly talked about ensuring the “purity” and “quality” of the vote, echoing arguments widely used across the Jim Crow South as reasons for restricting the Black vote.

State legislators supporting these changes have cited the urgency of “electoral integrity” and the need to ensure that elections are secure and free of fraud. But by multiple expert judgments, the 2020 election was extremely secure and free of fraud. The reason that Republican voters have concerns is because many Republican officials, led by former President Donald Trump, have manufactured false claims of fraud, claims that have been repeatedly rejected by courts of law, and which Trump’s own lawyers have acknowledged were mere speculation when they testified about them before judges.

In future elections, these laws politicizing the administration and certification of elections could enable some state legislatures or partisan election officials to do what they failed to do in 2020: reverse the outcome of a free and fair election. Further, these laws could entrench extended minority rule, violating the basic and longstanding democratic principle that parties that get the most votes should win elections.

Democracy rests on certain elemental institutional and normative conditions. Elections must be neutrally and fairly administered. They must be free of manipulation. Every citizen who is qualified must have an equal right to vote, unhindered by obstruction. And when they lose elections, political parties and their candidates and supporters must be willing to accept defeat and acknowledge the legitimacy of the outcome. The refusal of prominent Republicans to accept the outcome of the 2020 election, and the anti-democratic laws adopted (or approaching adoption) in Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Montana and Texas—and under serious consideration in other Republican-controlled states—violate these principles. More profoundly, these actions call into question whether the United States will remain a democracy. As scholars of democracy, we condemn these actions in the strongest possible terms as a betrayal of our precious democratic heritage.

The most effective remedy for these anti-democratic laws at the state level is federal action to protect equal access of all citizens to the ballot and to guarantee free and fair elections. Just as it ultimately took federal voting rights law to put an end to state-led voter suppression laws throughout the South, so federal law must once again ensure that American citizens’ voting rights do not depend on which party or faction happens to be dominant in their state legislature, and that votes are cast and counted equally, regardless of the state or jurisdiction in which a citizen happens to live. This is widely recognized as a fundamental principle of electoral integrity in democracies around the world.

A new voting rights law (such as that proposed in the John Lewis Voting Rights Act) is essential but alone is not enough. True electoral integrity demands a comprehensive set of national standards that ensure the sanctity and independence of election administration, guarantee that all voters can freely exercise their right to vote, prevent partisan gerrymandering from giving dominant parties in the states an unfair advantage in the process of drawing congressional districts, and regulate ethics and money in politics.

It is always far better for major democracy reforms to be bipartisan, to give change the broadest possible legitimacy. However, in the current hyper-polarized political context such broad bipartisan support is sadly lacking. Elected Republican leaders have had numerous opportunities to repudiate Trump and his “Stop the Steal” crusade, which led to the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6. Each time, they have sidestepped the truth and enabled the lie to spread.

We urge members of Congress to do whatever is necessary—including suspending the filibuster—in order to pass national voting and election administration standards that both guarantee the vote to all Americans equally, and prevent state legislatures from manipulating the rules in order to manufacture the result they want. Our democracy is fundamentally at stake. History will judge what we do at this moment.

Signatures at the link.

Congress: Up and down hand motion with a loose fist and a slight smirk

[Smoove_B]

I missed this yesterday. Seems like...maybe it should be bigger news?

Texas AG Ken Paxton said yesterday that if he hadn’t been successful with lawsuits to block mail-in ballots, Trump definitely would have lost the election in Texas.

[Zaxxon]

The quiet part out loud is now just the out loud part.

[El Guapo]

I missed this yesterday. Seems like...maybe it should be bigger news?

Texas AG Ken Paxton said yesterday that if he hadn’t been successful with lawsuits to block mail-in ballots, Trump definitely would have lost the election in Texas.

It should be.

I do wonder what support there is for the claim that the lawsuits were the difference in Texas. It's sort of a bizarre situation where Paxton has political incentive to make a claim that should be a scandal, because he needs to tout his "I did everything I could no matter how shady to help Trump win!" credentials to be a GOP member in good standing. Meaning he has incentive to make the claim even if the support for it is weak.

[noxiousdog]

I don't believe him.

This is mail in votes are scary and you're so lucky to have me quote. Note that the George P. Bush wants to take his job by being Trumpier than Paxson.

[Smoove_B]

I feel like I keep saying this, but I guess this goes here?

NEW: @LeaderMcConnell is not supportive of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act that @JoeManchinWV and @lisamurkowski have backed as an alternative to S1/HR1:

“It’s against the law to discriminate in voting on the basis of race, already. And so I think it's unnecessary.”

[Zaxxon]

Who knew it was that easy?

[Isgrimnur]

[Skinypupy]

I feel like I keep saying this, but I guess this goes here?

NEW: @LeaderMcConnell is not supportive of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act that @JoeManchinWV and @lisamurkowski have backed as an alternative to S1/HR1:

“It’s against the law to discriminate in voting on the basis of race, already. And so I think it's unnecessary.”

Gods, he is infuriating.

"In the name of 'election security', we're doing everything possible to make it disproportionally more difficult for minorities to vote. That's technically not discriminating against them!"

[YellowKing]

Classic McConnell. This is what happens when very intelligent people use their intellect for evil. If he can twist it around, he will, and if he can't twist it around he'll call it unnecessary or redundant.

[malchior]

This sounds legit.

[Smoove_B]

Joe Manchin to the rescue for maintain election integrity:

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., opened the door to a compromise on federal voting and campaign finance legislation Wednesday with a memo outlining provisions that he would support.

...

On Wednesday, he reaffirmed to reporters that he still believes voting legislation — including his own proposed version — should be passed on a bipartisan basis and he doesn’t back amending the filibuster rules to pass it without Republican support.

Manchin's compromise proposal include changes to both bills. He supports making Election Day a public holiday, offering 15 consecutive days of early voting for federal elections and automatic voter registration through state departments of motor vehicles.

He also proposes requiring voter identification but allowing alternatives like utility bills to suffice as proof of identity.

BREAKTHROUGH:

Stacey Abrams tells @JohnBerman on @NewDay that she supports Joe Manchin's voting rights compromise

[Carpet_pissr]

This sounds legit.

‘Secure lab’? Are we mixing our headlines with pandemic news now? :p

[Skinypupy]

BREAKTHROUGH:

Stacey Abrams tells @JohnBerman on @NewDay that she supports Joe Manchin's voting rights compromise

"Manchin no longer supports his own voting rights proposal after hearing that Dems are on board."

Breaking news tomorrow, probably.

[El Guapo]

Well, that's progress. It's not going to mean anything if he's not ultimately willing to permit some procedural mechanism for it to pass with less than 60 votes, but it's miles better than "no". Also, I've read a number of persuasive articles arguing that H.R. 1 ("For the People Act") is in many ways poorly designed to tackle the most dire threats to our democracy, especially since it would do little to address direct subversion of election results and harassing poll workers and volunteers. So there are a number of revisions that should be done anyway.

[pr0ner]

BREAKTHROUGH:

Stacey Abrams tells @JohnBerman on @NewDay that she supports Joe Manchin's voting rights compromise

"Manchin no longer supports his own voting rights proposal after hearing that Dems are on board."

Breaking news tomorrow, probably.

McConnell's already publically trashed the compromise bill, sooooooo....

[Smoove_B]

Only in this timeline does it mater what the Senate Minority Leader thinks or says.

[Zaxxon]

Only in this timeline does it mater what the Senate Minority Leader thinks or says.

Unfortunately in this timeline McConnell is always the most important person in the Senate.

[Drazzil]

Only in this timeline does it mater what the Senate Minority Leader thinks or says.

Unfortunately in this timeline McConnell is always the most important person in the Senate.

I wish that ghoul would have an "accident"