this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2025
951 points (98.3% liked)

politics

24129 readers
4851 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 72 points 2 days ago (5 children)

OK, next question: Let's say we do a 'recount' at this hour, assuming the evidence isn't already lost, what then?

Think he's going to go, ohh my bad?

Think he's going to leave willingly?

Think the court case will even be appropriately handled once it goes to the SCOTUS.

Think the SCOTUS will even hear it?

How is it 100 days later, we just now hear about this?

[–] ClydapusGotwald@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Last time he had to go the Capitol was stormed by terrorists.

[–] ssfckdt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think the best outcome would be that it might uncover deliberate malfeasance that might prompt some folks in congress to do what is needed. I wouldn't be optimistic though.

Slightly more likely is that such discovery would drive the public towards a congressional swing away from his enablers at the next congressional election next year, assuming we have it. I'm moderately more optimistic on that, apparently such a swing is already forming, but to what extent isn't clear.

We can't undo the election results, the congressional count done on jan 6 is definitive.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

I fear, if it looks like Congress isn't going his way he's just going to seize control.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Best case scenarios aren't really on the table. Doesn't mean you stop fighting.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I can see how it looks like I'm saying that I'm not advocating that at all. I just want to make sure that people understand this isn't a direct path to change.

Even a direct admission will not change anyone's mind. You are at best removing a couple of easy outs** for them to lie and say that's not how it is. In the end they're just going to lie and say that it's not real.

It'll be satisfying. It might make some already engaged people a little more engaged, But it isn't **in itself going to drive the needle we're going to need more.

[–] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's...not 100 days later. Its about 190 days later.

[–] Crikeste@lemm.ee 3 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Even if this is true, I don’t think they’re going to find the number of votes to change any outcome. Didn’t Trump win by like 3 million votes? Maybe this could have flipped an electoral college vote, but would that have even mattered?

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 29 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Even if it's not isolated, how do you move forward after this unless someone involved confesses and gives up other areas involved? Maybe they weren't dumb enough to be this obvious in other spots.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago

Ideally, you start demanding recounts But I can't imagine that votes are properly taken care of after the fact especially in this case.

But then if we find mass wrongdoing in counts, now it's a court thing, It goes to SCOTUS. Are they going to side with him? Frankly, there's no way. It's going to be authoritarian dictatorship or coup I don't think there's any other viable directions this could go.

[–] ssfckdt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Is that your general experience with people doing dumb things? That they only do it once?

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I think something like this where the fuck up gets noticed could be done at the poll level to some extent. Orders from above how to it, and this one person or area may have just fucked it up.

So these people would probably fuck things up again, but people at a different poll could do it properly.

[–] some_dude@lemm.ee 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't think it should necessarily be about overturning the election. I would like to know if our process was compromised, wouldn't you?

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

It absolutely was. It means fuckall unless something is done about it.

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Kamala carried New York either way, it absolutely would not change anything in the EC

e: unless it led to the uncovering of widespread fraud in key swing states, but even then they wouldn't do shit