Summary

Donald Trump announced plans to reform U.S. elections, including mandating paper ballots, same-day voting, voter ID, and proof of citizenship, while eliminating mail-in voting.

Trump criticized California’s ban on requiring voter ID, calling for a nationwide overhaul. Though mail-in and early voting surged during the pandemic, Trump has long opposed these methods, claiming fraud, despite evidence showing fraud rates are extremely low.

Critics argue his proposals could disproportionately affect rural, disabled, and nonwhite voters, potentially disenfranchising key Democratic-leaning groups.

The reforms would mark significant shifts in U.S. election policies.

    • AmidFuror@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      84
      ·
      1 年前

      Thanks for putting that plain text from the top of the post into a jpeg down in the comments.

      • T00l_shed
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 年前

        Not sure if you’re being sarcastic, but I couldn’t copy the plain text on jerboa, so I had to screen shot.

    • WhatAmLemmy
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      1 年前

      When he declared Nov would be the last election, and winning it meant they wouldn’t have to worry about elections again, he meant it!

      He’s doing exactly what he said he would do.

      • T00l_shed
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        1 年前

        Yup. When a fascist tells you they are a fascist, believe them.

        • Nalivai
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 年前

          Yeah, but something something genocide, so voting is bad actually

          • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 年前

            Shaming people for having deep moral quandries about voting for a candidate who is actively and directly facilitating genocide is pathetic and pointless and makes you look like a parody of yourself.

            • Nalivai
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 年前

              Shaming people, who pretend to have moral quandaries but then immediately acting to worsen everything they pretend to care about, however, is the only objectively correct behaviour.

    • pivot_root
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 年前

      When rural voters overwhelmingly voted for you, making it harder for them to vote seems like a great way to shoot yourself in the foot.

    • nutsack
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 年前

      they can also add rules to restrict the number of polling places, resulting in disproportionately long lines in cities where democrats live

      • T00l_shed
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 年前

        Often times yes, but they are in gerrymandered districts with adequate polling locations, plus they love to go out and vote for “their guy”

      • enbyecho
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 年前

        Aren’t rural people more republican leaning?

        In some places only slightly. Like 55/45. So it would still affect Democrats.

        Edit: I mention this because a lot of folks tend to assume rural areas are almost exclusively Republican and that’s very far from the truth even in super red states.

  • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    140
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 年前

    This is it folks. If he is able to transform our election system with his own two hands, we’ve had our last fair election, I guarantee it. Fraud will be baked in, circumventing any design elements that are ostensibly there to guard against it.

    This is the scariest thing I’ve read since the election.

      • WhatYouNeed
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 年前

        Like that scene at the end of The Dictator, when he finally holds election.

        There are two vote boxes and all the citizens are queuing in front of the box that will vote for his opposition. A tank drives up next to that queue, and everyone leaves the opposition queue, rushing over to join the queue to vote for the dictator.

    • chakan2
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 年前

      They weren’t quiet about this being the last fair election we would have. I’m also not convinced it was actually a fair election.

      But whatever…too late to bitch about the fascists now.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 年前

      Yeah, clearly opening the door to discuss further changes to the election process. It’s dying, and he doesn’t want more people voting, he wants less, if at all

      • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 年前

        Real “stop testing” energy here.

        If we stop testing right now, we’d have very few cases, if any

        “If we just stop voting, we’d have very few votes against me”

  • crimsoncobalt
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 年前

    But… it’s the states that run elections, not the federal government. This doesn’t make any sense.

  • splonglo
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    1 年前

    And you’ll have to wait 10 hours to vote on a workday because they’ve limited voting locations to one every million people - like they already do in Georgia.

  • jordanlundM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 年前

    “mandating paper ballots… while eliminating mail-in voting.”

    Does he not know mail in ballots are paper ballots? 🤔

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      ·
      1 年前

      The point is to eliminate voting options, the “justifications” are made up. Anything that moves closer to “not being able to vote” is the goal.

      • scutiger
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 年前

        Paper ballots are also easier to falsify, with all the videos of box stuffing in corrupt countries.

        That said, Canada uses paper ballots and hand counting, and I’m not aware of any accusations of election fraud related to that ever happening.

        • Revan343@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 年前

          We also have a non-partisan federal elections agency. With individual US states in charge of running their own federal elections, there’s more room for Republican state-level government to cheat on the federal election

  • nifty
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 年前

    “We’re gonna do things that have been really needed for a long time,” he said. “And we are gonna look at elections. We want to have paper ballots, one day voting, voter ID, and proof of citizenship.”

    This should come with a national day off for voting, and mandatory voting requirement.

  • Aolley
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    1 年前

    fuck that, mail in voting has done so much good and it’s a prime step in stopping all this. if we had national mail in voting things would get better fast so no wonder they don’t want it.

    what would this mean for states that already do this

  • gnomesaiyan
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 年前

    This motherfucker better be in a Popemobile 24/7. I got a bad feeling about this guy’s future existence.

          • Ledivin
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 年前

            There was a guy who hid in the bushes of a golf course for like half a day. He didn’t get any shots off, but was pretty close to before someone spotted the barrel poking out of the bush.

  • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    1 年前

    Something something constitution

    Article I, Section 4, Clause 1:

    The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

    https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S4-C1-2/ALDE_00013577/

    What was that about States rights?

    Oh, yeah, they only matter when they do what you want.

    • bluemellophone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 年前

      Oregon has entirely mail-in voting, since the 1990s. Good luck getting us to give it up.

    • givesomefucks
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 年前

      Yeah, but primaries aren’t controlled by the states.

      Which is why waaay back in 2024, the DNC and Biden were able to take all of NH primary delegates away…

      • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 年前

        That’s not voting, though. That’s what the party decides.

        But, yeah, the DNC highjacked the ability of people to choose the nominee for their party. Again.

        • givesomefucks
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 年前

          That’s not voting, though. That’s what the party decides.

          And (totally as a hypothetical) if pro corporate interests decided to interfere with primaries by donati g insane amount of money to pro-corporate candidates to ensure corps always win regardless of what letter is by the President’s name…

          Would you describe that as the illusion of choice when after decades those peo corporate interests controlled the parties and then (totally legally) directly influence the primary and ensure the corpo candidates always “wins”?

          And I’m not trying to be a dick here, but unless we fix primaries, we’ll never really “win” in the general, even when the Democratic candidate wins.

          • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 年前

            Your point is completely legit.

            Everything we believe about choice is an illusion. Propaganda. The dream is fiction.

            The public believe only 2 options exist. Because, no viable other options exist. At the moment. Any third party is either a spoiler by design, or so limited in scope as to be useless to most.

            Maybe now is the time to start another. A serious effort to form a citizen controlled, truly democratic, accountable, party. With its own primaries and rules. For the people.

            Not next election cycle.

            The DNC and RNC are irredeemably rotten because of the very concerns you’ve mentioned.

            Can’t repair rotted wood. You can cut out the decay and try to patch it up but you’re left with an unstable structure.

            You need to replace it.

            The difficulty is when the money realizes it could interfere and run propaganda to de-legitimize.

            Honest people who can own their faults, who are not afraid of their skeletons, who cannot be blackmailed, are needed.

            An impossible task to be sure.

            But, a lot of things have been impossible.

            If qanon and the tea party can take over a party in a few years…

            • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 年前

              Does anything other than tradition prevent a candidate from running in the primaries of both the R and D conventions? Could the same person end up as the candidate for both parties?

              • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 年前

                2028 might provide an answer the way things are going…

                I don’t know the answer but I would assume party rules would prevent that somehow.

                But, if someone ran for and won the R nomination and the D didn’t do a primary to officially nominate anyone, and that person crossed the aisle… I have no idea what would happen. Maybe it is possible.

  • Zier@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 年前

    Still following putin I see. Wait until he tries to change Presidential term limits.

  • Jesus
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 年前

    Wouldn’t he basically need a constitutional amendment to do this. Which would be almost impossible these days.

    • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.comdeleted by creator
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 年前

      Hard to say. voting is up to states for methodology but like we did have restrictions on state due to discrimation till recently that would not allow them to change their rules or purge voters like they do again nowadays.

      • Maggoty
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 年前

        The VRA was an extension of the fourteenth amendment. And the federal government never said the racist states had to do X. They said the states had to submit changes to the federal government to make sure they weren’t racist and thus unconstitutional.

        Trump’s stuff doesn’t have any of that grounding.

    • Maggoty
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 年前

      Yup. He can try for a reverse VRA but it’s going to be a pretty big fight if he does.

    • GreenKnight23
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 年前

      how hard can it be when you hold the Senate, Congress, and the supreme court?

  • Etterra
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 年前

    Too bad for him the constitution clearly states “the states shall decide” - which is why we have the hodgepodge patchwork bullshit we have now. So he may want to change it, but unless he actually does light the Constitution on fire, this is unlikely to go anywhere.

    • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 年前

      omm… the Republicans have the supreme court and are in the process of lighting the constitution on fire as we speak?

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 年前

        The constitution doesn’t protect the people from the government. The constitution protects a government from the people.

        When the government lights the constitution on fire, “We The People” are no longer restrained by its restrictions. We are free to establish a new constitution, with blackjack and hookers, and burn down the government established by the old, flaming constitution.