Poll of the Day > Trump wants to cancel the election

(+) Yeah! (+)

Remember, it's perfectly OK for kids to go back to school, but we should enact a move by Congress to postpone the election.

It amazes me the depth of human stupidity that anyone votes Republican.

---

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

Remember, it's perfectly OK for kids to go back to school, but we should enact a move by Congress to postpone the election.

It amazes me the depth of human stupidity that anyone votes Republican.

I'll do you one better:

Trump: It's too dangerous to have elections in November!
Democrats: So let's do mail in ballots...
Trump: Whoah! It's not THAT dangerous...

streamofthesky posted...

I'll do you one better:

Trump: It's too dangerous to have elections in November!
Democrats: So let's do mail in ballots...
Trump: Whoah! It's not THAT dangerous...

Lol that's so disingenuous.

If he wants to delay the elections because it's dangerous, inherently that means he wants it done when it's not dangerous and mail-in adds the risk of corruption which is entirely unnecessary if the vote can just be delayed as he wants.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Lol that's so disingenuous.

The irony, it's staggering

If he wants to delay the elections because it's dangerous, inherently that means he wants it done when it's not dangerous and mail-in adds the risk of corruption which is entirely unnecessary if the vote can just be delayed as he wants.

Putting an indefinite suspension on democratic voting is corruption, lol
The same conservatives who squawked about short term quarantine orders being an effort of the government to "control" them will defend Trump to the bitter end when he attempts to use the virus as an excuse to take away our election.
And thankfully, it's not up to him and won't be delayed as he wants. It's up to the Senate, and Satan's turtle is out of office if the election isn't held (hopefully he is either way, but definitely will be w/ no election), so you can be damn sure he's gonna keep that election on schedule.

HornedLion posted...

watch who the president would be if Donald Trump refused to leave:

For the record, since the video didn't actually give the name:
Senator Leahy would be the legitimate president in this instance since he is the President pro tempore emeritus (Leahy is the other senator from Vermont and a Democrat).

However, the concern is that Trump will not recognize that he won't legally remain president if there is no election and that those who are supposed to hold him to account when his term is up will not do so. This is not entirely out of the question considering how much others have enabled Trump's idiocy, but it is very unlikely.

---

Postponed =/= canceled. Beyond that, it's really up to congress.

WastelandCowboy posted...

There's nothing wrong with mail-in voting. Everyone has the right to vote, but not everyone can get to the polling office. Mailing-in their vote allows them to participate.

There are obvious things wrong with mail-in voting. It's a lot easier to tamper with the process than in-person voting. In fact, whenever a voting fraud allegation was brought up with in-person voting, leftists whatabouted hard by pointing out how mail-in voting was unreliable and rife with fraud... that is, until Trump criticized it and now they're suddenly all for it. Why is that?

Phantom_Nook posted...

But it would lead to fraud! Massive fraud!

What's that, you say? There wasn't massive fraud in every other election since mail-in voting became a thing? Fake news!

Overlooking that a large reason for fraud not being found is the fact that relatively little is actually investigated, no previous election has had anything close to the level of mail-in voting that will likely happen now and we *already* saw tampering during the primaries with mail-in voting which only got discovered because the registrar personally knew the people involved.

Phantom_Nook posted...

On topic, watch the Trumpers ignore this.

>Makes shitty, wrong-headed complaints
>Writes off any objections by trying to name-call anybody who criticizes his lack of reasoning ability

---

Zeus posted...

There are obvious things wrong with mail-in voting. It's a lot easier to tamper with the process than in-person voting. In fact, whenever a voting fraud allegation was brought up with in-person voting, leftists whatabouted hard by pointing out how mail-in voting was unreliable and rife with fraud... that is, until Trump criticized it and now they're suddenly all for it. Why is that?

Because both sides are full of hypocrites.

Unbridled9 posted...

You mean besides the fact that it's stupidly insecure? I mean, a few months ago we had someone stealing our mail for money. Imagine if they did that, saw the ballot, and then filled it out the way they wanted and sent it in. All I could do would be complain that I didn't get to vote but there'd be no way to do anything about it.

Sure there would. You complain that you didn't get your ballot despite it having been sent out (presumably there'd be a reasonable window in which to expect it), they mail you a new one and flag the serial number on the missing one as invalid so any votes coming from it aren't counted (since any quasi-sensible mail-in ballot system will have some sort of unique identifier on each ballot).

Unbridled9 posted...

Nevermind if a mailworker got malicious

Same solution works.

Unbridled9 posted...

a delay happened due to literally everyone in the nation sending in mail,

Start early so there's time to correct delays (which, incidentally, el presidente is resisting for exactly this reason).

Unbridled9 posted...

or people singling out voters because now their ballots can be traced back to their home.

Presumably, the completed ballots would be anonymous. There'd need to be some sort of serial number attached to your name and address (as outlined above), but it's not that hard to keep that attachment confidential, both from the general public and from whatever agency is counting the ballots. Short of mugging somebody on their way to the mailbox and stealing the ballot they have in hand, I don't really see how you could single anyone out, and even then that's going to be a matter of singling them out beforehand, not tracking them down based on how they voted.

---

WastelandCowboy posted...

You can replace your mailbox with one more secure, like one with a lock and key.

That would suck to have to replace youre mailbox just to secure your vote. Especially since some of the locked ones seem expensive. And it doesnt help with packages depending of the package and mailbox... Though, not every can replace their mailboxes. Like people who rent...

Not to mention the amount of time probably isnt enough. I mean, some packages are already taking longer than normal to send. If everyone tried to order the locked mailboxes, most probably wouldnt get it in time.

This may be a solution, but I dont think its a good one...

Mead posted...

Going into someone elses mailbox and tampering with mail are automatic felonies even before any other wrongdoing and the USPS takes the crimes very seriously.

Thats true. But I dont think that it being a felony makes it more secure. Some people probably dont care, I would think... I mean, people do a lot of bad things all the time...
---

streamofthesky posted...

Putting an indefinite suspension on democratic voting is corruption, lol
The same conservatives who squawked about short term quarantine orders being an effort of the government to "control" them will defend Trump to the bitter end when he attempts to use the virus as an excuse to take away our election.
And thankfully, it's not up to him and won't be delayed as he wants. It's up to the Senate, and Satan's turtle is out of office if the election isn't held (hopefully he is either way, but definitely will be w/ no election), so you can be damn sure he's gonna keep that election on schedule.

Until the virus subsides is not indefinite, we know it will happen and we have means to track when it has occured and can even predict a time. Giving an exact date would fly in the face of doing so to protect the public as the date has to change based on current information to guarantee it's actually safe.

Regardless of his true intentions, his claimed intentions are entirely justified by the circumstances; if he were a popular President then nobody would bat an eyelash, the problem with his claim isn't with the validity but with him personally.
---

So now theres video of Trump filling out an absentee ballot? Lmao

guys, he doesn't want to cancel the election, that's ridiculous, ok?

he just wants to delay it for four years, ok?

---

Aculo posted...

guys, he doesn't want to cancel the election, that's ridiculous, ok?

he just wants to delay it for four years, ok?

How about this: Allow a delay, but at the usual presidential switchover date Trump has his presidential powers stripped and the rest of government acts without Presidential input until the next leader is elected?
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

How about this: Allow a delay, but at the usual presidential switchover date Trump has his presidential powers stripped and the rest of government acts without Presidential input until the next leader is elected?

So the government runs with 2/3 of the Senate, none of the House, and none of the executive branch?

Yeah, that sounds feasible!

streamofthesky posted...

So the government runs with 2/3 of the Senate, none of the House, and none of the executive branch?

Yeah, that sounds feasible!

No, just without the President.
---

Cacciato posted...

So now theres video of Trump filling out an absentee ballot? Lmao

his entire administration votes by mail

what an absolute clown

---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

How about this: Allow a delay, but at the usual presidential switchover date Trump has his presidential powers stripped and the rest of government acts without Presidential input until the next leader is elected?

speaker of the house becomes president , thats how it would work

---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

if he were a popular President then nobody would bat an eyelash

if a popular president suggested he was going to delay the election there would be just as much backlash. its a stupid fucking idea.

---

DirtBasedSoap posted...

speaker of the house becomes president , thats how it would work

Except this is special circumstances. He hasn't been fired, he's put in the naughty corner until the vote happens. Just send him out for golf for 6 straight months and ban correspondence with the government. Just pretend he doesn't exist; he's technically president but he can't use his position.

When your boss doesn't come in, do you suddenly not know how to do your job? On this basis I believe the house, the Senate and the Executive branch can operate for a while without daddy holding their hands.
---

DirtBasedSoap posted...

if a popular president suggested he was going to delay the election there would be just as much backlash. its a stupid fucking idea.

Even Bernie Sanders thought it was a stupid idea to go out to vote in a pandemic. Trumps polar opposite outright told people not to vote because of the pandemic.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Even Bernie Sanders thought it was a stupid idea to go out to vote in a pandemic. Trumps polar opposite outright told people not to vote because of the pandemic.

But did he also take a stance against mail in ballots?

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Even Bernie Sanders thought it was a stupid idea to go out to vote in a pandemic. Trumps polar opposite outright told people not to vote because of the pandemic.

yes but he didnt say we should postpone the election lol

---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Except this is special circumstances. He hasn't been fired, he's put in the naughty corner until the vote happens. Just send him out for golf for 6 straight months and ban correspondence with the government. Just pretend he doesn't exist; he's technically president but he can't use his position.

When your boss doesn't come in, do you suddenly not know how to do your job? On this basis I believe the house, the Senate and the Executive branch can operate for a while without daddy holding their hands.

okay but his term is up in January and if we didnt have an election, Nancy Pelosi would become President the second his term ends. thats how its been set up. thats what would happen.

---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

How about this: Allow a delay, but at the usual presidential switchover date Trump has his presidential powers stripped and the rest of government acts without Presidential input until the next leader is elected?

Yeah, that'll happen, ok?

---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Until the virus subsides is not indefinite, we know it will happen and we have means to track when it has occured and can even predict a time

"Until a time that has not yet been defined" is literally what "indefinitely" means. If we don't know when it will happen, it's indefinite.

---

Regardless of his true intentions, his claimed intentions are entirely justified by the circumstances; if he were a popular President then nobody would bat an eyelash, the problem with his claim isn't with the validity but with him personally.

No, they aren't.

First off, the vote has never seriously been considered to be moved. Ever. Not during the Spanish Flu pandemic, not during World Wars (when the troops away voted by mail!), not during the fucking Civil War, not during the worst global depression ever seen. In-person voting shouldn't be considered more dangerous than currently grocery store shopping. Mask up, perhaps even gloves on.

Second of all, we have a variety of remedies to this: increase early voting times, voting stations, allow mail-in ballots, etc. None of these the GOP wants, though, because they have ADMITTED, numerous times (including Trump), that more people voting equals the GOP never being in power again. They know they have been deeply unpopular for the last 30-ish years, hence the systemic voter suppression system they have set up to keep themselves in power.

Finally, Trump, and his entire family, have always voted by mail. That should tell a thinking man all they need to know.

The Republicans are terrified of losing power. Nothing more. And they WILL try every underhanded trick to not lose it.

---

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

In-person voting shouldn't be considered more dangerous than currently grocery store shopping. Mask up, perhaps even gloves on.

Agreed until this.
A lot of urban areas are underserved by polling stations (guess which party tends to run the state government for cities where this occurs) and you always hear horror stories of people waiting 5 or 6 hours in a packed line in order to vote. Plus the sheer volume of people touching the pens/screens/etc... on election day is just so much more than the amount of people touching stuff on a typical day at a grocery store, so there's much greater risk of contact transmission.
It's really not comparable to a quick trip to the grocery store...

Second of all, we have a variety of remedies to this: increase early voting times, voting stations, allow mail-in ballots, etc. None of these the GOP wants, though, because they have ADMITTED, numerous times (including Trump), that more people voting equals the GOP never being in power again. They know they have been deeply unpopular for the last 30-ish years, hence the systemic voter suppression system they have set up to keep themselves in power.

Finally, Trump, and his entire family, have always voted by mail. That should tell a thinking man all they need to know.

The Republicans are terrified of losing power. Nothing more. And they WILL try every underhanded trick to not lose it.

This is all true.

streamofthesky posted...

A lot of urban areas are underserved by polling stations (guess which party tends to run the state government for cities where this occurs) and you always hear horror stories of people waiting 5 or 6 hours in a packed line in order to vote.

That doesn't mean it's inherently more dangerous, though. Social distancing and masks measures will be enforced. the only drawback is unbearable waiting lines.

Hence, why early voting, more areas, etc. are something that needs to happen. And why the GOP will absolutely refuse to let it happen.

---