Trump’s indictment can’t solve the real threat: our undemocratic electoral system ( www.theguardian.com )

Biden defeated Trump by nearly 8m votes in 2020, a substantial if not overwhelming margin of victory. Matters were very different in the electoral college. A combined total of 44,000 votes handed Biden victory in the swing states of Arizona, Wisconsin and Georgia.

Had Trump succeeded in “finding” 45,000 more votes in these three states, the 2020 election would have resulted in an electoral college tie, an unseemly result that, by the terms of the constitution, hands the task of electing the president to the House of Representatives. In a travesty of democratic rule, when the House elects the president, each state delegation, and not each representative, gets a single vote, and while Democrats still controlled the House after the 2020 election, Republicans actually enjoyed a majority of state delegations. Trump would have won.

While it is hard to imagine Trump defeating Biden in the popular vote in 2024, the electoral college remains another matter. Polls already predict another tight electoral race. Maga zealots and election deniers continue to target and attack independent election officials in the key swing states. Add to the mix the possibility of a third-party candidate, who, like Ralph Nader in 2000, would have no prospect of winning but could peel away votes in these crucial states, and the perils magnify.

Generations of Americans have recognized the defects in the way we elect our president. The first serious effort to eliminate the system came in 1816 and hundreds have followed, all failing given the extreme difficulty of amending our constitution. It is a grotesque fact that a candidate who has made clear his hostility to democratic governance could only be returned to office through an antiquated, dysfunctional and anti-democratic electoral system.

RagingNerdoholic ,

Biden defeated Trump by nearly 8m votes in 2020

The fact this number only accounts for about 2.5% of the US population is… terrifying.

Franzia ,

I agree with the sentiment that this system is undemocratic. The electoral college in its current form is enpowering the ‘undecided’ voter in swing states to decide the election in the final hour. I disagree with the sentiment that a popular vote would simply disenfranchise conservative voters. See how other countries cope with direct voting and a higher level of democracy - more parties, coalitions, direct ballot initiatives, increase in amount of local representation.

Arotrios ,
@Arotrios@kbin.social avatar

If Trump takes office without winning the popular vote, it will very likely lead to civil war. Not because the people will rise up to defend Biden, but because his policies are simultaneously cruel, poorly implemented, unjust, and most importantly to the wealthy who run the country, unprofitable. There were a lot of people in the business community who haven't forgotten the China trade war of 2020. And the fact of the matter is that with climate change beginning to have a real affect on the economy, an unsteady hand on the wheel is the last thing Wall Street wants.

Dictators that successfully put such policies in place do so after the fascist state is established to quell dissent. Trump can't even establish a state of denial.

Could he win? Possibly on a electoral vote basis - I think the popular vote is far out of reach for him. But I don't see the country lasting for long if he does - he doesn't have the skill to run a fascist state, much less build one, and he'd be completely out of his depth confronting a real uprising. DeSantis, on the other hand, could build such a state and has been somewhat successful in laying the groundwork in Florida. I don't think Trump will chose him as VP, but if he does, that's a match made in hell.

PowerCrazy ,

I don’t’ understand how you can say that Trump being elected is a dictatorship, but Biden being elected is a healthy democracy. Either America’s democracy is illegitimate (I Agree), or you are just mad that the other team won. Pick a lane.

czech ,
@czech@kbin.social avatar

You'd have to follow current events to understand the difference. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/trump-plans-to-massively-expand-executive-power-if-elected-report-says

Arotrios ,
@Arotrios@kbin.social avatar

Dictators get elected all the time, Hitler being the one most historians refer to. It's the policies they implement after election that define them as dictators. Trump began the process while in office, but was horribly incompetent at it, as demonstrated by his flailing coup attempt. Moreover, he didn't have Hitler's popular support, effectively getting into office on a technicality.

Biden was elected by both the popular and electoral vote. His policies thus far, while centrist, have been built on bi-partisan cooperation where possible, and he's been as hands off as possible regarding the political elements of the court cases against Trump. He's also been supportive of civil rights, and has rolled back a number of Trump's crueler policies.

The same cannot be said of Trump, nor will it be. You can actually boil it down to one definitive action: Dictators lock children in cages.

Trump qualifies under this definition, having been responsible for the detainment of over 500,000. Biden doesn't qualify under this definition, nor any other. At worst, he's a middling centrist who is most concerned with keeping the country running, as a President should be.

As to the legitimacy of America's electoral process, I absolutely agree that it needs to be reinforced, but I don't believe that there was any substantial fraud in the 2020 election.

I would ideally like to see all voting machines require paper trails, and have universal mail-in voting, as it's been a resounding success in OR and CA. I would also like to see a restructuring of the electoral college that more accurately reflects the popular vote while still allowing rural areas to have a significant voice - after all, urban needs can easily override rural ones to the detriment of all citizens. In a perfect world, that balance would also be properly reflected in Senate seats, to more properly represent the country as a whole.

PowerCrazy ,

The same cannot be said of Trump, nor will it be. You can actually boil it down to one definitive action: Dictators lock children in cages.

Was Obama a dictator? washingtonpost.com/…/8ff96f3c-1532-11eb-82af-8646…

I get that you can wring your hands and call the cages Obama built “holding cells” or whatever, but let’s get your definitions straight.

Now as far as the voting process, I don’t believe there has been any fraud that has affected a presidential election in any way that matters, except POSSIBLY Florida in 2000, but even then I wouldn’t put a lot of stock in it. But the important part about America’s sham democracy is that the choices are rigged from the start. You don’t get to vote for an environmentalist, you don’t get to vote for a leftist, you don’t’ get to vote for a candidate that will dismantle the CIA, that will recall 100% of America’s armed forces, that will stop supporting Israel, that will stop sending cluster munitions to Ukraine. The only thing you get to vote for is which flavor of Capitalist you prefer. You also don’t’ get to vote for reforming our first past the post system. So given this reality, why should I give fuck that the Red Capitalist technically matches some Ivory Tower definition of Dictator, but conveniently the Blue Capitalist is just shy of that definition?
By the way the Biden administration is still holding children in cages.

Debating these minute differences sounds like Manufacturing Consent to me.

dingus ,
@dingus@lemmy.ml avatar

Debating these minute differences sounds like Manufacturing Consent to me.

Obama is far from a saint, and every US President has the same blood of Empire on their hands.

But this is rich from a guy who bailed after it was pointed out that Trump literally has no platform, only offers racism, sexism, xenophobia, hate and authoritarianism, and that maybe we shouldn’t be trying to court the opinions of people who support those things.

I’m sure all the people in Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana will surely be lining up to vote for whatever out of touch liberal you are supporting instead of the person who actually engages with them.*

In this hypothetical, Trump was the person who actually engaged with them, and he won in 2016 because of that outreach.

I’m sure that buffoon really engaged them with his fucking unhinged rants and making fun of disabled people. His voters have been very honest about who they are, and it’s not our fault you’re not listening and instead arguing we should be engaging with authoritarians.

Sounds like Manufacturing Consent to me, from someone happy to debate the minute differences when it suits them.

PowerCrazy ,

I responded and I’ve made my point.

mrpants ,

It was a bad point. You should have saved your time and not posted.

dingus ,
@dingus@lemmy.ml avatar

Yeah I guess this guy forgot that Mr. Trump notoriously had a lot of white collar white people voting for him, and that his “base” absolutely isn’t just the rural working class.

I guess the working class in cities don’t exist or something. /s

Arotrios ,
@Arotrios@kbin.social avatar

Was Obama a dictator?

Clearly not from the context of the article you provided, as they describe how the cages were part of an expansion to a larger facility that corrected a worse detention situation at the border, where there was no air conditioning. Do I think this was a humane design choice? No, but it was an improvement. At the time they were built, family separation wasn't performed except in extreme circumstances. Nor do I think that Obama was personally involved in the design decisions.

Trump undid that policy, and filled the cages that Obama built. Family separation was the point. And again and again he bragged about it. He was personally involved in the decision, and lauded it.

The Biden administration is still detaining children, but they've drastically reduced the number (see the graph on the article provided), and no longer enforces family separation to my knowledge. More work needs to be done here, I agree, but ignoring the scope to say both he and Trump are the same is lazy thinking.

From a purely leftist standpoint (far left in the US), you're right - the electoral process and two party system as they currently exist will never allow a true progressive to set policy, and we're stuck in a cycle of choosing between bad and worse. It's my hope ranked choice voting starts getting some real traction as a counter, but I'm not holding my breath.

So why should you care?

Because in a choice between bad and worse, if you don't vote, you end up with worse.

PowerCrazy ,

I vote and I have voted in every federal election and most of my local elections since I was first eligible to vote in 2000. But I never vote for the “Bad” choice, nor the “worse” choice. I always vote in the primary of the majority party which was usually Dem, but in Texas I voted in the GoP primary. When it comes to the General Election, locally you have no excuse to vote for bad or worse, you typically have multiple candidates, some that are even good. On a federal level, there is no reason to vote for bad or worse either because even in swing states, voting for “Bad” means you support the bad, telling yourself the alternative is “worse” is just a coping mechanism and ensures no one will ever get any other choices.

dingus ,
@dingus@lemmy.ml avatar

So you’re an accelerationist. Got it.

voting for “Bad” means you support the bad, telling yourself the alternative is “worse” is just a coping mechanism and ensures no one will ever get any other choices.

This is what someone with no agency and no ability to ever organize something like a nationwide vote strike/write-in campaign tells themselves as a big fucking cope. Sure, you’ve got agency in this system, buddy. Sure you do.

PowerCrazy ,

Yea, I never once claimed to have agency in our system, and the liberal rallying cry about voting is absolutely an example of that. What are you actually upset about? That I am accurately describing our shitty society?

dingus ,
@dingus@lemmy.ml avatar

No, that you have the smug superiority of someone who is like “I vote with my principles” which is great and all, but it literally doesn’t make you better than anyone else or have a reason to tell others that participating means “they support it” especially if that’s literally the only actual agency they have in this shitty fucking system, voting. (Protip, it’s literally the only agency they have.)

On top of the verifiable harm that attitude that does to minorities in the USA. It’s easily arguable that no matter what party you vote for, you’re hurting minorities all over the planet, but sorry sir, I’m about general harm reduction, even if it’s halfassed in the short term.

I don’t think letting the worse win for your pyrrhic personal victory is in any way fucking helpful, nor is acting like you’re somehow better, smarter, or more capable than others for it, or that it means they support those things.

I’m on the left, and you’re just being a smug asshat, dude. Maybe not classist, but sure obviously think you’re better than everyone else here. Do you think that’s helpful? Great job not using classist words but still acting like a smug know it all prick who thinks they know better but can’t be fucked to actually help educate, but instead wants to put others down for not already knowing. Sounds pretty fucking classist to me.

Like there’s a thousand ways you could have participated in this thread without being a rude jerk. You chose to be a rude jerk, what does that say about you?

PowerCrazy ,

I get it, you are “on the left.” You would have voted for Obama a third-time if you could, Biden was the next best thing obviously. Anyone who implies differently is an “asshat.”

dingus ,
@dingus@lemmy.ml avatar

Resorting to making assumptions that couldn’t be further off base? Obama solidified the worst aspects of the Bush presidency and told us to “look forward, not backward” in regards to fucking war criminals. He had plenty of scandals that were mostly swept under the rug by the media. He himself admitted that if he had ran in the 1980’s he would have been running as a Republican. He ran on a public option but then said “Fuck you people” and gave us RomneyCare.

Seriously, grow up.

pinkdrunkenelephants ,

Holy shit, we have people defending literal concentration camps in the thread

Good job, Lemmy. You have officially gone full retard.

FormerlyChucks ,

The popular vote literally doesn’t matter and it never did for deciding the presidency. Why do people still bring this up? You want a pure democracy? Better hope you’re always part of the 51%

Arotrios ,
@Arotrios@kbin.social avatar

It matters as a gauge of popular support and perceived legitimacy of the President, which affects their ability to get legislation passed. You'll note I didn't argue for a pure majority vote, but rather an adjustment to the system to make it more representative.

Franzia ,

This is just off-topic doomposting.

duderium ,

In a travesty of democratic rule, when the House elects the president, each state delegation, and not each representative, gets a single vote, and while Democrats still controlled the House after the 2020 election, Republicans actually enjoyed a majority of state delegations. Trump would have won.

Chances of civil war are growing due to amerikkka’s utterly racist and dogshit political “system” designed 250 years ago by a bunch of slaveowning genocidal lunatics. Of course, the Democrats aren’t even talking about how this is a problem because they are paid to lose. Trump could easily win the electoral college and lose the popular vote in 2024. Although some liberals might rightfully be outraged by this, the corporate press is going to be telling you guys that you need to swallow your pride, RESIST!, and, most importantly, follow the constitution, even if it leads you straight over a cliff.

ares35 ,
@ares35@kbin.social avatar

trump got in in the first place in '16 by a not-dissimilar margin of, iirc, ~ 77k votes over clinton scattered among just a few states.

xenspidey ,

I agree that the system could use some adjustment, however, strictly popular vote should not be the fix. That would leave electing the president down to 3-4 counties in the entire country.

dingus ,
@dingus@lemmy.ml avatar

Oh no! What will we do if the actual majority has a democratic voice as opposed to the “silent majority” that isn’t a majority at all but has achieved outsized importance through gerrymandering, stacking the courts, purging people from voters roles, and making voting difficult for the actual majority.

I could give a fuck about the uneducated fucking yokels who have held this country back for 200 fucking years.

timbuck2themoon ,

Apparently the Senate is not enough and we need to cede an entire other branch as well to the minority. That’s apparently fair…

PowerCrazy ,

That is the current excuse the blue team uses to support capitalist policies and fool the people who vote for them, yea.

PowerCrazy ,

Yea those fucking rednecks who work with their HANDS instead of touching computers, like a good liberal should. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain

dingus ,
@dingus@lemmy.ml avatar

When I refer to yokels, I am referring to Christianity and in general puritanism and am in no way meaning to denigrate the working class, chum. Those Christians purposefully don’t learn things and try to prevent their families from learning things, whereas the working class learns difficult specialized labor.

Yokel means an uneducated, unsophisticated person from the countryside, not the working class and blue collar labor. I’m sorry for any confusion on this part.

PowerCrazy ,

If you are referring to religion, then just say that? I’m no fan of the christian right, but fortunately they are more of a boogie man these days as opposed to the 80’s and 90’s. For the uneducated, well if you want to continue to not give a fuck about them, then I’m sure all the people in Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana will surely be lining up to vote for whatever out of touch liberal you are supporting instead of the person who actually engages with them.*

*In this hypothetical, Trump was the person who actually engaged with them, and he won in 2016 because of that outreach.

dingus ,
@dingus@lemmy.ml avatar

You know, I made my account on Lemmy.ml for a reason, so maybe you can back off and realize we’re on the same page. Like dude, my first comment was advocating direct democracy, not praising the fucking sick broken system we live in. I’m not exactly a fan of political parties here myself, or the founding fathers, or the constitution, so take it down a notch.

And to be fair, Trumps outreach was being a racist fucking pig and authoritarian who promoted killing your enemies. Is that the outreach you want us to use, or aren’t we supposed to be out here punching Nazis, not breaking bread with them? Like holy shit you had me until that bullshit. They voted for him because they want to be able to grab women by the pussy with no repercussion like he does not because they’re fucking misguided.

PowerCrazy ,

I disagree with your characterization of even a majority of 2016 Trump voters. But I don’t want to re-litigate 2016. I just want to remind you not to dismiss wide swaths of the country for classist reasons, and using term like “yokel” or whatever classist term you love to use to otherize isn’t helpful.

dingus ,
@dingus@lemmy.ml avatar

You’re the one acting like working class people must be uneducated, and thus a word like “yokel” would apply to them.

Also, Trump literally had no platform in 2020. How is that engaging the voters? What did he engage them on, sir?

I’m not re-litigating 2016, I’ve spent 7 years being browbeat by the “Fuck your feelings” Trump voters who are happy to abuse minorities and anyone they deem “different.” So the fuck out of here with that noise.

I live in the city where Trump and his goons had someone extrajudicially murdered, so it hits pretty fucking close to home, thanks.

Drusas ,

I thought you were sincere before, but you've got to be a troll to try and link those things together.

GiantRobotTRex ,

The four most populated states aren’t anywhere near enough for a majority, let alone four counties.

And isn’t it a problem with the current system that votes in a handful of swing states matter far more than votes elsewhere? In a popular vote, every vote is equally important regardless of where you live.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • All magazines
    •