2 ms·

> I mean, how many more clues do you need, to admit the next election will be cancelled as soon as they lose? He literally said what he was going to do. And the

> I mean, how many more clues do you need, to admit the next election will be cancelled as soon as they lose? He literally said what he was going to do. And there has been no pushback, neither from the military nor parliamentarians. I'm not saying it wouldn't be done if it was possible, but I am working off the current status quoa that exists now. And I wouldn't be so sure about a lack of military pushback if something like cancelling national elections was called.

aredox 1y ago
It won't be cancelling national elections. It will be "suspending" a few local ones, enough to tilt the balance, and then using any excuse - e.g. "antifa", but any protest is enough - to escalate, to justify, progressively, a military clampdown. >I wouldn't be so sure about a lack of military pushback Again, Ashley Babbitt received full military honors for trying to overrun security at the Capitol to attack congressmen and women to overturn the election. That's what happened. Nobody has said anywhere in the military "it's wrong". The "status quo" is that the president, immune from any prosecution, is saying openly he is ready to use soldiers to shoot at American citizens when he gives the order, and anyone who disobeys will be fired.
- wat10000 1y ago
  Elections are essential for legitimacy these days. There’s something like three countries on the planet that don’t have elections. North Korea has elections. Inconvenience and intimidation will be used to discourage voters in opposition areas. Reasons will be found to discard ballots. Results will be challenged, reasons found to delay certification of unfavorable results until it’s too late. Imagine 2020, except done by smarter people who have had four years to think about how they’ll do it. And who have had four years to see that there are zero consequences for them even if they don’t succeed.
- BeFlatXIII 1y ago
  …and too many people talk about protesting harder instead of domestic terrorism.
nitwit005 1y ago
There isn't any need to fake all that much unless their popular support completly collapses. Claim Califoria's election was irregular, fudge some numbers, or just replace some electoral college delegates, and problem solved.

aredox 1y ago

It won't be cancelling national elections. It will be "suspending" a few local ones, enough to tilt the balance, and then using any excuse - e.g. "antifa", but any protest is enough - to escalate, to justify, progressively, a military clampdown. >I wouldn't be so sure about a lack of military pushback Again, Ashley Babbitt received full military honors for trying to overrun security at the Capitol to attack congressmen and women to overturn the election. That's what happened. Nobody has said anywhere in the military "it's wrong". The "status quo" is that the president, immune from any prosecution, is saying openly he is ready to use soldiers to shoot at American citizens when he gives the order, and anyone who disobeys will be fired.

wat10000 1y ago
Elections are essential for legitimacy these days. There’s something like three countries on the planet that don’t have elections. North Korea has elections. Inconvenience and intimidation will be used to discourage voters in opposition areas. Reasons will be found to discard ballots. Results will be challenged, reasons found to delay certification of unfavorable results until it’s too late. Imagine 2020, except done by smarter people who have had four years to think about how they’ll do it. And who have had four years to see that there are zero consequences for them even if they don’t succeed.
BeFlatXIII 1y ago
…and too many people talk about protesting harder instead of domestic terrorism.

nitwit005 1y ago

There isn't any need to fake all that much unless their popular support completly collapses. Claim Califoria's election was irregular, fudge some numbers, or just replace some electoral college delegates, and problem solved.