this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
895 points (97.6% liked)

politics

19072 readers
3665 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] spaceghoti@lemmy.one 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Let's game this out the way some of the comments are saying.

Scenario 1: Proud Boys and other right wing militant groups stand around polling places with open carry weapons to intimidate Democrat-leaning districts. Maybe it doesn't chase everyone away, but we know a lot of election officials are complaining about threats and have quit. So it's going to have some effect. Enough to swing the vote? I don't think that matters. It's still election interference.

Scenario 2: right wing militants show up, and so do various antifa groups to counter them. Maybe antifa show up armed, maybe not. Either way, it's an escalation. Escalating tensions with guns present significantly increases the chances that someone uses their gun, regardless of who shoots first. The first shots in a civil war? Then the right wing militants win, because they've been agitating for this for years. Who wins is immaterial to the millions of people who will suffer as a result.

Scenario 3: polling places are reinforced with police and National Guards as necessary to prevent any election interference. They can be present to "observe" but they're not allowed to intimidate anyone. This is the only scenario I can see where democracy is defended and preserved.

Agree or disagree? What am I missing? Where am I wrong?

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 46 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You're missing that the police etc and the proud boys etc are the same group.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Nah, he's missing: 4. The Fat Boys only show up in red counties, having no impact whatsoever. They pass out drunk in the parking lot of the voting locations and their wives and kids have a quiet night to themselves.

They forget to vote. They don't intimidate anyone because the few liberals who live there voted early. They later complain it was "rigged".

[–] zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago

Those people pride themselves at driving to another county to show up uninvited and unwelcomed. Source: Dealt with a few at protests in a "liberal urban" city.

[–] spaceghoti@lemmy.one -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Default_Defect@midwest.social 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A few bad apples spoil the bunch, homie.

[–] spaceghoti@lemmy.one -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Sure, ACAB. But that doesn't mean every cop who shows up to keep the peace at polling stations will enable right wing violence. Especially not with the press watching.

[–] orrk@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

the press hasn't been a concern to the police for a good long while now, and internal unity is more important than stopping murders (half of what the FBI does nowadays is arrest precincts because they were covering for the cop who happens to be the guy dumping bodies in the woods, bonus points if it's the woman he knocked up while having an affair with)

[–] Default_Defect@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

How many are doing something to stop it?