politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
No, he's not going to win. Kamala will win the popular vote by a significant margin and will win comfortably in the EC, +/- 25 electoral college votes.
The problem will be people are going to die tomorrow and we'll have to wait to see if the coup fails again.
Not an American, so maybe I don't know what I am talking about (although I have lived/worked/studied in US + Canada for a decade).
I won't speculate on who will win or not. But as a foreigner who has lived in the US, the impression I get is that American society is arguably not prepared to fight for it's freedoms. There also don't seem to be any institutions (political, social, cultural) that can create a situation where the current elite's de facto hold on power becomes unsustainable and they start feeling a personal risk (even on an implicit level - which is arguably more important than explicit actions).
Paradoxically that can be seen as a good thing; there is enough money to go around where people don't need to care. That's actually a decent place to be in (in an abstract sense). But there are also externalities to such a setup; your country's liberal (not in the American sense) institutions can slowly circle the drain and no one does anything until it's too late.
In a hypothetical country a sizeable ethnic minority might be so opposed to a given leader, that a lot of the centrists or people who just don't care that much start having second thoughts about that leader. Or say the local oligarchs or the judicial elite start wondering if they could get themselves in trouble (real trouble; loss of assets, even personal danger - doesn't have to be explicit but even a somewhat real possibility) due to the continued support of said leader.
From my experience, these sort of dynamics simply do not exist in the US. The oligarchs will always have their money protected and their "get out of jail free" cards respected. The judicial system as a whole would never be in a situation where they would largely be considered illegitimate (and seen as treasonous, criminal collaborators).
And can you honestly imagine any kind of real protest movement in the US. Shutting down of airports and critical transport and communication networks. Direct rejection of central authority in specific regions. Local arrests of oligarch property. Orders for arrests of specific oligarchs in protest regions (with full support of rank and file police officers).
I am not saying this is good thing, just pointing out that I can't imagine this happening in the US (I could be wrong).
So let's say Harris does win and Trump does a low-key coup with backing from oligarch and judicial elites (the US supreme court is corrupt by global standards). I don't see anyone fighting back.
Am I being too pessimistic and jaded in my worldview?
As a US citizen: No, not in the least. Most are cowed and comfortable and undereducated.
There would be pockets of fighting back, but not enough. The cops here nationwide are almost uniformly pro-oligarchy, they know who butters their bread and they like being an unaccountable gang.
I generally oppose notions such as "all cops are bad" and I do think they should even command some respect in society (it should go both ways of course). You want the police to be on side of society in a broad sense and for them to be civic minded.
I wouldn't say American police are bad (even though I do have stories of their cowboy antics) per se, but I did get the impression that the US police is somewhat subrevient to the oligarchy.
Having a civic minded police is the best option, but even a self-interested police force can show flexibility and have a indirectly positive influence.
One hypothetical example would be the police not willing to easily, directly side a group in a given case. Their thinking could be something along the lines "why don't we sit this out, no point in taking all the risks for some breadcrumbs, when the vast majority of the benefits go to someone else. Let them put their asses on the line and we'll see how things play out."
Is there anything that could happen this year that would change your mind? About some cops being okay.
Cops in general? Absolutely not. You won't change my mind on this. I have real life examples from my country that for me make it impossible to say "all cops are bad" - very couregeous acts of bravery in defense of the country and in a sense me and my family too.
With respect to the US, I did have issues with the police acting out and roleplaying as cowboys and generally being a bit unprofessional (I am aware that it can be far worse for many other Americans). I also had good personal interactions with someone who worked in a US police department. It would be difficult for me to call him a bad person.
I am sure there are a lot of bad cops in the US (and my country too), but I got the impression that systematic/institutional issues should not be underestimated.
These are just my direct experiences and some general knowledge. I am not really in a position to make calls about the US.
Do you have something specific in mind?
Nope I got what I needed.
If you don't mind me asking, why did you ask me that question. I am genuinely curious.
I feel like I am not getting something.
A revolution won’t find support from rank and file police, their whole existence is to prevent danger to the power of the state.