Upcoming riots from the elections: how bad will they be

[dudalb]

There's nothing in the Constitution about primaries. The states are responsible for how they choose their electors, and the Constitution is pretty vague about most of the details, leaving it up to the states.

On paper, a political party can choose it's candidate by any method it sees fit.
Primaries are a fairly recent development.
Almost all the commentators I have read think there will be no p roblem with Harris being on the ballot in all 50 states, and that any attempt b the GOP to keep her off by legal shennaigans would backfire on the GOP.

 

[varwoche]

I dunno. I'm not taking bets. Right now, both sides of the political spectrum are riling up their bases with claims that the other side spells the end of democracy. Both sides are guilty of fanning the flames, and nothing good can come of it.

Greetings Ms. Van Winkle. You're apparently unaware that one of the sides has actually tried to subvert democracy, and there's no reason to think they won't try again. Say hi to Rip.

 

[arthwollipot]

There's nothing in the Constitution about primaries. The states are responsible for how they choose their electors, and the Constitution is pretty vague about most of the details, leaving it up to the states.

And that's by design.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

This Supreme Court will be fine with Harris unless she wins

 

[a_unique_person]

There's nothing in the Constitution about primaries. The states are responsible for how they choose their electors, and the Constitution is pretty vague about most of the details, leaving it up to the states.

There's nothing in the constitution about Presidential immunity.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Greetings Ms. Van Winkle. You're apparently unaware that one of the sides has actually tried to subvert democracy, and there's no reason to think they won't try again. Say hi to Rip.

I didn't suggest that they wouldn't try again, varwoche. What I said is that BOTH ends of the spectrum are hollering that the other side will be the end of democracy. I assume you have no objection to that - evidence of this is apparent throughout this entire forum, sometimes without even trying to be cagey about it. It's a pretty prevalent assertion throughout the USA Politics forum.

Members of BOTH parties, and supporters of those parties are actively fanning the flames in anticipation of violence. We've seen that here as well, and it's easily evident throughout all of social media. There are republican supporters already setting the stage to claim that the other side cheated and is subverting democracy if they lose... but there are also quite a few democrat supporters insisting that if Trump wins, the republicans are going to become tyrants and remove our constitutional rights, so democrats need to be ready to defend their rights with violence.

You can observe that republican supporters engaged in an assault on the capitol on Jan 6 after the last election, definitely. But we can also observe that there have been numerous riots and protests driven by left-wing supporters over the past several years as well. Some will insist that those are "mostly peaceful", but let's not pretend that such descriptions are anywhere near accurate, given the amount of assaults, vandalism, arson, and destruction that was involved in those activities.

The reality is that there are factions within both sides of the political spectrum that are ready and willing to do violence in order to get their way. If you naively think that this is something limited to only republican supporters, well, I have a toy shop in the arctic circle that would be a fantastic investment for you.

 

[ahhell]

I didn't suggest that they wouldn't try again, varwoche. What I said is that BOTH ends of the spectrum are hollering that the other side will be the end of democracy. I assume you have no objection to that - evidence of this is apparent throughout this entire forum, sometimes without even trying to be cagey about it. It's a pretty prevalent assertion throughout the USA Politics forum.

Members of BOTH parties, and supporters of those parties are actively fanning the flames in anticipation of violence. We've seen that here as well, and it's easily evident throughout all of social media. There are republican supporters already setting the stage to claim that the other side cheated and is subverting democracy if they lose... but there are also quite a few democrat supporters insisting that if Trump wins, the republicans are going to become tyrants and remove our constitutional rights, so democrats need to be ready to defend their rights with violence.

You can observe that republican supporters engaged in an assault on the capitol on Jan 6 after the last election, definitely. But we can also observe that there have been numerous riots and protests driven by left-wing supporters over the past several years as well. Some will insist that those are "mostly peaceful", but let's not pretend that such descriptions are anywhere near accurate, given the amount of assaults, vandalism, arson, and destruction that was involved in those activities.

The reality is that there are factions within both sides of the political spectrum that are ready and willing to do violence in order to get their way. If you naively think that this is something limited to only republican supporters, well, I have a toy shop in the arctic circle that would be a fantastic investment for you.

Sorry but that's just a valid expression of frustration with the current system.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Sorry but that's just a valid expression of frustration with the current system.

Which would be why I started out with

I dunno. I'm not taking bets. Right now, both sides of the political spectrum are riling up their bases with claims that the other side spells the end of democracy. Both sides are guilty of fanning the flames, and nothing good can come of it.

 

[dudalb]

There's nothing in the constitution about Presidential immunity.

The argument is the powers granted to the POTUS in the constiution imply some legal immunity. Question is the extent.
It's complex.

 

[Stacyhs]

I dunno. I'm not taking bets. Right now, both sides of the political spectrum are riling up their bases with claims that the other side spells the end of democracy. Both sides are guilty of fanning the flames, and nothing good can come of it.

Republicans have this reliable habit of accusing the Dems of doing what they themselves are actually doing. They're the Party of Projection.

When one party has actively promoted and taken action to stop a legitimate election because they don't like the results, then the opposing party stating they've done so isn't 'fanning the flames'; it's taking a stand against it.

 

[bruto]

Which would be why I started out with

Maybe we read different newspapers or something, because I've yet to see the Democratic party threaten to overthrow the government if they lose the election, but the Republican party has actually tried to do just that, and their current leader has made it pretty clear that this was justified, that he would pardon those who participated, and that he'd do it again. If pointing that out is an equal flame-fanning to doing it, then I think it's too late. We're toast.

 

[varwoche]

When one party has actively promoted and taken action to stop a legitimate election because they don't like the results, then the opposing party stating they've done so isn't 'fanning the flames'; it's taking a stand against it.

This is so painfully obvious that one would think Both Sides foisters shouldn't need it explained. And yet here's the expectation...

Trump/MAGA tried brazenly tried to overturn democracy, and there's good reason to think they'll try it again. But let's not mention that pesky little detail. It might fan flames. ​

 

[Emily's Cat]

This is so painfully obvious that one would think Both Sides foisters shouldn't need it explained. And yet here's the expectation...

Trump/MAGA tried brazenly tried to overturn democracy, and there's good reason to think they'll try it again. But let's not mention that pesky little detail. It might fan flames. ​

I don't disagree that if Harris wins, this is likely to be repeated.

But I think you're willfully ignoring the behavior of progressives - not necessarily DNC and Dem politicians, but the supporters. Give it some serious consideration, varwoche. Think about all of the various riots that occurred early in the pandemic - it wasn't right-wing people driving those, and regardless of the media spin used, they weren't peaceful protests. They involved a significant amount of assault, arson, vandalism, harassment, and threats. Think about the demonstrations occurring on college campuses and other areas over the last several months, the pro-hamas and pro-palestine events. Those weren't right-wing driven actions, they were packed to the gills with left-wing progressives, and they haven't been limited to signs and calls to stop engaging in war. They've involved harassment and threats made toward US citizens of Jewish heritage, interfering with their ability to go about their lives. They've involve vandalism and destruction of public property. FFS, yesterday, they involved replacing the US flag with palestinian flags after the march was prevented from storming the capital!

Don't stick you head in the sand. On this very site, there have been numerous posts suggesting that if Trump wins, citizens should prepare to enact violence against the government in order to prevent the tyranny that those posters believe will result.

If Harris wins, there's a high likelihood that right-wing protests and violence will occur. If Trump wins, there's a high likelihood that left-wing protests and violence will occur. If you think the risk is limited to only one side, you're ignoring what's actually going on in the world and on this forum.

There is an alternative explanation. I like you varwoche, I think you're a cool dude, and I don't want you to think this is something I actually believe that you think. The alternative is that those people insisting that the risk is only one-sided, that the only risk is from the right-wing... are people who believe that any violence enacted by the left-wing is necessary and justified violence, and so they discount it from consideration.

 

[ahhell]

This is so painfully obvious that one would think Both Sides foisters shouldn't need it explained. And yet here's the expectation...

Trump/MAGA tried brazenly tried to overturn democracy, and there's good reason to think they'll try it again. But let's not mention that pesky little detail. It might fan flames. ​

While true, it shouldn't need to be pointed out that there were thousands of peaceful protests and hundred riots associated with left wing causes during Trump presidency. Which is to be honest mostly peaceful. Dems are also clearly running on the message that Trump is an existential threat to Democracy. True or not, that's clearly fanning the flames of not exactly peaceful protest.

So, there will almost certainly be riots regardless of who wins. I think its actually more likely if Trump wins. Recent history, its hundreds to one odds.

 

[crescent]

....over the last several months, the pro-hamas and pro-palestine events. Those weren't right-wing driven actions, they were packed to the gills with left-wing progressives, and they haven't been limited to signs and calls to stop engaging in war. They've involved harassment and threats made toward US citizens of Jewish heritage, interfering with their ability to go about their lives. They've involve vandalism and destruction of public property. FFS, yesterday, they involved replacing the US flag with palestinian flags after the march was prevented from storming the capital!

That group will do what they do irrespective of the outcome of the election. They are not part of the Democratic party and are every bit as critical of the Dems as they are of the Republicans. They are in the classic "both parties are the same" B.S. mindset of the very far left.

They don't support the Dems - they hate the Dems with every bit as much vitriol as they hate the GOP, if not more. They view the GOP as enemies, but they view the Dems as hypocrite traitors to the cause.

Say what you will, but very few Dems are going to support a group that vandalizes a statue by graffitiing it with "Hamas is coming" and then burns an American flag and then replaces it on the flagpole with a Palestinian flag (as happened yesterday).That group of protestors has about zero influence withing the Dem party, in stark contrast to the Jan. 6 people and their supporters who just about control the GOP right now.

All this means is that to those protestors, the election is irrelevant. They probably don't even recognize it as a real election. Which means that the results of the election are equally irrelevant. They are the fringe, locked out out of any real political party power in the U.S.

 

[Brainster]

My gut feeling is that there will not be rioting no matter which side wins. If Harris wins, how many Trump supporters are going to want to try to repeat January 6, after seeing how many of those protesters ended up in prison? As for if Trump wins, I would expect some protests and lots of giant puppets, but little real rioting.

As for a civil war, it's laughable. As others have mentioned, the fault lines here are not geographic so it's not like we can try to cleave the country in two. People don't go around hating the people they know who happen to be in the other party; generally they see them as being duped by the evil geniuses who run the other party.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

There will be rioting if Harris wins:

Trumpers have huge blue balls at this point: they expected Trump to win, they expected the Courts and Congress to give him the crown, they feel like the Jan 6ers are political prisoners that need to be released, they feel like they have done everything right in showing the American People how bad Biden is;
and then someone tries to kill their Dear Leader, which just proves that Destiny Itself wants Trump to win.

And now, with a nasty procedural trick, probably illegal, the Dems have switched out Biden, proving once again that the system is completely rigged against Republicans.


There will be riots against Polling Stations if it looks like Harris is going to win.

 

[Hlafordlaes]

... Maybe I missed it...

Indeed, thanks for fessing up. Right wing riots are against the rule of law and lawful governance. That's treasonous. Left wing riots usually have to do with government-oligarch collusion; say, unfair taxation or unfair governance. That's a right patriotic thing to do; foundational, even. No comparison.

 

[plague311]

I didn't suggest that they wouldn't try again, varwoche. What I said is that BOTH ends of the spectrum are hollering that the other side will be the end of democracy. I assume you have no objection to that - evidence of this is apparent throughout this entire forum, sometimes without even trying to be cagey about it. It's a pretty prevalent assertion throughout the USA Politics forum.

Members of BOTH parties, and supporters of those parties are actively fanning the flames in anticipation of violence. We've seen that here as well, and it's easily evident throughout all of social media. There are republican supporters already setting the stage to claim that the other side cheated and is subverting democracy if they lose... but there are also quite a few democrat supporters insisting that if Trump wins, the republicans are going to become tyrants and remove our constitutional rights, so democrats need to be ready to defend their rights with violence.

You can observe that republican supporters engaged in an assault on the capitol on Jan 6 after the last election, definitely. But we can also observe that there have been numerous riots and protests driven by left-wing supporters over the past several years as well. Some will insist that those are "mostly peaceful", but let's not pretend that such descriptions are anywhere near accurate, given the amount of assaults, vandalism, arson, and destruction that was involved in those activities.

The reality is that there are factions within both sides of the political spectrum that are ready and willing to do violence in order to get their way. If you naively think that this is something limited to only republican supporters, well, I have a toy shop in the arctic circle that would be a fantastic investment for you.

MMmMMm yeah, that's the bothsidesing I needed to get me through the day.

How many riots took place when Trump won? How many took place when Biden won? The riots that are being blamed on "the left" have nothing to do with politics and everything to do with police shooting and killing unarmed black people with no regard.

The two sides aren't the same, no matter how many times you try to push that bull ****. It's inane. If you find protesting murdering black people to be a "left wing" issue then you should seriously take a look at yourself in the mirror because that's a ****** up way to look at it.

 

[Emily's Cat]

MMmMMm yeah, that's the bothsidesing I needed to get me through the day.

How many riots took place when Trump won? How many took place when Biden won? The riots that are being blamed on "the left" have nothing to do with politics and everything to do with police shooting and killing unarmed black people with no regard.

The two sides aren't the same, no matter how many times you try to push that bull ****. It's inane. If you find protesting murdering black people to be a "left wing" issue then you should seriously take a look at yourself in the mirror because that's a ****** up way to look at it.

Do you honestly think that the neverending refrain that Trump is going to be a fascist dictator, that if Trump wins it's the end of democracy, that Trump is going to destroy all of our rights, that Trump is an existential threat to democracy, and so forth have no impact at all?