Hacker News Reader

Comment by aerovistae | Hacker News Reader

This is so insidious and depressing. Nothing the Republican party does surprises me anymore. He outright said today that he's doing this to stymie mail-in voting, and the Republican party supports him on it. The president is outright saying "I want to hinder the vote for everyone, across the board" and the Republican party supports it. It's so sad.

This is a taste for Americans of what it must feel like for many people across the world in less fortunate countries every day, for as long as anyone can remember. I can't imagine living with this indefinitely with no hope of change.

View on HN

The president is outright saying "I want to hinder the vote for everyone, across the board"

No, he isn't "outright saying" that. This is the kind of statement that Scott Alexander rightfully criticised some years ago when people started saying Trump is "openly" racist:

http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16/you-are-still-crying-wo...

Here's an actual quote from him: "Mail-in ballots are very dangerous - there's tremendous fraud involved." That's what he is outright saying.

Mail fraud is not a US specific problem. UK elections have had the same problems. In one case someone who had previously been jailed for mail voting fraud took an Instagram selfie of himself in the counting room. An MP has written an article about mail voting fraud here:

https://www.politicshome.com/thehouse/article/there-is-wides...

It's only going to get more brutal -- Trump is terrified of losing the legal protection of the presidency and will not hesitate to do literally anything to hold on to it.

This election is a referendum on the survival of humanity.

I recognize that the previous sentence seems hyperbolic but I believe it to be the case. I'm terrified.

In some ways I agree, but I bet I disagree what they referendum is because a Biden/Harris Presidency Terrifies me

What exactly about a Biden/Harris presidency terrifies you? Strong language there.

Well I am a libertarian, Both Biden and Harris are known "Tough on Crime" Authoritarians,

I also oppose 99% of their platform including government run healthcare, extreme theft errr taxation, open social programs for anyone that happens to be physically located inside the boarders, their Identity / Social Justice Warrior politics, I could go on and on

I support federalism, I support individual liberty, I support meritocracy. all of which they stand against

They literally support none of those things (except maybe identity politics).

The think tanks' efforts to brand "socialism" as authoritarianism have paid off. M4A being painted as an authoritarian nightmare is a slick trick on their part.

Can you point me to a non-authoritarian socialist nation, now or at any point in the past...

Socialism fails very quickly if not backed by an Authoritarian form of government... Only with Authoritarian enforcement can it survive and then only with extreme poverty and misery for most people.

All of the things listed both have implicitly supported during the primary debates

Literally every candidate must be seen as "Tough on Crime" because the public wont vote for anyone who doesn't make this appeal. This became a big Republican stance that Clinton embraced that helped him win the election. So please show me the not "tough on crime" politician that has any shot at winning an election.

This was when the Republicans had majorities in both chambers of Congress, Newt Gingrich was Speaker of the House, and the Republican's Contract on America was passed, unfortunately. The Democrats shifted right because they thought that's what would win them elections.

Sure, Biden and Harris are terrible candidates because they're 1990s Republicans, but they're a million times better than Trump and Pence. The smear campaigns against them are an attempt to elevate Trump and Pence so he seems only as awful as Biden And Harris. Don't take the bait. Don't defend them. For a Republican to warn liberals that Biden and Harris don't deserve anyone's vote because they're those "tough on crime" types when it was Republicans who shut the government down to force through "tough on crime" legislation and codify "tough on crime" as a requisite to hold political office is some serious b.s.

This is unrelated to a presidents attempt to reduce voting, I would think you would be pro voting

Why that?

A lot of the tough on crime stuff is Dem's trying to counter the "law and order" playbook by the GOP. Criminal "justice" definitely needs to be re-examined and re-worked.

Pretty hyperbolic statement. America (the federal entity) might be in danger of survival long-term but humanity has survived much worse. You don't even need to go back 100 years to imagine what it looks like for a major nation to collapse under authoritarianism.

Climate change is coming faster than expected. It will be ignored by the Trump regime, just like the pandemic is.

It's also another disincentive for him to get the pandemic under control. Because if we got down to tens or hundreds of infections per day per state, there'd be less need for mail-in voting.

Who specifically is being disincentivized?

Trump. The pandemic works for him, because then more people want to vote by mail, which he can limit through defunding the post office. If the pandemic isn't as much of an issue, then he can't limit the supply of voters as easily.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com