Quokk.au"Fuck 'em, we didn't want their votes anyway."
PugJesushttps://media.piefed.social/posts/2i/MU/2iMUIEfWkn7zUzq.png
Share on Mastodon
Share on Reddit
Share on WhatsApp6 Comments
Comments from other communities
Explanation: Many European countries, including Ukraine, which is currently struggling against an imperialist incursion by Russia, have laws on the books which restrict or restrain elections during wars which violate the territorial integrity of the polity - ie, that holding elections while being bombed is impractical, and holding elections in occupied territory is impossible.
The US, being a vast country even at its youngest point, founded in an era before motorized armies and aerial bombing, and insanely attached to the one document that lays out the processes of our government (because if we weren’t, we’d immediately start killing each other over what it should be instead), has no such laws. During the US Civil War, we just ignored the South during the 1864 election. Doing so resulted in the most radical and forward-thinking (relative to contemporary society) Congress in US history, and a resounding re-election victory for President Abraham Lincoln.
… we gave the South their fucking voting rights back too soon.
Sherman should have done more.
Also traitors should have been treated as the treasonous scum they were.
agamemnonymousAs it just so happens, however, the current cunt in office is trying to cancel the midterms and 2028 elections under a manufactured crisis.
So we’ll see how long we have that moral high ground.
I mean, the arguments put forth for not having elections during wartime is sound. It’s not so much a moral high ground as an amusing piece of trivia.
But yes, the current shitwit’s enthusiasm for locking us under the fascist regime is… notable.
What occurs to me is that a state of emergency will be called only in the blue states and the 2028 election will somehow only be held in the red states. Insane but… so is everything else that has happened.
tomiant
Miles O'Brien“And besides, according to all known laws of aviation…”
Lol I love when the bee movie script shows up in unexpected places
Quite the stretch. There really isn’t any comparison to be done between a war of foreign aggression and a civil war in this context. Also didn’t the US allow a third time for Roosevelt during WWII for much the same reasons?
Quite the stretch. There really isn’t any comparison to be done between a war of foreign aggression and a civil war in this context.
As I said elsewhere, the effect of denying the centralized government the ability to offer elections in occupied territory is the same.
Also didn’t the US allow a third time for Roosevelt during WWII for much the same reasons?
There was no law at the time limiting the number of terms presidents could win.
Explanation: Many European countries, including Ukraine, which is currently struggling against an imperialist incursion by Russia, have laws on the books which restrict or restrain elections during wars which violate the territorial integrity of the polity - ie, that holding elections while being bombed is impractical, and holding elections in occupied territory is impossible.
The US, being a vast country even at its youngest point, founded in an era before motorized armies and aerial bombing, and insanely attached to the one document that lays out the processes of our government (because if we weren’t, we’d immediately start killing each other over what it should be instead), has no such laws. During the US Civil War, we just ignored the South during the 1864 election. Doing so resulted in the most radical and forward-thinking (relative to contemporary society) Congress in US history, and a resounding re-election victory for President Abraham Lincoln.
… we gave the South their fucking voting rights back too soon.
Ricky RigatoniSo all we have to do to fix america is just let the south leave next time.
A_Random_Idiot
Explanation: Many European countries, including Ukraine, which is currently struggling against an imperialist incursion by Russia, have laws on the books which restrict or restrain elections during wars which violate the territorial integrity of the polity - ie, that holding elections while being bombed is impractical, and holding elections in occupied territory is impossible.
The US, being a vast country even at its youngest point, founded in an era before motorized armies and aerial bombing, and insanely attached to the one document that lays out the processes of our government (because if we weren’t, we’d immediately start killing each other over what it should be instead), has no such laws. During the US Civil War, we just ignored the South during the 1864 election. Doing so resulted in the most radical and forward-thinking (relative to contemporary society) Congress in US history, and a resounding re-election victory for President Abraham Lincoln.
… we gave the South their fucking voting rights back too soon.
Goddammit.
Civil war and foreign invasion with combat on your land are quite different things tho.
I mean, ultimately both have the same effect of denying the central state the ability to meaningfully offer electoral participation to those occupied by the enemy.
Problem that you can’t do meaningful participation of those on non-occupied land as there is a risk that russia would be sending shaheds into voting centres the whole day.
Do defenders vote? Can they participate as candidates?
Do people who left the country vote? How, as embassies physically can’t process that number of people?
Whatever you do, it will create legitimacy crisis. Which is why russia push it. And now USA joined cause Trump is a russian whore.
I agree entirely, as I said in another comment chain, this isn’t a criticism, just a piece of trivia