Equal and more equal.
this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2026
172 points (98.9% liked)
News
36867 readers
2846 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Seems like more people should be upset about this, but I guess we've all given up on democracy.
On the bright side, at least kids in the future won't have to memorize the Bill of Rights.
This just happened yesterday. Take a deep breath already
kids don't do that now
Apparently, neither do adults.
Most people probably aren't aware of it yet.
Lemmy gives us a very skewed perspective on how informed the general population is.
But there are already lawsuits being prepared.
The cheating on mail-in voting is legendary. It's horrible what's going on,"
Didn't he, uhm, just recently voted through mail in Florida?
executive order
That's as useful as a fart
Probably: ~~eligible~~ republican leaning
Snowden released the information showing that the government was logging everyone's text messages and logging the phone numbers everyone called. Then it was revealed that the government already has a profile that connects each person to their facebook, their phone number, their email- they know who everyone is. I guess this is really about ALLOWING people to be citizens and ALLOWING people to vote. It gives them control to create their own definitions and rules.
It also means that you, as a voter, have zero LOCAL recourse to get yourself added back on to the allowed list, should you ever find you have been kicked off it. And that is by design.
In most (all? I don't know) states, if there is any problem with your registration or ID at the polling place you are allowed to submit a provisional ballot, which is then counted after the problem is resolved, or discarded if it is not.
But with a federal -- physically controlled in Washington, DC -- list of allowed voters they can kick whoever they want off the voter rolls, whenever they want, for any reason they want or even no reason at all, and have that be the final word.
EVERYONE is on the disallowed voter list until and unless specifically added, by unnamed operators, in some completely opaque process, answerable to either no one at all, or just to some rubber-stamping kangaroo court in DC.
By contrast, the framers of the Constitution very specifically and deliberately left all election matters to the states, because they never wanted that concentration of power in the federal. Coming out of a very out of touch and physically distant monarchy they wanted people to never be too far from the mechanics of their own elections, so they very carefully wrote it the way they did.
And here we are.
They royaly fucked up by creating the EC and not including votes of no confidence.
Although maybe they intended for the people to forcibly remove bad presidents.
If you haven't already been doing so, between now and Election Day in November, CHECK YOUR VOTER REGISTRATION STATUS!
Y'all better be doing this. You gotta get rid of this guy, I'd love to come back 🙂
States control elections. Donny can fuck off.
Yeah this will be shot down so fast, I’m not worried at all
....by whom?
As right wing as the Supreme Court is now, there's no way they allow this. They've already shot down less overt shit he's wanted.
Even if they do though, I don't think the Democratic States would comply regardless of a SC decision saying so. It is so clearly unconstitutional that I think they would outright refuse that interpretation.
Even if they don't comply, it will be used to muddle the veracity of the elections. Maybe he'd just ignore the results from those states. And by the time all THAT is sorted, it will be too late and we'll be even MORE fucked than we already are.
The judicial system
He's going to say his people have to run blue states, and if they don't go along with it he'll try to say their elections don't count.
Then have congress just not come into new session to seat anyone.
Even if the article didn't explicitly talk about it it's weird how many people really can't see that coming and legitimately think he'll start following both letter and spirit of the law.
Not saying that he won't try, but the president has no (constitutional) say in the sitting of congress.
I looked it up and in Powell vs McCormack (1969), the Supreme Court ruled that the speaker of the house has no authority to deny a representative sent by their respective state. So, unless the current Supreme Court decides to overturn that precedent, it would require a 2/3 majority vote of the newly-seated house to expel someone, assuming I've understood correctly (which is questionable).
Tl;dr: I think even this couldn't necessarily prevent folks who win in November from serving.
The president has no...
When was the last time that mattered?
Did you used to work for the Justice Department, by chance?
"Guys, it turns out that molesting and raping children is indeed illegal for an American citizen. I think we might be able to prosecute Trump, and a whole lot of other people. I'm gonna share this with the office, I call it The Epstein files."
tl;dr: Trump owns the Supreme Court
Not saying that he won’t try, but the president has no (constitutional) say in the sitting of congress.
...
Buddy...
You don't think John Thune and Mike Johnson wouldn't listen to trump if he says to not call the new Congress into session?
How the fuck can someone be so authentically naivie in 2026, to think the mastermind conspiracy of that is just too far fetched?
Like, you might as well have said:
Of course billionaires pay taxes, it's the law
Tl;dr: I think even this couldn’t necessarily prevent folks who win in November from serving
I legit can't tell if that's a typo or brainrot. But you still don't understand any of this
"The cheating on mail-in voting is legendary. It's horrible what's going on," Trump said, repeating his false allegations about mail ballots as he signed the order. "I think this will help a lot with elections."
"And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth."
George Orwell, '1984'
As an American, Is there a way to not be on his list?
The only people on the list already voted for him three times.
Give him a few million dollars.
Pretty sure this is gonna be a literal whitelist, as in white voters.
This is very clearly what they wanted all those state voter rolls for.
I still can’t understand why you need to register to vote? I mean, is that really democracy?
I still can’t understand why you need to register to vote? I mean, is that really democracy?
I literally do not understand what this question is trying to say, unless it is coming from a profound misunderstanding of what registering to vote actually means.
In the US, all elections are run by the individual states, across a land mass that is bigger than western Europe, and smaller only than Russia or China, and our voting process goes back to the late 18th century. This process actually worked really well for over two hundred years. It is only with the advent of electronic voting in the 1990s that there has been any real problem with our systems.
But regardless, both back in the 1700s and now, registering to vote in the US is simply a matter of providing your identity and address of residence to your state's electoral board in accordance with that state's laws. In return your constitutional right to vote in elections is affirmed by your state, again in accordance with that state's processes, so that when you show up to vote your vote is properly validated and counted.
So given that understanding, what does registering to vote have to do with any system of government?
What's not democratic about being affirmed as a lawful voter by the state where you reside, in a country where it is impossible to know all your neighbors by sight and where there even now are vast stretches of rural land that have few to no inhabitants?
Doesn't every country have some electoral census? I know only about Poland and Spain because that's where I voted but in both countries you register in the census to indicate where you will be voting. Based on that you get assigned to a voting location that they have on their list. You go there, show them ID, they mark on the list that you voted and you get to place your vote.
The main problem with US is that they, like some developing country, don't have a proper national ID system. In modern countries you get assigned an ID number at birth (PESEL in Poland, DNI in Spain), every single person has a national ID and you use it to identify yourself. No one says "you can't require ID for voting people a lot of people don't have it". People being unable to identify themselves is a 3rd world issue.
Sure, but I have never been registered to vote in Finland. I just have information about elections and when and where I can vote. Also here even prisoners can vote. That’s why I’m a bit confused about US voting laws.
Do you register as a resident of your new town if you move?
If yes, there's your registration to vote.
So, why it doesn’t work like that in USA? It sounds so complicated but I’m sure it’s the best system in the world, if you say so.
As far as I know they don't have a similar registration with the city, the same way they don't all have IDs. Supposedly because it's seen as intrusive for the government to know anything about the citizens in the first place. (I'm German and only have internet knowledge about this myself.) Kind of ironic that this now serves as a vehicle to disenfranchise voters.
It’s kind of astonishing how different this is around the world. Well, now I know a little bit more.
I never registered to vote in Canada.
Since I was moving a lot before I left (student, then early-career renter), I would always show up to my local polling station with proof of address (usually a utility bill in my name) and proof of citizenship (usually my passport). They would copy down my details and give me a ballot. (I wasn't a douchebag who would do this on election day. I'd always go for early voting when the polling station was empty.)
In Poland you have to apply for a kind of "remote location" voting in advance and you can get a paper that let's you vote anywhere. You can't just show up anywhere. We also don't have any sort of early voting here. The polling stations are only open on election day.
Who works at polling stations in Canada? How long do they have to sit there? In Spain it's random people from the public that are assigned to them so they are only required to be there for one day.
In Canada, polling stations are also run by members of the public. I think they get paid, but it's a small enough amount that most people think of it as volunteering. In my experience, it's usually retired people. They also sit there for the day. On election day itself, they're also responsible for counting the ballots and making sure that the ballots are preserved. (I was once a volunteer scrutineer for one of the political parties, so I got to be there to watch the ballot-counting process.)
Regarding early voting, my recollection is that a subset of polling places were open on two or three specific days in the weeks leading up to the election. Like, if my riding had 25 polling sites, only maybe 4 (one in each "quadrant") were open for early voting. On the plus side, I think the early voting days were usually on weekends.
On the topic of "remote voting", my wife is Romanian and used to vote at the train station in Iași, since her official residence was still her home town. I always thought that was an interesting solution to the "voting outside your home district" problem, since it kind of implies that you're away from home because you've been riding a train. That said, since Iași is a university town and most people never seem to update their official residence (like, most of my tech worker friends officially "lived" in their hometown, even if they'd been in Iași for 10 years), the lineup to vote at the train station during a presidential runoff could be hours long. Of course, nobody needs to "register" to vote at the train station, since they just show their national ID card to prove they're eligible to vote.
If the US has free and fair and honest elections, the Republicans will lose their majorities, therefore Trump (with the brazenly dishonest support of the corrupt and compromised conservatives of the Supreme Court) will see to it that the US does not have free and fair and honest elections.
Pretty much, but as others have pointed out elsewhere, it's difficult for him to rig the midterms for a number of reasons. It is entirely possible that both the House and the Senate will lose their majorities, even with all these obvious efforts to rig and cheat.
How is this not election interference? I mean even proposing a law to interfere is interfering. I know that existing laws have very specific wording, so my question is, why the fuck did this not cover it. It's insane how obviously unconstitutional this is to a degree that these fuckers should be imprisoned for even the intent to make this an EO.
You're making the incorrect assumption that Trump is beholden to the law.
Laws only matter if someone enforces them.
I mean, he already straight up admitted the 2024 election was rigged.
Im not convinced. It was shown fairly conclusively that there was no significant voter fraud in the most recent election, and trump still won. Yes, there was some, namely the whole musk thing, but it wasnt that impactful. The issue is that there is nothing to vote for. Democrats are controlled opposition, simple as. A vote for democrats is a vote for delaying fascism, not a vote against fascism. So many people sat out the last election because democrats refuse to budge on the genocidal tendancies, and theres no reason to believe that they will attempt to do any better this time around because thats not how controlled opposition works. If we had even one serious candiate, they would easily dominate both sides of the political spectrum. But that would directly hurt the interests of the powers that be.
At the end of the day, it all boils down to whether youre willing to die on the hill of capitalism. Its a failed system, and unless the US decides to get with the times and become the ungovernable intollerant left, then the US as a country will burn within the next 30 years.
He’s realizing that he won’t be able to stop the election from happening, and that the SAVE Act is DOA. Grasping at thinner and thinner straws.
The people will vote. The states will count the votes and ratify winners. By November, the election will be among the largest midterm tidal waves in history.
Trump’s impotent rage will be the next operation epic fury and will yield similar results.
saves act is more than likely to hurt republicans overall, since likely the places that only issue passports are far and few between.