Official Election 2020 Doomsday Thread

[All becomes gunt]

Realistically, the best way to have a voting system is to only allow people who are invested in the country to vote. aka, tax payers/land owners. people who are on welfare arent allowed to vote for x amount of years after coming off of it. people who don't own property/land aren't allowed to vote. On top of that, only allow 1 vote per person who reaches those criteria.
Edit: i should also add onto this: Spouces of taxpayers/land owners aren't allowed to vote, neither are children of them. Only individuals themselves that pay taxes or own property/land are allowed to vote.

Also you should be required to have a mother and father that have citizenship.

 

[Andrew Neiman]

I'm not retarded enough for my cognitive ability in spamming Biden votes to cease over people sperging from the corner of my eye.

What?

 

[BHWuser]

Realistically, the best way to have a voting system is to only allow people who are invested in the country to vote. aka, tax payers/land owners. people who are on welfare arent allowed to vote for x amount of years after coming off of it. people who don't own property/land aren't allowed to vote. On top of that, only allow 1 vote per person who reaches those criteria.
Edit: i should also add onto this: Spouces of taxpayers/land owners aren't allowed to vote, neither are children of them. Only individuals themselves that pay taxes or own property/land are allowed to vote.
Edit 2: as a reply to @All becomes gunt , Only citizens that have been born in america, with parents that have been born in america are allowed to vote. No dual citizens are allowed to vote.

Funny enough, this actually was pretty much how it was before we gave all men the right to vote alongside things like the draft and mandatory bucket duty.

 

[Cypher]

Some dates to keep in mind:

November 23rd: (3 days)
A majority of the states in question are required (legally or constitutionally) to certify their elections. After this date, Trump would need states to modify their laws to appoint Trump electors, or a supreme court decision.

December 8th: (18 days)
Electors are all selected. It's too late for states to pass any new laws. Trump would require a supreme court decision that would overturn Bush v. Gore and extend the date, or for enough electors to be faithless to state laws.

December 14th: (24 days)
Electors vote. It's now too late for any influence on electors, or for the supreme court to decide anything, but congress can still challenge individual electoral votes. At this point, Trump would need to convince both branches of congress to ignore enough electoral votes to allow congress to decide the election, if only one branch doesn't accept them, then it doesn't matter.

January 6th: (46 days)
Congress counts the votes. After this date, Trump's only method of winning would be a constitutional amendment passed by 2/3rds of states and congress.

January 20th: (60 days)
Biden is inaugurated. Trump's only hope of staying in office is armed revolution against the United States.


In most betting odds and basic electoral logic, Trump has until December 14th to get a legal victory on the level of 2000 Florida to win or he's fucked.

 

[Arm Pit Cream]

https://youtu.be/k-VnMXjTaV4

 

[CWCchange]

Crossposting from the TES thread because this is so fucking funny.

Which one of you A & N regulars cried to Uncle Rush? Fess up.

I heard the call at lunch. It sounded more like he was upset over the fact Republicans in Georgia absolutely cucked than dying for GEOTUS.

What?

If people the other side of a window bothered me so much while "counting" votes, I would just turn my fucking chair around. Absolutely no justification exists for covering windows.

January 20th: (60 days)
Biden is inaugurated. Trump's only hope of staying in office is armed revolution against the United States.

Simple with ninety-something percent approval rating in the military, and everything that has come out so far and will between now and then, as if the National Guard is going to have to escort Trump out of the White House for a senile geriatric and his curry nigger shadow socialist overlord?

Trump knows his time constraints, and perhaps Biden not doing anything in court over "muh transition" probably realizes his fate date with Justice Thomas.

 

[Paranoia Machine]

View attachment 1740311

https://youtu.be/k-VnMXjTaV4

-1337 Hax0r animated background.
-Goofy Mask.
-Fake voice.
-Clips from the film adaptation of 1984.
-Clubbed To Death by Rob Dougan playing in the background.
-Joker

Not sure if serious or cutting edge satire.

 

[Andrew Neiman]

Also you should be required to have a mother and father that have citizenship.

lol, by that standard I couldn't be a U.S. citizen because one of my paternal great grandparents was Irish.

If people the other side of a window bothered me so much while "counting" votes, I would just turn my fucking chair around. Absolutely no justification exists for covering windows.

I don't know what method of counting they were using (i.e., whether it was fully manual), but you might be surprised by how much concentration it requires to count ballots without error. You also might be surprised by how distracting the presence of a screeching mob can be.

 

[BlackDragoons]

View attachment 1740311

https://youtu.be/k-VnMXjTaV4

Well at least he is already in clown getup.

 

[Flip: Draw 2]

I don't believe you're attacking me, and I'm not a Democrat. However, I'm skeptical of anyone who thinks society's problems are caused by the masses being less intelligent or perceptive than they themselves are.

Then I ask, is asking people to just have a consistent set of beliefs too much to ask? It's obvious loyalty to political parties is bad for democracy so it seems only fair people who aren't voting out of a mere sense of loyalty are the ones who ought to vote and those that only toe the party line shouldn't.

 

[Andrew Neiman]

Then I ask, is asking people to just have a consistent set of beliefs too much to ask? It's obvious loyalty to political parties is bad for democracy so it seems only fair people who aren't voting out of a mere sense of loyalty are the ones who ought to vote and those that only toe the party line shouldn't.

There's no way to disenfranchise people who vote out of tribal loyalty, though. Anyway, even if you could, they'd still have enormous influence over society. I don't think there's any way to solve our current political problems without breaking those sharpening tribal divisions. I have no idea how that can be accomplished as long as social media exists in its current form, though.

 

[Flip: Draw 2]

There's no way to disenfranchise people who vote out of tribal loyalty, though. Anyway, even if you could, they'd still have enormous influence over society. I don't think there's any way to solve our current political problems without breaking those sharpening tribal divisions. I have no idea how that can be accomplished as long as social media exists in its current form, though.

Forcing people to think critically about their beliefs before they can vote would help. Just put something simple agree/disagree test with prompts like "I'm anti-war" and "We need to be more involved in the Middle East" and see if their beliefs line up. If they can't keep their own story straight until the end (with some flexibility for nuance) then no vote for them. Sure, their beliefs will likely line up closer than one party than another but at least those beliefs aren't just whatever is convenient for their favorite party at the time.

 

[Illiterate Wanderer]

Forcing people to think critically about their beliefs before they can vote would help. Just put something simple agree/disagree test with prompts like "I'm anti-war" and "We need to be more involved in the Middle East" and see if their beliefs line up. If they can't keep their own story straight until the end (with some flexibility for nuance) then no vote for them. Sure, their beliefs will likely line up closer than one party than another but at least those beliefs aren't just whatever is convenient for their favorite party at the time.

If there was some official government test that was suppose to help you then it'd be better off telling you just which national party you fit with best instead of trying to narrow down exact positions like Neoliberal ,Leftwing Populist ,Right-Libertarian , Conservative ect ect. Most people don't bother with old economics books, keeping up to date with foreign policy ect ect, they use short cuts like "My mom says we need to vote Biden or else Trump is gonna go full-Hitler and I've chuckled at some Bernie memes on twitter."

 

[Jack Awful]

If there was some official government test that was suppose to help you then it'd be better off telling you just which national party you fit with best instead of trying to narrow down exact positions like Neoliberal ,Leftwing Populist ,Right-Libertarian , Conservative ect ect. Most people don't bother with old economics books, keeping up to date with foreign policy ect ect, they use short cuts like "My mom says we need to vote Biden or else Trump is gonna go full-Hitler and I've chuckled at some Bernie memes on twitter."

I'd theoretically like some voter qualification test to prove someone isn't a literal retard, but I also don't trust the government to create and enforce one, so I'd rather it not exist.

 

[Illiterate Wanderer]

I'd theoretically like some voter qualification test to prove someone isn't a literal retard, but I also don't trust the government to create and enforce one, so I'd rather it not exist.

I think we should increase the requirements and have no test, that way we can narrow down the voting people to some people more likely to be competent, if we can't replace the entire system with something where voting is obsolete.

 

[Flip: Draw 2]

If there was some official government test that was suppose to help you then it'd be better off telling you just which national party you fit with best instead of trying to narrow down exact positions like Neoliberal ,Leftwing Populist ,Right-Libertarian , Conservative ect ect. Most people don't bother with old economics books, keeping up to date with foreign policy ect ect, they use short cuts like "My mom says we need to vote Biden or else Trump is gonna go full-Hitler and I've chuckled at some Bernie memes on twitter."

Nah. It shouldn't tell you who agrees with you but rather if your own positions agree with each other. If it's coherent, then it's fine. Don't need to get into gritty political details but more abstract things like morality. Maybe even play the good old veil of ignorance game. As long as you're not contradicting yourself, you pass.

 

[LinkinParkxNaruto[AMV]]

When candidate i like wins: Suck it up buttercup! Go be snowflakes somewhere else

When candidate i hate wins: Democracy has failed, this is how we change the constitution so only people like me can vote

 

[introvertedobserver]

I'd theoretically like some voter qualification test to prove someone isn't a literal retard, but I also don't trust the government to create and enforce one, so I'd rather it not exist.

Yeah, same boat.

I have no problem, and actually think some type of civics test before being allowed to vote is, conceptually, the way to go. Stupid people and people that can't understand what it is they're voting for shouldn't be voting.

In practice though Government abuses the shit out of such tests to disenfranchise groups regardless of if they understand shit or not. So we're ultimately better off without it since it can't be trusted to be done impartially..

 

[King's Gambit Accepted]

Taping pizza boxes to the window, and they got nothing to hide. We all know.

If you had a mob of random protesters, a few of whom were arrested after they came from out of state with firearms, I'd want to keep the mob out too.

The point is Trump's poll watchers were in the room, as Trump's lawyers were forced to admit in court.

 

[Andrew Neiman]

Forcing people to think critically about their beliefs before they can vote would help.

I don't think you can force someone to think critically. You can't help the unwilling. Also, for many people you'd be going up against the entire structure of the social environment where they spend most of their time. It's much easier to resist the pressure of a single, intruding person than it is to resist the pressure of all your friends and peers.