372
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by tonytins@pawb.social to c/politics@lemmy.world

Rachel Maddow warned viewers on Monday that President Donald Trump plans to interfere with midterm election results, following the Supreme Court’s recent 7-2 ruling against his executive order instructing the US Postal Service (USPS) to block states from distributing and collecting mail-in ballots.

Trump’s order, which he signed last March, would’ve directed the USPS to refuse to deliver mail-in ballots to anyone whose information hadn’t been properly submitted to a new state citizenship list maintained by the federal government.


"Trump is counting on confusion, uncertainty, and a lack of confidence in the mail-in voting system to suppress voter turnout," she said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] hoppeduponcoffee@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It’s not entirely hopeless. It just requires millions upon millions of us to take unified action.

We can refuse to comply with anything en masse. Refuse to work. Refuse to pay our bills and taxes. Refuse to engage. They can use their authority to harass a small portion of us, but there’s nothing they can do to intimidate millions of us.

[-] VoodooAardvark@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I think you accidentally just explained why it’s entirely hopeless.

[-] ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

I get the idea, but the only thing that most can really do is refuse to pay bills and engage. Then you get thrown into the machine within 2 months. And the bills you don't pay don't directly affect the government.

IF one could refuse to pay taxes, that'd be something better. But, most have taxes automatically pulled from their pay before they even get it, and getting an employer to not pay that taxes on to the government is extremely difficult if not impossible in the system.

The system is working as intended. And it sucks

[-] hoppeduponcoffee@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Withholding paying for things and refusing to work could have an indirect effect. For one, it would foil the capital class who needs a constant stream of money, or else they would start pressuring the government to do something, out of fear of losing wealth and power.

If a huge amount of people are refusing to pay their rent or mortgages, there’s no way they can evict that many people, and we can also claim squatters rights.

If people completely boycotted all non-essential consumer goods, that would also be a kick in the nuts.

It’s neat to think about how much we comply with all of this shit, because we’re programmed to fear the consequences. The illusion completely falls apart when people finally refuse to comply en masse. It’s all a paper tiger.

[-] ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

Agreed, to a point. If society could collectively decide to withhold rent for example.... That society likely wouldn't have high enough rents that withholding would matter.

The system is how it is because of how humans are too. (Some worse than others) We can push against it, try and make things better. And sometimes in history we've succeeded. Other times the system just grinds on.

We really need more community and collective action. But the digital age has (intended or not) made it possible for nearly everyone to be more isolated, and that reduces the immediate community and possibility of effective collective action.

[-] hoppeduponcoffee@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Oh, the screens and social media algorithms that push ad traffic and addict us are totally by design. Social alienation, degradation of the human mental state and distraction to benefit tech billionaires are the features, not the side effects.

[-] notsure@fedia.io 2 points 2 weeks ago

I'm in, how about next tuesday?

this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2026
372 points (97.9% liked)

politics

31286 readers
2933 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS