Not a problem. They lose one voter (if the conviction sticks) and strengthen the fanaticism of their victimization narrative. To them, that says that the deep state just covers up for the antifa, and suppresses their voice.
Contrary to our stereotype, the vast majority of Americans don't resort to gun violence or the threat of gun violence to get what they want.
The gravy seals you see on TV are just cos playing and would turn tail and run if they ever really had to put it all on the line. Or even if the local police simply didn't enable them.
Because you'd been falsely presenting as a disillusioned Democrat that could be won over if Harris changed position on supporting Isreal. And framing it as others such as yourself could be won over as well, and that the Dems deserve whatever they get for failing to do so.
Yet you now admit that the Dems will never get your vote (in the short term), and that changing position on Isreal support would not get them your vote.
That's literally what this community has vocalized repeatedly in response to people like yourself who grandstand on genocide despite the only other option being worse genocide.
Tl;Dr- you admit that pandering to people like you will achieve nothing.
Ahh, I guess I misread. I thought they got convicted for attempted voter fraud but acquitted of voter fraud.
Like I said, intent is a large part of the law. A lot of crimes don't get charged because intent is a high threshold to prove. Just because it seems the intent is obvious, proving it beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law is a very different matter.
But driving under the influence is literally the charge. There's also reckless endangerment and other tack on charges. You couldn't necessarily tack on attempted homicide, because intent is required.
In this case, attempted voter fraud is literally the charge. Sentencing guidelines are a state level decision.
That's just how the law works. If you want more punishment for failed voter fraud, pressure the state to increase the sentencing guidelines.
Bernie endorsed Hillary too. Fat lot that did. My progressive friend still wrote his name in on the ballot.
Luckily my friend is done fucking around. But seems like a lot of the "leftist" vocal minority here on Lemmy want the rest of us to pay the "find out" tab for them again.
Yeah, I guess that's what I don't get. How can stealing/destroying ballots not be considered "political", but figuratively throwing out all of the ballots and unilaterally picking the winner be protected as "political".
It seems both are major crimes to democracy, whatever political party happened to commit said crimes.
Unless there's some grey area not explicitly addressed in law wrt electors.
Can someone explain why this is different from election interference?
You have people going away for years for stealing/destroying ballots, as they should.
But to throw away the result of millions of counted ballots seems like these low level interference x1000. How have they not faced dire consequences?
And yeah, I know, if its considered state level crimes (because states define tgeir own election rules), then it's local law enforcement, prosecutors, judges who look the other way because it's for their team.
But these seem to be major crimes with a clear record. How are they not locked away despite political alignment?
Meh. I'd happily return to the ideological difference of the 90s / 2000s where maybe some facts don't support beliefs. But we're in a very different ballgame now.
And the fact that he's endorsing Harris instead of just saying don't vote for Trump is commendable. Many of my Republican friends that reject Trump can't stomach voting for Harris. It's apparently a very big bridge to cross for them.
Eh. It started respectful, but dealing with the same tired "never genocide" canvassing of every single election thread gets old. And the people making those arguments know exactly what they're doing.
Do you expect the opposition to fall over themselves to be respectful and accommodating while the other is not playing by the same rules?
Does that remind you of something the Dems were very heavily criticized for doing in the recent past?
TBF, Australia has a really big problem with racism. Against immigrants in particular.
As an American that traveled there 2 years ago on vacation, it was typical for them to ice break with "so how about them immigrants" after they found out we were American (and assumed all Americans are Texans I guess, by the stereotype they were expecting)
It seems likely to cause a rift though as they all fight to take the reigns. We saw in the primaries that no one was even up to the task for taking the reigns from an old criminal drowning in legal woes who attempted a violent coup, and also pissed off McConnell, the next most powerful republican.
I still don't understand Trump's "charisma", but there's no denying that it seems exclusively his. The other candidates tried saying the quiet parts out loud too, and didn't manage to elicit any hint of fervor.
He may be a symptom, but a political defeat would stall their fascist movement. And only a Dem controlled house/senate/potus combined have much chance at stopping, or at least stalling, this freight train. And they may just eat each other if we can stall them long enough.
There's miles of difference between the damage that corporate stooges do versus a literal fascist movement. If this were the 2000s, yeah, I'd be with you all the way, both sides pillaging our futures and all that.
But you're focused on that asshole stealing your catalytic converter down the street, when you're actively getting mugged and curb stomped, here and now.
There is a very real possibility of this country descending into fascist dictatorship, and/or huge loss of life from an ensuing Civil War.
Right now, the Dems are at least united like they haven't been in recent memory because they finally understand what's at stake. It is absolutely infuriating that you guys are still nitpicking over comparatively trivial stuff compared to cataclysm.
This isn't hyperbole, this is literally what they have been repeatedly caught expressly trying to accomplish. Yes, it seems like it's crazy to consider that they might actually achieve their goals. But with everything we know, Trump is still very likely to win this election thanks to people like you who can't seem to prioritize the violent muggers trying to kill you, over the guy stealing your catalytic converter.
because fixing these underlying issues would upset the handful of billionaires that actually control our government
And how exactly are they supposed to do that without a super majority that is impossible with the population continuing to elect MAGA Republicans?
There is no bipartisan possibilities. No one from the right will step across the aisle to make constitutional amendments or impeach corrupt SCOTUS justices or fascist party members. And they'd need 1/3rd of them to do so for the authority to fix anything.
There is no moving on. Nothing can be fixed. Voters should have woken up after Jan 6th, but Republicans still gained seats in the mid term elections.
There is no legal path to fixing this, we can only do our best to bail water and keep them from sinking the ship.
Not a problem. They lose one voter (if the conviction sticks) and strengthen the fanaticism of their victimization narrative. To them, that says that the deep state just covers up for the antifa, and suppresses their voice.