US President Joe Biden has said he is not confident there will be a peaceful transition of power if Donald Trump loses the presidential election in November.

"[Trump] means what he says, we don’t take him seriously. He means it, all this stuff about ‘if we lose it will be a bloodbath’.”

Mr Trump’s comment that it would “be a bloodbath for the country” if he loses the election, made as he was talking about the auto industry in March, triggered a wave of criticism.

The Trump campaign, however, said the comment was specifically about the auto industry and had been deliberately taken out of context. It sent a fundraising email which said Trump’s political opponents and others had been “viciously” misquoting him.

  • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    4 months ago

    Ditch the electoral college, certify the election with a popular vote, adopt ranked choice.

    But then the 1% would become the 10% and I’m sorry but that just won’t do, it’s a very nuanced system that boils down to Rich good Poor bad. /s

      • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s absolutely true. However with the SCOTUS rulings as of late regarding the Executive branch, it could be fun to try.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          4 months ago

          If we ever get a trifecta again we need to kill the filibuster and then pass a law to expand Congress so the EC is effectively locked to the national result. As a bonus it seriously hurts lobbyists and gives us better representation.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              Historically we’ve never gone backwards in the number of representatives. It would be very hard for a party with a majority in The House of Representatives to make that case.

    • glizzard@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Ranked choice is just another way for people to game the system. I wish people understood this.

      If we can only afford one candidate, they can afford 30. Ranked choice is like the very last possible thing that should be implemented in a supposed democracy. You don’t believe me, the Conservative party of Canada has ranked primaries. You have 4 crazy people and 1 moderate. Who gets more votes? The crazy people. You’re literally sealing your fate if you implement ranked voting in a mass-lobbying environment like the USA.

      • BigBoiBarry@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 months ago

        Nope, it works great here in Australia.

        FPTP is the worst system, and couple that with a system like the electoral collage and you have a system designed to make as few voices heard as possible.

        • glizzard@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Is lobbying legal in Australia? Considering the sway the oil and gas lobby has in AU, i don’t know if your point stands. I just can’t see it helping a shitstorm like USA, when I can see it impacting Canada negatively

      • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Ranked choice is just another way for people to game the system. I wish people understood this.

        Vote for the candidate you want, and then put the moderate as your second choice, shuffle them all together and oh look the moderate got the nom, but has to campaign in such a way as to please the democratic plurality of a multi party system.

        How many “crazy people” have been put forth as the Canadian Conservative Party candidate? As the general elections went in 2021, one of the most contentious in recent history, it looked like there was a plurality there. The outcome, and current scandals not withstanding within the Canadian governemnt, there aren’t assassination attempts creating articles from reputable sources giving serious credence to civil war.

        https://theconversation.com/one-inch-from-a-potential-civil-war-near-miss-in-trump-shooting-is-also-a-close-call-for-american-democracy-234628.

        Seems like a two party system might create some tribalism there, let’s look back at the Canadian Parliament, with a lot of different parties in the parliament compromising and doing politics. Looks like a lot of pluralism there.

        https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/votes

        Now let’s take a look at what the US Congress has been up to recently

        https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/votes

        Weird, outside of a universal vote to go on vacation, I don’t really see a plurality there. Mostly along a two party line.

        I wonder how we got there? I bet someone smarter than I has thought of this.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger's_law

        Oh they did.

        Moving back to the threat of political violence, which is a much larger conversation than ranked choice voting. Could a two party system contribute to that? Could other countries with a binary politcal system face the same issues?

        https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/rising-tide-political-violence

        Huh could the very nature of a two party system, encourage political tribalism and disincentivize political collobaration?

        https://voices.uchicago.edu/dangerousthoughts/2016/05/14/political-tribalism-and-identity-politics/

        https://www.power3point0.org/2019/01/15/conformation-bias-political-tribalism-as-a-driver-of-disinformation/

        What does the future of the US want?

        https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/08/09/as-partisan-hostility-grows-signs-of-frustration-with-the-two-party-system/

        Huh, thank goodness we don’t have to deal with those pesky crazies in the Canadian Conservative Party ranked primaries.

        Ranked choice is just another way for people to game the system. I wish people understood this.

        • glizzard@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I don’t see why you skip my entire point of it just increasing the number of shitty candidates. You say the “moderate” gets chosen, but what’s the mean when 4/5s of the pool is poison?

          The fact you just straight to Trump-assassination whataboutism is fucked, and this whole mathematical law regarding duopoly again flies past my point. Providing more candidates that are shit only ratchets the equation towards shit. That’s not to say having more than two parties is bad… I’m saying the political foundation in America is so bad that implementing ranked choice before destroying the influence of capital only increases the chance of capital winning.

          • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Do you know how Ranked Choice works? I explained it in a sentence. You keep agreeing with my points. The Moderate wins and has to take the 4/5ths into consideration. What you’re describing with your pool of poison is a problem with the conservative party and not with ranked choice voting. You can happily look at the voting turn out in Australia, and Australian exit polls to directly refute your point of poison.

            Whatboutism? You didn’t even read my post. I’m saying that a First Past the Post voting leads to tribalism that can lead to political extremism and violence. Which is clearly illustrated in every research paper, article, and government report I shared with you.

            You’ve responded with an opinion, and your opinion of one minor part of a much larger Canadian political system. Again.

            More choice breeds better results for a larger portion of the population. The fact that our extremism here in America cannot even take serious root in Canada is a great point to the benefits of a pluralistic government. But sure. Whataboutism .Yeah.

            • glizzard@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              It’s “whataboutism” because using a closed Republican-on-Republican violence is kind of ridiculous when you say my point about “poisoned pools” is only a problem within the Conservative party.

              I’m saying ranked voting only helps when it’s backed by a legitimate and healthy political environment. One that America and Canada do not have. Man we’re just talking past eachother, cause some ignorant Aussie (you) thinks he understands American politics. Brother, I understand math, but these people can legally throw money at the literal Supreme Court and it’s completely legal. That’s not a healthy environment. Citizens United would mean every pool in the USA would be full of poison.

              • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                The Balkanization of the Republican Party is driven by political tribalism. I don’t think you have a very strong grasp on political theory or how absolutely fucked we are down here.

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkanization

                I’m not the person who said

                Nope, it works great here in Australia.

                That was @BigBoyBarry

                Look at my comment history, I was born in America and have lived here all my life. I’ve voted in every primary I qualify to vote in and every presidential election since I turned 18.

                You might want to read the usernames of the people you’re replying to.

                • glizzard@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  If your point now is that ranked choice voting would increase voting turnout, thus reducing the chance of Balkanization — I understand I guess. But RC isn’t going to fix the fact only 1 candidate is going to win, and doesn’t guarantee some better percentage breakdown in representation. Like you should maybe clarifying why the Republicans are balkanizing specifically, because even Musk would argue it’s a problem of Democrats. I just dont really understand what youre getting at