Lots of folks might need to mail early or show up in person until regime change as governance infrastructure is sabotaged or degraded by people who might not otherwise be able to win.
Those people previously benefited from not being in power, so voters forgot how abjectly terrible they were. This was helped by conspiring media egging them on about price inflation, much of which had taken years to set in.
that's moving the goalposts of the comment I replied.
"people who might not otherwise be able to win" would mean that without this rule change, the current admin would not have been able to win. that's clearly not true. all this does, as you suggest, makes it harder for their opposition to use a valid means of voting.
DJT is fixated on anything where he can put his thumb on the scale. this is no different than demanding states gerrymander their maps in his favor. also, clearly DJT won, so not really sure what the argument here is. the original comment said unable to win. QED or some such
The same number of 55+ voters in the US that was the margin of victor for this election die in a year (~2M, ~5k/day). I admit, I'm unsure if those who voted for this have felt sufficient pain yet to vote better, and the votes of those who don't age out by election deadlines are hard to predict, but election results since the presidential election have been very favorable. NYC and Seattle have both elected democratic socialist mayors recently. Certainly, I have no doubt deep red parts of the country will continue to vote for this until death, but those parts of the country also have lower life expectency.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/06/26/behind-trump... ("Most adults who were eligible to vote in 2020 – but declined to do so – stayed home again in 2024. But among those who did turn out, Trump had the edge. Among all 2020 nonvoters (including those who were too young and ineligible to vote in 2020), 14% supported Trump in 2024 while 12% supported Harris.")
Observing demographic systems ("demographics are destiny") and its context within a political and governance system, and then building a thesis from those observations is simply academic. Attempting to predict the future isn't a fantasy (death or otherwise) imho, but I do enjoy trying to predict the future from observations and data. But, from your comment "A small price to pay for election integrity," (when elections were already high integrity) I can already deduce your mental model and that it is not grounded in facts or data.
> "We're going to start with an executive order that's being written right now by the best lawyers in the country to end mail-in ballots because they're corrupt," Trump said later Monday, during a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House. "And it's time that the Republicans get tough and stop it because the Democrats want it. It's the only way they can get elected."
> Although Trump himself urged his supporters to vote using mail ballots prior to the 2024 election, Democrats have been significantly more likely to vote using mail-in ballots, compared to Republicans, since the 2020 election. That gap has only gotten wider in recent elections as GOP-led states have passed more restrictions on this method of voting.
> But legal experts say Trump does not have the legal authority to tell states how to run their elections.
As the saying goes, "Every accusation is a confession."
