In the aftermath of USA 2024 elections, what are the chances of widespread violence?

[alhoon]

USA elections are coming in November 2024.

Whether you support Democrats or Republicans or none of the two, either the Republicans or the Democrats would elect the PotUS.
And while "winning elections" in USA is actually much more complex than who becomes PotUS, as the PotUS shares power with judges and legislators and the states have their own governments etc. whomever of the two parties wins the PotUS is more or less considered to have won the elections.

That said, here is the issue. USA polarization is through the roof these years (linkA, LinkB) although some disagree (LinkC).

In 2016, there were protests and riots on the eve of Trump's victory. "Not my president" etc.

In 2020, a lot of people (and I mean millions of people) thought that Trump won the elections and was kept from the presidency because of Democrats cheating. A highlight of that denial to accept the loss was the attack on the capitol in 6th January.

With that in mind, do you think 2024 elections could continue the trend started in 2016 and intensified in 2020?

My opinion:
If Trump is the Republican nominee, there will be bloodshed. Perhaps 10-20 dead in 3 months, perhaps 500-1000 dead. But there will be blood.
If Trump wins, the radical left will go from not my president to screams of horror and attacks. The Radical Right will also make attacks, emboldened (like it happened in 2016).
If Trump loses, then it will be Jan 6 on steroids. The MAGA will scream, shout and refuse to accept it.

If Trump is NOT the Republican nominee and the Republicans win, there will be anger and protests and disbelief, but probably not blood.
If Trump is NOT the Republican nominee and the Democrats win, MAGA will shout that Trump would have won and that the eeeeevuuul system kept the champion out and refuse to accept the new PotUS as the legitimate PotUS. "Not my president", but from the other side. And yes, there would probably be a few politics-fueled deaths as fanatics clash.

What do you think?

[Kyriakos]

I just hope the US doesn't go for banning a major candidate (afaik currently projected to win). Both Trump and Biden are way too old clowns, and neither should have been the options.

[alhoon]

That's a completely different discussion for a different thread (and it happens in a different thread), but I have come to kinda agree with you. The courts banning a candidate opens the sack of Aeolus. This time (depending on where you stand) there is a legitimate reason. But now, it is open for abuse and courts placed by A or B side will have great influence. But again, that's a discussion for a different thread.

[Muizer]

Very likely. Got to keep in mind though that the polarization is also very strongly one of city vs countryside. So I would not expect both camps to come to blows in the streets. We might see some paramilitary violence by loners or 'militias' if Trump loses and rioting and anarchy among the urban poor if he wins.

The real tragedy is of course that whether or not he gets convincted, Trump is an anti-democratic candidate (how else can one qualify someone calling officials to 'find some votes' or to pressure the VP in not ratifying election results. It does not matter whether that amounts to insurrection, legally speaking. It means people voting for him are voting against democracy. And that is always a conundrum: is it possible to democratically abolish democracy?

[alhoon]

Very likely. Got to keep in mind though that the polarization is also very strongly one of city vs countryside. So I would not expect both camps to come to blows in the streets. We might see some paramilitary violence by loners or 'militias' if Trump loses and rioting and anarchy among the urban poor if he wins.

So, you expect specific types of violence. I don't disagree with your examples, but I do worry about another Jan 6th if Trump loses OR if he is disqualified or pressure, as in violent pressure and threats, to the Electoral College if Trump wins.

[Laser101]

The real tragedy is of course that whether or not he gets convincted, Trump is an anti-democratic candidate (how else can one qualify someone calling officials to 'find some votes' or to pressure the VP in not ratifying election results. It does not matter whether that amounts to insurrection, legally speaking. It means people voting for him are voting against democracy. And that is always a conundrum: is it possible to democratically abolish democracy?

Trying to do that in the American context runs into a problem; even if Trump wins the Presidency, he may not have control of the legislature. Plus, there's also the state governments, and the blue states are likely to try and make his time in office as difficult as possible.

[conon394]

I just hope the US doesn't go for banning a major candidate (afaik currently projected to win). Both Trump and Biden are way too old clowns, and neither should have been the options.

As per usual I really can't understand your disdain for Biden. Name a better recent democratic President

[Kyriakos]

Biden was alive back when Germany controlled Stalingrad.
He simply can't be a good option for potus.

[Laser101]

As per usual I really can't understand your disdain for Biden. Name a better recent democratic President

Obama? At least he was younger.

[alhoon]

As per usual I really can't understand your disdain for Biden. Name a better recent democratic President

Obama and Clinton.

How THAT has anything to do with whether there would be violence on the aftermath of the election?

[conon394]

@alhoon. I was simply responding to Kyriakos repetitive statement based on no facts. I'll drop it. That being said from a democratic perspective and a liberal neither Obama nor Bill were as effective in implementing domestic policy and Obama was a disaster on foreign policy.

[Kyriakos]

I think there may well be violence, whether Trump wins (as projected) or Biden. But if Trump is banned, it will be a precedent the US won't easily recover from => more than just violence pending.
All Trump has going for him - being otherwise a clown and not fit for potus - is that the system has been explicit in showing it doesn't care about massive parts of the population, which led to popular disgust.

Re Biden, I can't see why an 80+ year old who clearly shows signs of mental decline, can be presented as fit for potus.

[conon394]

(as projected)

Ah yes by what again polls that at the same time had Romney winning or Bill losing in a landslide. Clickbait polls this far out heavily massaged by R have no predictive value.

[Sir Adrian]

I think there may well be violence, whether Trump wins (as projected) or Biden. But if Trump is banned, it will be a precedent the US won't easily recover from => more than just violence pending.
All Trump has going for him - being otherwise a clown and not fit for potus - is that the system has been explicit in showing it doesn't care about massive parts of the population, which led to popular disgust.

Re Biden, I can't see why an 80+ year old who clearly shows signs of mental decline, can be presented as fit for potus.

Because he is very easy to manipulate.

[Kyriakos]

Maybe they should have a radish as president ^^

[mishkin]

January 6 United States Capitol attack

On January 6, 2021, the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. was attacked by a mob[33][34][35] of supporters of then-U.S. president Donald Trump, two months after his defeat in the 2020 presidential election. They sought to keep Trump in power by preventing a joint session of Congress from counting the Electoral College votes to formalize the victory of President-elect Joe Biden. The attack was ultimately unsuccessful in preventing the election results from being certified. According to the House select committee that investigated the incident, the attack was the culmination of a seven-part plan by Trump to overturn the election.[36][37]

2023 Brazilian Congress attack

On 8 January 2023, following the defeat of then-president Jair Bolsonaro in the 2022 Brazilian general election and the inauguration of his successor Luis Inácio Lula da Silva, a mob of Bolsonaro's supporters attacked Brazil's federal government buildings in the capital, Brasília. The mob invaded and caused deliberate damage to the Supreme Federal Court, the National Congress building and the Planalto Presidential Palace in the Praça dos Três Poderes, seeking to violently overthrow the democratically elected president Lula, who had been inaugurated on 1 January. Many rioters said their purpose was to spur military leaders to launch a coup d'état and disrupt the democratic transition of power.[17][18][19][20]

Outrage in Spain after leader of far-right party talks about hanging Pedro Sanchez



Voting fraud claims spread ahead of Spain’s pivotal election

WASHINGTON (AP) — Days before Spain holds a pivotal election, misleading claims about mail ballots and election fraud are spreading on social media and casting doubts about the results even before the votes have been counted.

The allegations, amplified by supporters of the center-right Popular Party and the far-right Vox Party, bear striking similarities to the baseless claims spread by then-President Donald Trump ahead of his 2020 U.S. election defeat and offer a reminder that the distrust of elections that has marred U.S. politics has taken root in Europe, too.

Sunday’s general election could tilt Spain in favor of the populist right, as the Popular Party looks to take power away from the Spanish Socialist Worker’s Party and its far-left coalition partner, Unidas Podemos (United We Can).

Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez called the early election after his left-leaning coalition lost big in this year’s local and regional elections that were also marked by online misinformation about voting, as well as a surge in hateful content about Muslims and immigrants.

Javier Milei in Argentina said that if he did not win it would be because of some electoral fraud (I can't find sources in English*). I see a certain pattern when the populist right loses elections. Do you have any other examples?


*Las denuncias de fraude electoral de Milei emulan las estrategias de Trump y Bolsonaro (Milei's allegations of electoral fraud emulate the strategies of Trump and Bolsonaro) The far-right candidate’s attacks on the electoral process raises fears that he might not accept a negative result in Sunday’s vote

Edit: Germany. Voter fraud misinformation gains momentum in Germany

False claims about election fraud, often promoted by leading far-right politicians, are starting to pick up pace ahead of Germany's nationwide election in September, according to data from Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms provided to POLITICO.

Far-right voters, including some from the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, are the main promoters of such misinformation.

False claims about election fraud, often promoted by leading far-right politicians, are starting to pick up pace ahead of Germany's nationwide election in September, according to data from Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms provided to POLITICO.

Far-right voters, including some from the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, are the main promoters of such misinformation.

Dutch election: Far-right accounts are trying to spread claims of voter fraud like Donald Trump

Edit 2: In case it needs to be said. These are threats and a search for justifications to reverse normal democratic processes through coups d'état/violence. Of course, part of the North American right will not accept it if it loses the elections.

[The spartan]

But if Trump is banned, it will be a precedent the US won't easily recover from

Trump : precedent

You can only pick one. We've never had a president deny that he lost the election and then try to overturn that election, before. No matter how Trump's legal situations go, it is all unprecedented.


As to the thread, I think the chance of widespread violence is rather low. It is too visible and unsavory for the American people. Isolated, but multiple, terrorist activities are more probable. However there is always slim chance that the US absolutely loses its goddamn mind and commits to huge amounts of violence in the form of a civil war. It is a weird situation in which the voters are incredibly polarized but the institutions are still relatively strong.

[alhoon]

Ah yes by what again polls that at the same time had Romney winning or Bill losing in a landslide. Clickbait polls this far out heavily massaged by R have no predictive value.

No, they didn't. What are you even talking about? With Obama and Romney there was never a real doubt that Obama would win except of the Tea Party echo chambers (the MAGA prequel). Obama was above Romney in most polls. Check threads from January 2012 in this site and you will see what I mean.

Obama and Clinton had significantly higher poll numbers than Biden has.
Obama was 7% ahead of Biden in popularity, and Clinton was 12% ahead of Biden.
Even Trump, that lost, was doing a bit better than Biden at the time, 3% ahead.

Yes, there is time to turn things around, but don't pretend this is not a great problem for Biden.

As to the thread, I think the chance of widespread violence is rather low. It is too visible and unsavory for the American people. Isolated, but multiple, terrorist activities are more probable. However there is always slim chance that the US absolutely loses its goddamn mind and commits to huge amounts of violence in the form of a civil war.

I agree but I put the chance of a real civil war in USA, not just a militia of 50 people in state_13 going up the mountains with their guns shooting at federal employees is very very slim. Americans have very little reason to offer their lives and die.

The moments militias start to form and act, the various agencies will cut their cellphone signals and direct FBI to arrest them.

[mishkin]

The moments militias start to form and act, the various agencies will cut their cellphone signals and direct FBI to arrest them.

I just want to point out that the militias are already formed and right-wing terrorism has already acted.

[alhoon]

I just want to point out that the militias are already formed and right-wing terrorism has already acted.

That's because the 18th century document that is in great need of a revision mention that militias should exist, so they could fight off the brigands, the British, other evil invaders, Indians or Trump's government.
Make no mistake that "militias should be legal" was written with Trump-like figures in mind.