POLL: Pending Election Insanity.

[dblack]

What say you good people? How low will we go?

 

[Mac1958]

I'm gonna go with "no", but it's not a HARD "no".

Probably more likely to be locally if it were to happen.

 

[martybegan]

I would worry more about after the 2024 election.

 

[OKTexas]

What say you good people? How low will we go?

There is no low the commies won't go to try to gain or keep power.

.

 

[dblack]

I just don't see either of the shit-parties accepting defeat peacefully.

 

[Natural Citizen]

 

[Votto]

What say you good people? How low will we go?

If there is any chance Trump wins, then yes.

 

[Donald H]

First a big rise in vigilante justice, then government taking measures to control it.
l
Not likely to reach the need for martial law officially.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“Will we see martial law before. during or after the 2024 elections?”

None of the above – the notion is idiotic.

Martial law is legal and Constitutional only if a given jurisdiction is subject to actual military war and the courts in that jurisdiction have ceased to function – and lawful only in that jurisdiction, not the entire country. See: Ex Parte Milligan (1866).

 

[dblack]

First a big rise in vigilante justice, then government taking measures to control it.
l
Not likely to reach the need for martial law officially.

That may be the winner. It's going to be a mess though. I don't see a clean way through it. Unless one of the shit-parties breaks from tradition and nominates a decent candidate.

 

[dblack]

“Will we see martial law before. during or after the 2024 elections?”

None of the above – the notion is idiotic.

Harumph!

 

[Lastamender]

First a big rise in vigilante justice, then government taking measures to control it.
l
Not likely to reach the need for martial law officially.

We could use it now to clean up the Democratic shitholes.

 

[dblack]

We could use it now to clean up the Democratic shitholes.

"We"?

Reminds me of the old joke:

Lone Ranger and Tonto scouting the surroundings.

Tonto returns - "It's not good kemosabe, great many Souix and Apache braves headed this way."

Lone Ranger: "Hmm... that NOT good. What are we going to do, Tonto?"

Tonto: "What do you mean 'we', white man?"

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What say you good people? How low will we go?

It’s more a matter of ignorance than ‘how low.’

Martial law can’t just be ‘declared’ – that’s nonsense.

The correct question is: if elected, would Trump lawlessly activate the Insurrection Act to ‘justify’ the use of the military on domestic targets, such as Trump’s opponents and perceived enemies – and the answer is, yes.

 

[dblack]

It’s more a matter of ignorance than ‘how low.’

Martial law can’t just be ‘declared’ – that’s nonsense.

The correct question is: if elected, would Trump lawlessly activate the Insurrection Act to ‘justify’ the use of the military on domestic targets, such as Trump’s opponents and perceived enemies – and the answer is, yes.

Nope. That's 'a' question. But not 'the' question. The correct question is at the top of the thread. Harumph.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Harrumph!

And the willfully ignorant will remain willfully ignorant.

 

[dblack]

And the willfully ignorant will remain willfully ignorant.

Harumph, harumph.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Nope. That's 'a' question. But not 'the' question. The correct question is at the top of the thread. Harrumph.

Again, the thread premise is ignorant nonsense.

Unless Canada invades Idaho, jails all the judges, and closes all the courts, ‘martial law’ can’t be ‘declared.’

 

[dblack]

Again, the thread premise is ignorant nonsense.

Unless Canada invades Idaho, jails all the judges, and closes all the courts, ‘martial law’ can’t be ‘declared.’

Triple harumph? You're on a roll, C.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Harumph, harumph.

Now, Trump might try to declare ‘martial law’ because he’s a fascist and ignoramus – in which case the people have only themselves to blame; putting the likes of Trump in the WH is the lowest.