[r053bud]

We voted for this! This is “democracy” at work

[Cthulhu_]

Sure, but you also voted for a system of checks & balances, laws, and separation of powers - whatever happened to all these laws and stuff from the Cold War where even a hint that you may have ties to Russia would get you a Visit?

[kzrdude]

Do you think it's legitimate when the administration transgresses constitutional limits? With legal eyes nobody voted for that, you can't vote inside the system to break the system, office holders are expected to follow the law once elected.

[vkou]

People also voted in a Congress that is tasked to uphold the law, and it seems fine with this.

That was the really stupid part of that election.

[candiddevmike]

Less than 30% of voter age Americans voted for this

[rchaud]

The majority that did vote, voted for this. The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Given the standards of media literacy and civics education, there's no evidence that a higher participation rate would have changed the outcome.

[Braxton1980]

100% of voter age Americans made a decision. That includes not registering to vote or not voting.

Pretend I want a snack, I can choose between a cookie and an apple. If I dislike both then I also have the option to not get a snack. Neither is selected.

This is different from not voting because a candidate still wins.

[KingOfCoders]

Voters who do not vote say "I'm fine with all winners", like "What pizza do you want?" - "I'm fine with every pizza".

[ThrowawayR2]

> "Less than 30% of voter age Americans voted for this"

I'll point out again an article about a post-election analysis by David Shor posted on HN a few weeks ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43400172): "The reality is if all registered voters had turned out, then Donald Trump would’ve won the popular vote by 5 points [instead of 1.7 points]. So, I think that a 'we need to turn up the temperature and mobilize everyone' strategy would’ve made things worse."

Even as late as April 9, disapproval of the Democratic Party is higher than for the Republican Party according to Pew Research: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/04/23/views-of-con...

There isn't a hidden wellspring of pro-Democratic voters to tap. The Dems are going to have to go out and fight to win people over.

[monkeyelite]

What presidential elections are you comparing it to?

[rayiner]

David Schor’s analysis found that if everyone had voted, Trump would have won by 4.8 points: https://www.vox.com/politics/403364/tik-tok-young-voters-202...

[jen729w]

And those that stayed at home deserve what they got.

[8bitsrule]

According to this non-official but prestigious NPO source [0]

Trump got 49.8% of votes for president, Harris got 48.3%. Vote total ~156.3 million. A rather slim 'mandate' methinks.

[0] https://www.cfr.org/article/2024-election-numbers (Council on Foreign Relations)

[makeitdouble]

"American democracy"

[fnordpiglet]

And a minority of those who did vote voted for this.

[keybored]

It’s interesting that people who claim Americans live in a democracy will slam-dunk any topic based on a completely binary decision made every four years.

No discussion beyond that point is needed.

[timeon]

> We voted

Depends if your “democracy” have one person = one vote. Or if the land is included somewhere in the vote.

[fguerraz]

There is no democracy without a free press, or else no one can make an informed decision. I doubt that the press can be called free when it’s owned by oligarchs.

[ty6853]

I mean yes? Democracy is a pretty poor model for governance. IMO peak enlightenment happened circa the 17th or 18th century when classical liberalism decided government should be based on individual liberties and anything outside of that is decided democratically not because it is a good system but because votes are roughly a tally of who would win if we all pull knives on each other because we didn't like the vote.

[makeitdouble]

Democracy is not 2 parties doing voter suppression and gerrymandering as a filter to pass the result to an electoral college.

The US system was never designed to be fair to individuals in the first place, pointing at it as a failure of democracy is IMHO pulling the actual issues under the rug.

[sapphicsnail]

How can someone talk about democracy peaking when the franchise was extended to a tiny minority of the population. You don't give a damn about individual liberties, you only care that the "right" people have liberty.

[timeon]

Seems like US-centric view. Many countries had several iterations since then.

[tsimionescu]

Ah yes, the wonderful time of enlightenment when all straight white Christian land-owning men's rights became recognized, not just the nobility's. Just a few short centuries from there, the rights of poorer white men, children, women, people of any other skin color, non-Christian, and LGBT people would be recognized too.

[watwut]

Whatbexactly are values you consider enlightened and did you ever bother to read history, specifically the parts about how society functions not just where armies went?

I assure you French prior, dueing and after French revolution was not pinacle of great governance. More like, the low.

[cyberax]

> IMO peak enlightenment happened circa the 17th or 18th century

Hmmm... The time when most people were not able to read?

[jfengel]

I know that Harris put up zero fight about it. I infer that she believed it to be legitimate.

That's not definitive, to be sure. But it's sufficient for me to believe that we did this to ourselves. Now all we can do is figure out how we're going to get through it.

[toast0]

Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I think actual election fraud, big enough to steal an election, would be too big to miss.

Yes, it might only take a small number of votes in the right place, but either you somehow know the right place, or you have to move a lot of votes.

There's a reasonable discussion to be had along the lines of 'these guys seem to be doing everything they whine about', but could they get a big operation done without a) bragging openly about it, b) leaving a big trail, or c) having a falling out with a conspirator who then tells all.

Adding on, certainly gerrymandering and voter supression laws affect voting results, but I have trouble calling that stealing an election.

[wongarsu]

Trump did thank that "very popular guy. He was very effective. And he knows those computers better than anybody. All those computers, those vote counting computers, and we won Pennsylvania in a landslide." If Biden or Obama had said something like that the nation would be in uproar.

https://www.youtube.com/live/kdvpXxXVyok?si=XALuK7No9-PLQBAr...

[yndoendo]

Democracy built lies, decide, and rejection of facts through propaganda.

Really need a viable means to fight it, say allowing an elected official's constitutes being able to sue them for no less than $10,000 for incidence of bearing false witness. Help erode the dark money networks.

Also having a 4th branch of Governments, the people with State and Federal binding resolution, would help. Only way to overrides those in power is to unionize the will.

[westmeal]

The suing thing would be cool but the court system is slow by design. I can't see it working in practice however I'm also really fed up with the bullshit so i understand.

[Ar-Curunir]

Good luck relying on a court of law when the President suspends courts and arrests judges. The latter is happening right now.