The main difference between the US and Russia in this regard is that the US federal government has very little say or control over what are state-run elections.
Solidly red states don't need election interference; they're going to vote red. Solidly blue states aren't going to tolerate interference. The handful or so of swing states will be watched incredibly closely by everyone else for even a hint of interference.
> and then a smarter Republican comes along and its a repeat again in 2032.
I mean, this is just how American politics works now, and has worked since extreme political polarization took root. That's what happens when you have FPTP voting and a two-party system, where members of each party show complete disdain (justified or not) of members of the other party.
FWIW, the first thing Putin did after he got elected wasn't to mess with the elections; rather, he methodically strangled all remaining free press in the country above a certain threshold. Basically no opposition TV at all, only a couple of radio stations and newspapers. Massive electoral fraud orchestrated from Kremlin only really began post-2008.
It's completely reasonable to think and plan ahead, especially when we are dealing with someone who is refusing to acknowledged a democratic loss. This is not theoretical, we know how he reacts when he looses a election.
>reasonable to think and plan ahead, especially when we are dealing with someone who is refusing to acknowledged a democratic loss.
>This is not theoretical, we know how he reacts when he looses a election.
It sounds like from your perspective, the sequence of actions should be pretty obvious: create a market on polymarket or something for Trump to not acknowledged a loss, put up some money on it, and at the expense of people who perceive this question as theoretical you should easily get your x20-x30 insurance if something like that happening and can go to live in Europe in your own mansion (or even castle, there are many of them in Europe).
I guess it's telling that faced with the prospect of the fall of American democracy, the obvious thing is to start gambling on it.
I don't know how much I would gamle in such a case. There are many outcomes compatible with his previous actions. Maybe he gets a heartattack. Maybe there is no election. Maybe the election process is manipulated so he wins. Maybe he actually wins, fairly or 'fairly'. Maybe they find a way for him to run, maybe it's Vance. Maybe someone else.
The important thing is that we should prepare that shitt will happen, and democracy don't survive automatically. We literally have him on tape, pressuring Georgia secretary of state to "find 11,780 votes" and overturn the state's election results. And it is not 'lazy' to prepare (intellectualy and physically), and when it happens it's too late to 'discuss the politics'.
You are probably not aware of this, but these are the events on and leading up to Jan 6.
* Trump calls fraud on elections with no real evidence. Lawsuits are filed. Every single one of them gets dismissed except like one, which ends up turning more votes for Democrats anyways
* Some adviser puts in an idea in Trumps head that Pence can reject the results and send them back to the states
* Trump basically gathers a crowd together, tells them to march to the capital to save our country. As the protesters are breaking in, there are records of him just calling different senators and asking "are you sure you don't want to delay the certification of the vote", all while being told that protesters are breaking in and getting hurt.
* Trump sends a fake set of electors from key states, calling on Pence to "do the right thing". Those fake electors were of course arrested and prosecuted.
None of this is disputable, undeniable, as it was brought up in a republican controlled supreme court hearing, which you can read for yourself. Supreme court decided that President is basically immune from legal punishment as long as he is acting within official capacity.
So saying he is gonna do more shit this time around, granted that he has legal immunity to do so is about as speculative as saying the guy who does 2 Nazi salutes probably believes that the Nazis were right in a lot of things.
Solidly red states don't need election interference; they're going to vote red. Solidly blue states aren't going to tolerate interference. The handful or so of swing states will be watched incredibly closely by everyone else for even a hint of interference.
> and then a smarter Republican comes along and its a repeat again in 2032.
I mean, this is just how American politics works now, and has worked since extreme political polarization took root. That's what happens when you have FPTP voting and a two-party system, where members of each party show complete disdain (justified or not) of members of the other party.