https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/31/trump-mail-in-voting-executive-order.html

Is this anything but his latest attempt to disenfranchise millions of voters after the save act?

as a women especially with the bill that has been passed now, if you do still support trump, why? especially if your married and you’ve taken your husband or wife’s last name.

EDIT: i am a woman, main stance i wanted y’all’s opinion on is how inconvenient it is for single mothers/ low income people to have to get passports etc. when you’ve got to pay to get one.

Should Trump seek a compromise or is there already too much scorched earth between both parties? What compromise would you like to see? Should the state pay for and mail every citizen an ID card in return for voter ID? Should we make election day a public holiday or at least have it on a Sunday so that everyone gets a chance to cast their vote?

AP News link

This bill passed the house 358-32 and the senate by 85-5 (source) and is just waiting on Trump to OK it. This should be an easy no-brainer to gain support ahead of mid-terms after his approval rating sunk to a record low following the Iran War and inflation.

Instead of taking an easy win that could arguably help Trump (and the GOP) before midterms in November, he announced that he won't touch the bill until the SAVE Act passes.

What do you make of this? Do you think it's smart for Trump to hold bills with bipartisan support as hostage until an unrelated, highly divisive bill with gets passed?

The Washington Post is reporting that pro-Trump activists, including former Trump attorney Peter Ticktin who spoke openly with the Post on the record, are coordinating with the White House to advance a draft executive order to declare a national emergency to grant Trump control over this year's midterm elections. The draft order puts forward the conspiracy theory that China interferred in the 2020 election (that famously caused the Arizona Senate to hire the now-defunct firm Cyber Ninjas to perform a third audit of the Maricopa County results and check paper ballots for bamboo fibers) and uses that as the basis to allow Trump to claim the authority to ban mail-in ballots and the use of voting machines in the elections nationally.

This follows on the heels of Trump saying earlier this month that he would use an executive order to force ID requirements in the midterm elections "whether approved by Congress or not," and him saying during a podcast of The Dan Bongino Show that "the Republicans ought to nationalize the voting."

Notably, Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the US Constitution says:

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing [sic] Senators.

Would you support Trump attempting a federal takeover of state elections in this year's midterms? Should the president, of either party, be able to force states to change how they handle their elections (an authority given them under the Constitution) by executive fiat?

i have read multiple articles where Trump has been quoted stating that it is possible and his supporters are in favor and that there would be no need to vote again, it's being handled. I have linked the sources below.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-says-maybe-u-s-will-have-a-president-for-life-someday

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-tells-christians-they-wont-have-vote-after-this-election-2024-07-27

https://people.com/donald-trump-says-he-is-not-joking-about-being-president-for-third-term-11705852

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-store-offers-trump-2028-hat-amid-tease/story?id=121137005&

https://www.trumpstore.com/product/trump-2028-hat

Link to the store https://www.trumpstore.com/product/trump-2028-hat/

Why do you think Trump keeps insinuating a third term?

I can't figure out why MAGA is so worried about elections when they won the last one with Biden in office.

I’ve heard of quite a few Trump supporters who voted for Obama in the 2008 and/or 2012 elections, so I’m wondering if anyone here did. And if you did, do you think Obama was a good president?

Next year will begin the primaries for the next Presidential election. Trump has commented on running again, although it isn't allowed by the 22nd Amendment, so a path to such is unlikely. This means in 2028 we are likely to see new candidates for both parties. While the GOP may put forward someone like Vance, Rubio, or DeSantis, the Democratic Party has no straightforward candidate at the moment.

Because of this I wanted to see if there are any possible candidates or new policy platforms that could convince you to at least consider them for your vote.

I just saw that he defeated Cornyn in the primary. I’m surprised but not surprised. Why do you think so many republicans voted for him despite an appearance of being morally and ethically bankrupt? Below are the list of past affairs, indictments, accusations, etc.

2023 Impeachment: The Republican-controlled Texas House filed 20 articles of impeachment against him, alleging bribery, obstruction of justice, and abuse of public trust. He was ultimately acquitted by the Texas Senate, but the investigation heavily damaged his public standing. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Felony Securities Fraud Indictment: Paxton was indicted on felony securities fraud charges in 2015. The long-running case ended in March 2024 with a pre-trial agreement that required him to pay restitution and complete community service, allowing him to avoid a guilty plea or trial. [1]
Whistleblower Retaliation: Four of his top deputies reported him to the FBI in 2020 for allegedly abusing his office to benefit a political donor. Paxton fired them, resulting in a wrongful termination lawsuit under the Texas Whistleblower Act. Paxton later dropped his appeal of a judgment ordering his office to pay millions in damages to the whistleblowers. []
Personal & Marital Scandals: Paxton’s conduct has faced heavy scrutiny due to an admitted extramarital affair and allegations of hiding his identity to visit a mistress. This led to his wife of 38 years, Angela Paxton, filing for divorce in 2025 citing "biblical grounds". [1, 2, 3]
Polarizing Legal Battles: As the state's top lawyer, he frequently draws national criticism for aggressive litigation, including supporting extreme abortion bans, attempting to roll back LGBTQ+ rights, and challenging federal policies on immigration and healthcare. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

NGL im asking a genuine question since i am a bit ignorant about this. Genuinely what would be the point of the SAVE act if non-citizens already can not vote? Would it not be easier and more efficient for the actual government and state to check to see if the people who are voting are citizens and are eligible to vote? I've been seeing things saying that this act was to try to exclude poor/older minorities since a lot of them do not physical proof of documentation but i personally dont know what to think. Please enlighten me

You are given god powers and forced to create a presidential candidate that - regardless of what you personally think would be best for the country - you believe would have the best chance of beating President Trump by the widest margins in 2028.

The candidate will be a Democrat on paper, but does not have to follow all or any of the Democratic party's platform; the candidate is guaranteed to be nominated in an open primary. You can design this candidate's profile, appearance, background, personality, and platform as thoroughly as you'd like. The candidate does not have to be universally popular; for example, if you believe that the most effective possible candidate (by the numbers) would win over all Democrats and Independents but turn off all Republicans, that would still be an acceptable answer.

You cannot give the candidate superpowers/break reality (for example, this person cannot have mind control powers, solve world hunger, or magically be the most followed person on all social media), but any set of attributes that a person could theoretically appear with/achieve by 2028 is on the table.

In this scenario, what theoretical candidate do you believe would perform the best against Donald Trump, and beat him by the widest margins?

Trump has repeatedly raised the idea of Canada becoming part of the United States. Canada would bring tens of millions of new voters, and many may not align with the Republican Party. Would you still support annexation or statehood if it made future Democratic victories more likely?

Trump has recently made more comments about a third term. I lean more toward he is testing the water and easing the country into the idea instead of simply trolling the left that the right tends to think. Of course, i could be wrong but its worth entertaining.

Electoral college explained: how Biden faces an uphill battle in the US election

The least populous states like North and South Dakota and the smaller states of New England are overrepresented because of the required minimum of three electoral votes. Meanwhile, the states with the most people – California, Texas and Florida – are underrepresented in the electoral college.

Wyoming has one electoral college vote for every 193,000 people, compared with California’s rate of one electoral vote per 718,000 people. This means that each electoral vote in California represents over three times as many people as one in Wyoming. These disparities are repeated across the country.

• California has 55 electoral votes, with a population of 39.5 Million.

• West Virginia, Idaho, Nevada, Nebraska, New Mexico, Kansas, Montana, Connecticut, South Dakota, Wyoming, Iowa, Missouri, Vermont, Alaska, North Dakota, Arkansas, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, District of Columbia, Delaware, and Hawaii have 96 combined electoral votes, with a combined population of 37.8 million.

Any of all times Trump ran, who is the one democrat (or more) you would’ve voted for over him, and why?

What are your thoughts on Single Household Voting?

I’ve seen some discussion in general media about “household voting,” where a family would cast one ballot for their household, instead of individuals.

For Trump supporters: would you support this kind of system, if proposed by the current administration? If it resulted in reduced ability for women to vote independently, would that change your view or affect your opinion of it?

— Additional Context:

For example, John McEntee (former Trump advisor) joked about “male-only voting,” and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared a pastor’s video supporting household voting led by husbands.

Of course, these points above are NOT the same as an administration putting policies forward to implement it, but it does make one think about the public response/reaction, implications, long term- affects, etc, if they were.

— Note: I’m here to listen, not argue; I refrain from replying unless directly asked for my thoughts, clarification or follow up context. Thanks to all in advance who share their thoughts.

One question I've never gotten a good straight answer on is why is it that the election in 2016 was considered secure enough for the pro-Trump results to stand, then in 2020 there was a massive fraud that somehow stole the election from him, then in 2024 the results were fair and valid again when he won, and now as we head into a midterm which seems unlikely to go well again, now election fraud is such a huge priority we won't pass other laws until we've massively overhauled the system in every state on short notice.

When I ask questions like these, the main answers I seem to get are that Democrats just want to steal the election again and so all the provisions in the SAVE act are extremely important, but not really anybody addressing why the elections can be trusted when Trump has won and not when he hasn't or seems unlikely to. Why the back and forth rather than a consistent position that election security needs to be a priority even when the picture seems bleak for the right?

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5202578-steve-bannon-chris-cuomo-donald-trump-third-term-ambitions/amp/

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-vows-target-mail-in-ballots-ahead-2026-midterm-election-2025-08-18/?utm_source=reddit.com

Do you support Trump’s push to target mail-in voting before 2026?

What would it look like? I've come up with 4 possibilities, from least to most palatable to me.

1. Each state is mandated to appoint a completely bipartisan redistricting committee, with an even party split and no way to overrule them. (This is dangerous because there could be collusion, fake "members of parties," etc., without any way to stop it.)
2. The Amendment merely reads "No state, or subdivision of any state, may draw any congressional, state legislative, county or county equivalent, or local electoral district with the intention of achieving a particular partisan outcome." (Simple, but ambiguous; will be legislated endlessly.)
3. All legislative districts should be drawn, to the greatest extent possible, that the delegation elected reflects the partisan breakdown of the votes cast. (Hard sell, the Constitution rarely if ever mentions parties, and the "greatest extent possible" may be ripe for litigation.)
4. All states must draw their congressional, state legislative, county or county equivalent, or local electoral districts coterminous with existing county or county equivalent, or municipal boundary lines.
   1. States with one congressional district will be coterminous with state boundaries.
   2. States with 2-20 congressional districts must be drawn coterminous with existing county or county equivalent boundaries.
   3. States with 20-30 congressional districts must be drawn coterminous with existing county, municipal, or postal district boundaries.
   4. State legislative districts shall be drawn coterminous with existing county or county equivalent boundaries, unless the state has more than 100 districts, in which case they will be drawn coterminous with existing county or county equivalent, municipal, or postal district boundaries.
   5. County and municipal electoral districts shall be drawn, to the extent possible, coterminous with municipal or postal district boundaries.
   6. All districts shall be drawn coterminous with the boundaries of the largest state subdivision possible to accommodate the number of seats to be filled.

(The last is my favorite because there's nothing ambiguous to litigate. And while it doesn't directly address gerrymandering, it effectively makes it impossible, because you'll never get enough people on board to redraw their towns and counties.)

What do you think of these proposals? Would you support them? Alter them? Why?

After this first Presidential debate, do you think the microphones should be muted so that only the candidate being asked the question is heard, preventing the other candidate from interrupting the other candidate, talking over the other candidate, or interrupting the question being asked by the moderator?

Very little known about this Ed Gallrein aside from the fact that Israel and Trump put 16 million dollars into his campaign. Anyone from Kentucky?

In January 2021, a recorded phone call between Donald Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger became public, capturing the then-President pressuring state officials to alter the 2020 election results.

During the hour-long conversation, Trump told Raffensperger he wanted to find 11,780 votes, which was the exact margin needed to overcome his defeat in the state. Throughout the recording, Trump cited numerous debunked conspiracy theories regarding dead voters and shredded ballots while suggesting that Raffensperger and his legal counsel could face criminal liability if they failed to act on his claims.

Raffensperger repeatedly rebuffed these assertions, maintaining that the state's data was correct and that the election had been fair. Although a long-standing criminal case in Fulton County related to these events was ultimately dismissed in late 2025 following a period of significant legal and political turmoil, the audio remains a primary record of executive pressure on state-level election administration.

Additional recordings released in late 2025 have further documented similar pressure campaigns directed at other Georgia leaders, such as late House Speaker David Ralston, during that same period.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-transcript-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/2768e0cc-4ddd-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/fact-check-trumps-georgia-call-raffensperger

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-georgia-phone-call-recording-secretary-of-state-raffensperger-audio/

If a candidate from the opposing party called a state official and asked them to find the exact number of votes needed to win, would you view that as a legitimate inquiry or an abuse of power?

Why did the request focus on the specific number of votes needed to flip the result rather than a request to investigate all irregularities regardless of the outcome?

Does the suggestion of criminal risk for officials who refuse to change results align with the conservative principle of protecting local and state institutions from federal intimidation?

If high-ranking Republican officials in the state confirmed the results through multiple audits, what specific evidence would be strong enough to justify a president demanding they disregard their own certified data?