Of all the awful things Donald Trump has done, his teeing up this election to be a shit-show that his pet Attorney General will litigate to the bitter end is arguably the worst. I know that list has bitter contention for top billing, because the nominees are legion. But I believe it so, because Donald’s actions, attitude, and announcements have fractured a keystone of our democracy / representative government: that election results can be trusted.
(Yes, for some populations in the US, that’s hardly new news. But we’re potentially talking here about a majority of Americans having that faith called into question.)
Everything stems from belief in election results. From the Constitution to the courts, from effective governance to crisis management. Taxes, obeying the law, basic societal bonds — all are affected by that basic trust. Because, as Donald’s own behavior shows, a lot of our society runs on a degree of confidence in the system, and voluntary compliance to civil norms.
Donald is damaging that. He’s setting things up so that confidence will be –already is — rattled, and so compliance becomes something for suckers because it’s every person for themselves. The social contract we have in this country is at stake.
So what’s the worst that could happen?
There are no electoral scenarios where things necessarily end well, because Donald has already called the whole process into question, and seems ready to continue to do so regardless of the outcome.
If Donald wins “bigly” (he will make any win into a “bigly” one, no matter the actual numbers), his and the GOP’s shenanigans regarding mail-in votes, on top of the (reprehensibly) usual GOP voter suppression, will further erode the idea of elections meaning anything. Even among his supporters, it will enforce the idea that winning depends on who’s willing to be the most cut-throat, regardless of traditions or even the law.
If Donald barely loses, he will fight tooth and nail in court, abetted by his pet AG, to call into question enough of the votes (mail-in or in-person, through his already asserted claims of massive fraud and illegal voting) to get the results changed enough to win. And then do his damnedest to make sure that the party (and his) advantage so gained is codified in law, as supported by a judiciary of the same persuasion.
(I have no faith that Donald, should he win, will not attempt to get the Constitution changed to allow him to run for another term. Or get SCOTUS to rule that so much of his first term was tied up in the “FAKE RUSSIA HOAX AND IMPEACHMENT HOAX TOO” that it doesn’t count. In either case, he will have a personal stake in making vote suppression even a bigger thing.)
If Donald loses big-time (doubtless with an accompanying drubbing of the GOP in the House and Senate), he’ll just switch to the Big Lie and use it as proof of massive fraud (“The only way I could lose is if there’s huge fraud, because everyone loves me, and the Dems always cheat, and this is proof of it” kind of thing).
Again, massive court fights will ensue. And remember, he has as potential allies not just the executive branch, and half of Congress, but a massive fraction of federal judges he’s gotten appointed, plus 2-3 SCOTUS justices he’s named.
Even if Roberts declines to damage SCOTUS’ rep by supporting a perceived coup, if the Trump nominees and Thomas & Alito vote as a bloc, they win 5-4 vs Roberts and the remaining liberal justices. And I have no question in my mind that this, far more than any sentiment about abortion, is why Donald is pushing his SCOTUS nominee so fast. He’s admitted it. And that Mitch is supporting that raises even more grave doubts about outcomes.
And, to that end, there have already been discussions with GOP-run statehouses about how state legislatures could override the popular vote. (The Constitution gives the selection of electors to the lege, not to voters; it’s just a norm, under the law, that the voters get to make that decision. And we all know about the fragility of norms under the Trump presidency.)
Or for that matter, it might only take a GOP-run state to declare that there was massive fraud and they cannot select electors reliably. SCOTUS might rule the same. If the neither side ends up with 270+ electoral votes … then under the Twelfth Amendment, the election goes to Congress.
In that case, the House elects the President — but each state only casts one vote, as polled within its delegation. And there happen to be 26 states with a majority of GOP Representatives, vs 22 with a majority of Dems (one state, PA, is tied, and one state, MI, with has half Dems, an Independent, and the rest GOP). That means the House, if everyone follows party lines, chooses Trump for President. (And you thought the Electoral College was bad.)
(The VP is chosen in the Senate, where each Senator has a vote, so we know how that goes.)
Even if he’s finally stopped in court, and we don’t get state legislative shenanigans — however long that whole process would take — the spectacle itself would itself be a shock to the nation’s confidence and trust, and Donald’s inevitable rallying of the public (and the counter-rallying done by his opponents) further fracture the country. And it would, as importantly, firmly set the precedent first dabbled with in 2000: elections will be appealed and settled in court, not the ballot box, no matter the apparent result.
Way to be a bummer, Dave
So, yes, all of that is very depressing, and I sincerely hope against hope that the only Donald outcome we get is his leaving the White House grounds in January for good.
But that he’s made such dark fantasies even half-plausible demonstrates the damage he’s already done in four years, abetted by the news networks and pols and pundits who’ve been willing to deny reality and show undying loyalty, even in the face of regular zany behavior, in exchange for a cut of continuing power. They’ve all, collectively, called into question for coming decades, if not longer, how stable and reliable and honest our elections are.
