Noah, your optimism about institutional resistance is refreshing, but it misses the broader strategic picture I’ve been mapping in my World Ahead 2026 series.
Yes, Trump can’t literally press a “cancel elections” button. You’re absolutely right about that. Elections are state-controlled, Congress certifies results, and the mechanics matter.
But you’re analyzing this as if the goal is to successfully cancel elections. It’s not.
The goal is to delegitimize them.
Here’s the game theory from my behavioral lens:
When an authoritarian repeatedly “jokes” about canceling elections, unsuccessfully attempts gerrymandering that generates Democratic counter-gerrymanders, threatens ICE deployment to polling places that backfires in public opinion, and contests results through failed litigation, the point isn’t winning those specific battles.
The point is establishing that elections are contested terrain where outcomes are negotiable.
Every “joke” about canceling elections normalizes the idea. Every gerrymandering attempt (even failed ones) reinforces that electoral manipulation is standard practice. Every threat of ICE at polling places signals that voting is dangerous. Every lawsuit contesting results demonstrates that certified outcomes aren’t final.
Trump first jokes about canceling elections, attempts fail, resistance succeeds. The public becomes habituated to the idea that elections might not happen, electoral legitimacy becomes partisan rather than universal, trust in democratic processes erodes incrementally
When the actual crisis comes (contested 2028 results, declared emergency, whatever mechanism), the groundwork for acceptance has been laid.
This connects directly to the institutional collapse I also have detailed in my analysis.
When institutional resistance is probabilistic rather than guaranteed, authoritarians probe for weakness. Every failed attempt teaches them where the constraints are. Every successful pushback that’s partial rather than total shows them the limits of opposition.
I’m watching what happens when America’s allies observe:
A president openly “joking” about canceling elections
Gerrymandering so aggressive it triggers retaliatory gerrymandering (destroying any pretense of democratic norms)
Threats to deploy federal agents to polling places
ICE occupying cities and murdering residents
Supreme Court blessing ethnic profiling and dismantling Voting Rights Act protections
Our allies are not asking “will he succeed?” They’re asking “is this a reliable democratic partner?”
The answer is no. And they’re building alternatives.
This is what institutional collapse looks like. Not immediate authoritarian victory, but the breakdown of shared norms requiring constant crisis-mode resistance to prevent worse outcomes.
That’s not hopelessness. That’s realism about what happens when institutions prove unreliable even if they haven’t completely failed yet.
— Johan
Former foreign service officer who’s watched this pattern before
A retired atty, my 1st resort is to legal analysis. Not so, for the criminal cabal. As destructive as it is, the voters have to prepare for violence in tandem with any elections to be held in 11/26. the secdef has prepared 'rapid response' forces across the country. And the military, with a few laudatory exceptions, has not refused the many illegal orders. People have to be ready for what's ahead.
The first quote is Trump trying to process the advice he's getting from his "leech-like advisers". The advice goes against what his lizard brain wants, reducing him to incoherence.
John Roberts and his "bench fascists" on SCOTUS made this happen. They immunized that stinking bag of guts from all accountability, and eagerly defend him against attempts by lower court judges to enforce the rule of law.
Noah, your optimism about institutional resistance is refreshing, but it misses the broader strategic picture I’ve been mapping in my World Ahead 2026 series.
Yes, Trump can’t literally press a “cancel elections” button. You’re absolutely right about that. Elections are state-controlled, Congress certifies results, and the mechanics matter.
But you’re analyzing this as if the goal is to successfully cancel elections. It’s not.
The goal is to delegitimize them.
Here’s the game theory from my behavioral lens:
When an authoritarian repeatedly “jokes” about canceling elections, unsuccessfully attempts gerrymandering that generates Democratic counter-gerrymanders, threatens ICE deployment to polling places that backfires in public opinion, and contests results through failed litigation, the point isn’t winning those specific battles.
The point is establishing that elections are contested terrain where outcomes are negotiable.
Every “joke” about canceling elections normalizes the idea. Every gerrymandering attempt (even failed ones) reinforces that electoral manipulation is standard practice. Every threat of ICE at polling places signals that voting is dangerous. Every lawsuit contesting results demonstrates that certified outcomes aren’t final.
Trump first jokes about canceling elections, attempts fail, resistance succeeds. The public becomes habituated to the idea that elections might not happen, electoral legitimacy becomes partisan rather than universal, trust in democratic processes erodes incrementally
When the actual crisis comes (contested 2028 results, declared emergency, whatever mechanism), the groundwork for acceptance has been laid.
This connects directly to the institutional collapse I also have detailed in my analysis.
When institutional resistance is probabilistic rather than guaranteed, authoritarians probe for weakness. Every failed attempt teaches them where the constraints are. Every successful pushback that’s partial rather than total shows them the limits of opposition.
I’m watching what happens when America’s allies observe:
A president openly “joking” about canceling elections
Gerrymandering so aggressive it triggers retaliatory gerrymandering (destroying any pretense of democratic norms)
Threats to deploy federal agents to polling places
ICE occupying cities and murdering residents
Supreme Court blessing ethnic profiling and dismantling Voting Rights Act protections
Our allies are not asking “will he succeed?” They’re asking “is this a reliable democratic partner?”
The answer is no. And they’re building alternatives.
This is what institutional collapse looks like. Not immediate authoritarian victory, but the breakdown of shared norms requiring constant crisis-mode resistance to prevent worse outcomes.
That’s not hopelessness. That’s realism about what happens when institutions prove unreliable even if they haven’t completely failed yet.
— Johan
Former foreign service officer who’s watched this pattern before
Unfortunately, I totally agree with this assessment.
This is no joke.
A retired atty, my 1st resort is to legal analysis. Not so, for the criminal cabal. As destructive as it is, the voters have to prepare for violence in tandem with any elections to be held in 11/26. the secdef has prepared 'rapid response' forces across the country. And the military, with a few laudatory exceptions, has not refused the many illegal orders. People have to be ready for what's ahead.
Karolyn Leavitt confused “facetious” with “fascist” in her ongoing propaganda to continually lie about most things this administration does.
The first quote is Trump trying to process the advice he's getting from his "leech-like advisers". The advice goes against what his lizard brain wants, reducing him to incoherence.
John Roberts and his "bench fascists" on SCOTUS made this happen. They immunized that stinking bag of guts from all accountability, and eagerly defend him against attempts by lower court judges to enforce the rule of law.
And what if he invokes the insurrection act? He could certainly set up a pretext. Wouldn't that stop voting?