Could there be post-election violence in the United States?

"Post election violence."

Three words normally heard in stories of African or Asian third world hellholes, failing post-Soviet satellite states, South American banana republics... In general the failed or failing states of the world.

But could it come to America? I don't think I have ever seen the two sides so wound up as they are now. I've never seen the US political spectrum so polarised and bitter. Never seen them literally demonise each other so vitriolically. I think in a recent debate, Trump actually called Clinton the devil. Something his supporters would certainly agree with it seems. And those behind Hillary would certainly see him as the devil in turn.

Is there going to be an outburst of violence on the streets when this election happens?

It's possible that Trump could provoke something. It's indicative of how broken the process and the system more generally, is.

Might be a few, but the closest most of these "water the tree of Liberty" types will get is pissing themselves when the Feds have 'em surrounded. That's if they have the stones to try it, which is an even smaller percentage.

I'm more worried about voter intimidation at the polls leading to chaos and violence than about post-election violence. Sure, a handful of Trumpsters will go terrorist, but I really doubt anything organized or wide scale will happen. Loonies open-carrying at polling places, generally making sure the process is as lengthy and unpleasant as possible so that people give up and go home, and intimidating poll workers into forcing people to cast provisional ballots, however, I expect to be a more significant problem.

I'm worried that our governor will field us without air support.

Doubtful.

Seriously. The state militia doesn't have dick for air cover except some police helicopters and maybe some folks in Pipers and Cessnas, plus potentially one P-51 Mustang and an imitation Neiuport 17 that doesn't even mount a real machine gun.

One the bright side, we get workman's comp if we get wounded.

You've got enough gas to cover Asia. I wouldn't fret.

Not a chance

Like Hillary wouldn't do the same? Hell a lot of her fans already riot at the drop of a hat - she's got them on speed dial ready make that call!

There will be some, but I doubt it will amount to anything. Oh and whatever does happen will be blown way out of proportion by the cable news networks.

You are sniffing too much glue. Hillary is not an inspiring candidate. People see her as what they have to put up with because the republicans put a Jerry Springer guest on their ticket for some reason. That is not someone you riot about.

Highly doubtful. She would almost certainly do what every losing candidate has done since Adams lost to Jefferson. Accept it, acknowledge it, and congratulate the winner. Neither Clinton nor any of her prominent supporters have made a single statement questioning the legitimacy of the process. Just stop with this kind of stupid and false equivalency. It is not always the case that both sides do it.

This. She'll hate having to do it (as almost all politicians do), but she would acquiesce to the election results. While it's possible he could, I highly doubt Donald Trump would acquiesce, and would instead demand something be done about it to make it work in his favor. Donald Trump doesn't give two fucks about a peaceful transfer of power. This is about ego for him.

It's not about Hillary losing - it's about Trump winning! You know, the racist/homo hating/women abusing/immigration hating guy? Hillary losing means the Democrats losing - yeah, things would get ugly. Well there's an 85 percent chance of her winning so we don't have anything to worry about anyway.

Are all you Hillarites drinking from the same donkey water trough or what? Are her crazy eyes hypnotizing you or what?

Nah, I just like to read, observe and, you know, apply critical thinking skills.

Well when Hitlery is elected I fully blame the Republicans - they had four years to prepare and fucked it up again. Hillary is practically begging to be fully trounced (with all the dirt on her recently plus the fact that she's universally despised) and if the Republicans ran anyone but Trump - I mean any wet dish rag cookie-cutter moderate who "acts presidential" - or even just keeps their mouth shut when they need to - the election would have been Hillary's to lose. Another opportunity down the drain - Obama would have been tough to beat because he's not a criminal shit-bag and actually appeals to people and his "family values" are so far above reproach. But beating Hillary should be child's play for almost anyone - I would think that the Republicans are kicking themselves now because they may never get another Democrat opponent as fucked up as Hillary - so who can they beat? The next election Hillary might as well just run unopposed, as well as all Democrats after her. It's over Republicans! You had a good run so why half-ass it? Let the Democratic Party have everything and thus let the country reap what it sows.

Firstly, if she were "universally despised," you would be railing against Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders. The man was supposedly everything a left leaning liberal could want in a candidate. That certainly doesn't make her well loved, but the big chance for someone other than Clinton was ever present, and popular amongst liberals and even some conservatives, and yet he still didn't make the cut.

Secondly, what does it matter whether or not the next Democratic candidate is good or bad? From the Republican side, they're always the worst possible thing. Seriously, you speak about Obama being tough to beat because he is appealing and having family values above reproach, but did that stop some of the absolute worst shit being slung at him and his family by the GOP and its various constituents? Fuck no, it didn't. So your point here is irrelevant.

The problem with the GOP is that they haven't yet figured out that the old white male is dying, and they're not adapting fast enough because there is a contingent of religious nuts and racist assholes who have just enough influence to keep the party squarely in fantasy land. The only reason they're still out in force as they are is because of some terrific gerrymandering skills.

In short, Barry Goldwater warned your asses years ago, but nobody listened:

the theoretical possibility exist that Trump would say "rise up" and a lot of nutters would. I don't THINK he will go QUITE that far, but it's the first time since...the Civil War maybe?...that the possibility even exists, which says something.

At worse when Trump loses, a few bass pro shops may be robbed and some outhouses burned in protest but that's it

There will be as many riots as when Obama was elected.

Which means none.

Honest to God, I haven't seen a single Hillary yard sign around here. I haven't seen a single Hillary sign anywhere...and I recently drove to Hot Springs, Arkansas....and I had to drive through Little Rock. Not. A. Single. One.

Around here, I figure Hillary supporters just don't want to wake up on fire.

However...if, on the off chance, people decide to visit violence on people with no political signs in their yard, I'll be ready.

I haven't seen any signs around here for anyone and I live in the state capital.

Saw several trump billboards in the central valley but no one important lives there.

Why the surprise?

Hillary is loathed in Arkansas

I don't know. Hot Springs had "Childhood home of Bill Clinton" signs all over the place.

and yet more than 4 in 10 residents of that state will vote for her.

McCain and Romney weren't making noises about the election being rigged and illegitimate, though. Nor did they energize the "deplorables" nearly as much as Trump has.

Bernie was being actively undermined by the Democrats and aggressively ignored by the media (while they gave Trump endless free publicity), then in the end fucked over by the super delegates. Bernie was robbed.

Wow, that was an incredibly bigoted thing to say.

And the historical irony here is that this "can't and won't compromise" attitude over a belief that to do so would mean compromising with evil can now just as easily be used to describe so-called "progressives" on the left as their conservative Christian counterparts on the right.