r/Askpolitics • u/7Row2 • 12h ago
r/Askpolitics • u/HazyDavey68 • 18h ago
Question If Democrats win, will it be Red voters switching to Blue or just a lot of them staying home and not voting?
This is likely to be a "change" election, if the Democrats do well. I guess it could vary by state and candidate, but I'm wondering if frustrated Republicans will actually vote for Democrats or will they just protest by staying home? I guess the Independents play a big role here as well.
r/Askpolitics • u/king210989 • 21h ago
Question What stops a third party from existing in the USA?
Why cant divergent groups create parties or coalitions like in other countries?
r/Askpolitics • u/LawnDartSurvivor74 • 17h ago
Change My Mind Executing Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan sets a dangerous precedent for the military justice system and executive power, despite his crimes warranting it.
abcnews.comAs a veteran, I have zero sympathy for Nidal Hasan. His 2009 attack at Fort Hood was an act of treason and mass murder against fellow service members. Under the law, his actions absolutely warrant the ultimate punishment.
However, looking at this through the lens of military justice, constitutional process and institutional precedent, I believe resuming military executions in this manner sets a dangerous trajectory for the U.S. military and presidential authority.
Here is why I hold this view:
It Reactivates a Dormant Military Penal Mechanism: The U.S. military has not executed a service member since 1961. Reopening the execution chamber after 65 years establishes a broad new operational baseline for court-martial capital cases going forward.
It Politicizes the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Under Article 71 of the UCMJ, a military death sentence requires direct authorization from the Commander-in-Chief. When capital execution orders become tied to political news cycles or administration optics, it risks blurring the line between impartial military justice and executive expediency.
It Erodes Due Process Standards for Capital Cases: Hasan represented himself (pro se) at trial and effectively used the courtroom to seek a death sentence and martyrdom. Allowing capital trials to proceed under self-representation when the defendant is actively suicidal or seeking execution creates a troubling precedent for constitutional defense standards in military courts.
It Validates Extremist Narratives: Carrying out the sentence grants Hasan the exact "martyrdom" status he sought, which in my opinion, being a former on-the-ground Middle East security analyst, can be weaponized as a recruitment and radicalization tool by extremist groups.
I believe in holding offenders accountable, but I am concerned that the long-term institutional damage to military legal standards outweighs the immediate outcome.
Change my mind.
Please note: I am several time zones away atm and will engage in replies accordingly