Skip Navigation

If Trump wins the election, US cities are at risk of military takeovers and mass deportations

Senior Democrats in US cities are preparing to defend their communities in the event of Donald Trump’s return to the White House after the former president has repeated threats that he would use presidential powers to seize control of major urban centers.

Trump has proposed deploying the military inside major cities largely run by Democrats to deal with protesters or to crush criminal gangs. He has threatened to dispatch large numbers of federal immigration agents to carry out mass deportations of undocumented people in so-called “sanctuary” cities.

He also aims to obliterate the progressive criminal justice policies of left-leaning prosecutors.

“In cities where there has been a complete breakdown of law and order … I will not hesitate to send in federal assets including the national guard until safety is restored,” Trump says in the campaign platform for his bid to become the 47th US president, Agenda47.

Trump provoked uproar earlier this week when he called for US armed forces to be deployed against his political rivals – “the enemy within” – on election day next month. But his plans to use national guard troops and military personnel as a means to attack those he sees as his opponents go much wider than that, spanning entire cities with Democratic leadership.

Trump Watch @lemm.ee

If Trump wins the election, US cities are at risk of military takeovers and mass deportations

11 3
201 comments
  • I guess he's seen the episode of deep space nine and thought it would be a good idea...

  • I think the information is good, but they really need to actually talk about military leaders. It's basically known that the military should not be operating within the US borders, with the exception of national guard, and that with strict limits. We know, because military leaders have told us, that they have discussed what they would do if Trump gave unconstitutional orders. But we don't know the details, and we don't know who has decided what. Of course it's difficult for people to go public with hypothetical responses to that kind of blatant abuse of Presidential power. But it's still something that needs to be mentioned.

    • Hi former soldier here, I can offer some educated insight on this. What's likely to happen in the very short term of such an order is the Joint Chiefs refuse it. Trump replaces them and the next set refuses it. This will happen a few more times before he gets someone willing to tell him yes, but they know the military under them isn't going to respond. If Trump insists on this path he will likely try to directly order smaller units to do what he wants. Any unit that does will find it's leaders immediately relieved of command by their superiors. If some small unit does find it's way out into the public it's likely a general will order the military police to go round them up on charges of deserting their post.

      It will be very messy and Authoritarians hate messy. Much more likely is they give the Proud Boys and the KKK uniforms and guns and call them soldiers, along with any federal agents he can recruit again. The actual military is going to be very resistant to shooting at Americans. We've spent the last 20 years sweating, bleeding, and even dying to protect Americans. Orders to go after Americans en masse, (instead of single Americans overseas on very good evidence they're working with enemy militants), will require a complete change in ideology and essentially invalidates 20 years of effort on the part of the current force. I've seen guys refuse to moderate uniform standards for a command mandated fun event over this exact issue. ("My friends died wearing this uniform, I'll be damned if I disrespect it like that") I highly doubt Trump will change that in any kind of short order.

      • Sounds like the evolution of all that would take years anyway... so it's just a matter if he leaves office ever if elected again.

  • With the current info on Undecideds, it's lining up mostly with what I guessed based on what we knew about the locked in voters barring another polling disaster rendering all the data moot. Around 60% of the recent undecideds have broke for Harris, but the bulk of Undecideds who committed earlier broke for Trump (52-48) which is a larger number. These two average out to basically 50-50 on the whole. Undecideds went massively for Trump both previous elections so I don't foresee Harris breaking 50%ish, that's already a big gain.

    This is relevant because the final locked in scores at the rate things are trending are going to be something like 47.5 - 49 give or take a half a point by election day. Not all of the 3-4 points left are going to either them, at least one, maybe 2 are going for Third Parties, which unlike in past years are way more left leaning than normal thanks mostly to RFK Jr and Libertarian infighting. Harris is trending in the right direction, but that 3rd party shift absorbs some of that. A final 50/50 call between what's left leaves maybe a 2 point difference final result depending on exactly how well third parties do. 48-50 or so. That's a Hilary Clinton sized margin between Popular Vote and EC. Not a death sentence, this thing is cyclical, sometimes it favors one party or another (Democrats had a EC advantage in 2004 and 2008 and probably 2012) and sometimes it's stronger. The effect is supposed to be much less this year, a Biden level margin of 4 points or even a 3 point lead is a safe Kamala win. Not so much 2 points, that's up in the margins.

    If the polling is right, this is a dead heat election where Wisconsin and Michigan are going blue, Arizona Georgia and North Carolina going red, and Nevada and Pennsylvania are too close to call.

201 comments