Election 2020 Election 2020: It's (almost) over! (maybe...possibly...ahh who are we kidding, it's 2020!)

[Free-Stater 101]

Can you not see the post just a few above yours already saying:

I can but the decision to reopen the thread was Sunhawks not mine, and furthermore I didn't want to make an assumption that would make an ass of me, thus asking the man to elaborate his reasoning.

Not sure if this counts as crossing the line, but if this is how the thread means to go on, well.

I agree Terntha should calm down as we are still stuck under Zoe's TOS but he/she should know better in that regard as we have all been informed.

 

[Abhishekm]

Look everyone's heart is in the right place. Everyone's. But the law and this forum being what they are this topic here is trouble. So can we agree to keep this to other forums and sites for just a few more days?

That is not based on my opinion on the topic but just my hope for the site. So for the sake of not raising tempers on topics we all have our positions on in a stressful time. Can we just keep it elsewhere for just a bit longer?

 

[Free-Stater 101]

Look everyone's heart is in the right place. Everyone's. But the law and this forum being what they are this topic here is trouble. So can we agree to keep this to other forums and sites for just a few more days?

Alright since I agree your hearts in the right place and somewhat agree, I shan't post until after the inauguration.

 

[Zachowon]

I think it's reasonable to keep in mind that even Vice President Pence himself opposed the Gohmert lawsuit, and the claimed Constitutional basis for that suit is shaky at best. Even by the most literalist reading of the Constitution, it's an extreme stretch to say that the VP is empowered with unlimited discretion to count the electorate votes however he sees fit, especially since in the Founding Fathers' original version of the system, said Vice President is himself a candidate for the very office.

Didn't his lawyer say that it makes no sense putting the VP on the suite which is why he opposed it? I could be wrong of course

 

[Terthna]

Look everyone's heart is in the right place. Everyone's. But the law and this forum being what they are this topic here is trouble. So can we agree to keep this to other forums and sites for just a few more days?

That is not based on my opinion on the topic but just my hope for the site. So for the sake of not raising tempers on topics we all have our positions on in a stressful time. Can we just keep it elsewhere for just a bit longer?

And what would that accomplish, exactly? The situation is what it is, and everyone's opinions on it are unlikely to change; especially not anytime soon.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Didn't his lawyer say that it makes no sense putting the VP on the suite which is why he opposed it? I could be wrong of course

Yes. Pence's legal team pointed out that it is nonsensical to sue the Vice President on the argument that he has tolerated a supposedly unconstitutional Congressional restriction of his alleged authority over the electoral count, as opposed to filing suit against Congress to directly challenge said restriction. Especially since by Gohmert's own argument, he himself should have no standing to challenge the Vice President's action or inaction.

 

[Val the Moofia Boss]

IIRC the electoral college votes are counted on January 6th. I can't find accurate information on who is going to vote for what. Is it true that there is one guy who is a wild card? Or is it really over for Trump?

 

[ShadowArxxy]

IIRC the electoral college votes are counted on January 6th. I can't find accurate information on who is going to vote for what. Is it true that there is one guy who is a wild card? Or is it really over for Trump?

The tally of electoral college votes is Biden 306, Trump 232. There's no wild cards in play in terms of the electors, and every single court challenge to date has been dismissed for lack of standing, dismissed for lack of evidence presented, or withdrawn by its own plaintiffs.

It is not strictly over yet, but things at this point we're mostly seeing a chaotic mess of third party attempts, and nothing from the White House itself.

 

[Zachowon]

Yes. Pence's legal team pointed out that it is nonsensical to sue the Vice President on the argument that he has tolerated a supposedly unconstitutional Congressional restriction of his alleged authority over the electoral count, as opposed to filing suit against Congress to directly challenge said restriction. Especially since by Gohmert's own argument, he himself should have no standing to challenge the Vice President's action or inaction.

That is what I thought

The tally of electoral college votes is Biden 306, Trump 232. There's no wild cards in play in terms of the electors, and every single court challenge to date has been dismissed for lack of standing, dismissed for lack of evidence presented, or withdrawn by its own plaintiffs.

It is not strictly over yet, but things at this point we're mostly seeing a chaotic mess of third party attempts, and nothing from the White House itself.

The electors are being challenged

 

[Megadeath]

That is what I thought

The electors are being challenged

And even the people challenging the electors have put out a press release to say that it won't do anything and is purely symbolic.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

The electors are being challenged

Hawley's challenge will open the floor for debate, but he doesn't have the votes to actually overturn the electoral slates under the procedures laid down by the Electoral Count Act of 1887, as I summarized in a post here a few weeks ago.

(The entire purpose of Gohmert's suit is to challenge the ECA procedures and to assert that Pence can single-handedly pick and discard electoral votes as he pleases. As stated, even Pence doesn't agree with that, and I think it goes without saying that this would be an insanely dangerous precedent to set.)

 

[Zachowon]

Hawley's challenge will open the floor for debate, but he doesn't have the votes to actually overturn the electoral slates under the procedures laid down by the Electoral Count Act of 1887, as I summarized in a post here a few weeks ago.

(The entire purpose of Gohmert's suit is to challenge the ECA procedures and to assert that Pence can single-handedly pick and discard electoral votes as he pleases. As stated, even Pence doesn't agree with that, and I think it goes without saying that this would be an insanely dangerous precedent to set.)

I am just going off what I am hearing, not saying it will work.

We have what, 12 senators challenging it now as well?

and didn't some state legislature going to try and decertify before the 6th?

 

[GoldRanger]

It's been over for awhile now, it seems. The focus should be on fighting the Dems tooth and nail now, instead of wasting time and energy on a doomed attempt to prove an apparently unprovable case of election fraud. The Republicans should be ready to counter a strong push to reverse Trump's achievements, that will be backed by an unconditionally sympathetic media blitz, of course. Also look out for those AOC "blacklists".

 

[Doomsought]

It's been over for awhile now, it seems. The focus should be on fighting the Dems tooth and nail now, instead of wasting time and energy on a doomed attempt to prove an apparently unprovable case of election fraud.

The case is provable, there is all sorts of evidence. The problem is that we are denied access to justice.

 

[Terthna]

It's been over for awhile now, it seems. The focus should be on fighting the Dems tooth and nail now, instead of wasting time and energy on a doomed attempt to prove an apparently unprovable case of election fraud. The Republicans should be ready to counter a strong push to reverse Trump's achievements, that will be backed by an unconditionally sympathetic media blitz, of course. Also look out for those AOC "blacklists".

It's provable; it's just that nobody wants to listen to the evidence, not even the Republicans. You're also making a mistake in assuming that they want to stop the Democrats from undoing what Trump did while in office; which couldn't be further from the truth. For most career politicians, there is no such thing as a "Republican" or a "Democrat"; those are just masks they wear to trick the masses into thinking their votes matter. There is only the establishment monoparty.

 

[Megadeath]

The case is provable, there is all sorts of evidence. The problem is that we are denied access to justice.

Uh... Cases were heard. It's just that they were then either denied or dismissed, often due to a lack of credible evidence, though sometimes for lack of standing. (Which is fancy legal speak for saying the person you're trying to sue didn't do damage to you.)

In other words, not one of the more than 50 legal challenges bought and listened to was able to demonstrate any significant fraud, even when presenting to trump appointed judges, and in fact they lacked evidence to the point where even trump's legal team made a special effort to clarify they weren't alleging fraud in several cases.

The fact that half truths and internet hearsay can convince a bunch of trump supporters online doesn't make it provable in a legal sense.

It's provable; it's just that nobody wants to listen to the evidence, not even the Republicans. You're also making a mistake in assuming that they want to stop the Democrats from undoing what Trump did while in office; which couldn't be further from the truth. For most career politicians, there is no such thing as a "Republican" or a "Democrat"; those are just masks they wear to trick the masses into thinking their votes matter. There is only the establishment monoparty.

Uh huh, except that apart from the cases where trumps team was careful to clarify that even they weren't claiming fraud, what evidence exists was in fact listed, and examined. It was the complete garbage value of that "evidence" that often resulted in the cases being thrown out.

 

[almostinsane]

The most important thing right now is the Georgia runoff. The Republicans need control of the Senate.

 

[Terthna]

The most important thing right now is the Georgia runoff. The Republicans need control of the Senate.

You're buying into the illusion; the Republicans are nothing more than controlled opposition. Them having a majority in the Senate won't change anything.

 

[LordsFire]

You're buying into the illusion; the Republicans are nothing more than controlled opposition. Them having a majority in the Senate won't change anything.

You sound like a bloody broken record. Do you really think that people like Trey Gowdy are controlled opposition? Do you even know who that is?

Some Republicans (Mitt Romney) functionally are such, but certainly not all.

 

[Duke Nukem]

Republicans aren't much better than the democrats.