Trump and 17 states back Texas bid to undo his election loss at Supreme Court

[ChouDoufu]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

That is one of the arguments for Rank Choice Voting, aka Rank Preference Voting.

 

you must be joking!

we can barely accomplish simple counting of ballots.

you want us to use the maffs?

not gonna happen.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 hour ago, J Town said:

supports the premise that 45's voters were absolutely behind him. Their passion is enviable. Just too bad they couldn't focus that energy towards truth.

 

Unfortunately, there's the actual TRUTH... and then there's the entirely unrelated Trump Truths.

 

To get the Trump Truths, you gotta be believing the fallacious garbage delivered by places like OAN and NewsMax, et al.

 

[placeholder]

4 hours ago, Sujo said:

Filings were told to be complete by friday. Scotus will probably give a ruling by monday.

 

its a very simple matter so not long.

Actually they have to give a ruling by very early Monday morning since the electors are required by the Constitutionto cast their vote this year on Dec 14. Of course, for that very reason, the lawsuit brought by Texas will fail. The Constitution is very specific that all the states must hold the vote on that day. But the Texas lawsuit petitions the Supreme Court to order a delay for the 4 states in question. The Supreme Court is not going to defy the Constitution. It was for a similar reason that the Supreme Court ordered the counting in Florida to be stopped by whatever the Safe Harbor day was in 2000. This year it was Dec 8. Because the Constitution specifies that all electoral disputes are to be resolved by that day.

[RocketDog]

2 hours ago, ChouDoufu said:

 

sure, they can make a statement by throwing away their vote.  3rd parties always get some votes.  the american communist party, the nazi party, the reform party, the tea party, the free beer party.....they all get a few votes.

 

my comment was to 3rd party candidates occasionally having enough support to drain votes from one of the uniparty candidates potentially causing a loss..... see perot and nader.

 

https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States

 

just imagine having multiple parties in the current environment -- which nutcases could the trump party form a coalition with!!

Possible, but coalition parties seldom work well with fiercely independent people. Witness the Tea Party which was a flash in the pan. It's not clear that parliamentary democracies work well either at building and sustaining coalitions. Elections happen at random times in that case and seems chaotic to me. 

 

As for throwing away votes for independents, that is in fact a statement that not voting at all would not make. It's a path to accidentally making entrenched parties cringe enough to change enough to capture those votes. 

 

I think Churchill said the democracy is a lousy form of government but the best available. It's a messy process. 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, ChouDoufu said:

 

you must be joking!

we can barely accomplish simple counting of ballots.

you want us to use the maffs?

not gonna happen.

There has been little trouble counting votes once the ballots were properly processed.  The counting of rank choice voting wouldn't be an issue.

 

Explaining to people that they now have the option of deciding which issues are most important to them and researching which candidate they think is best, which is second best, etc. then getting people to do this would be a problem.  But people who still wanted to vote for only one candidate would have that option.

 

I would welcome the chance use my vote to clearly demonstrate which candidate and party I think is the best in an election, and which I think is the worst.  If the majority of voters could and would do this it would provide valuable information about what the voters really want to all parties.  Much better than the increasingly inaccurate polls that both big parties pay big bucks for.  And it would give small parties a better chance of growing into serious contenders.

 

Also, it would be nice to not have to choose the lesser of two evils when I vote.

[cmarshall]

2 hours ago, Sujo said:

After all the court cases that are lost i doubt even the repubs would be dumb enough to do that, that would cause untold violence from millions of disenfranchised voters, and rightly so.

 

Of course, they would do it.  The Republicans know they can only get power in anti-democratic ways, since they represent the interests of a minority, rich people.  The Supreme Court executed a judicial coup in 2000 to steal the election from Gore and give it to Bush.  There were no riots, no violence by the Democrats.  

 

Just the fact that 106 members of Congress signed their amicus brief supporting the naked power grab by the Texas AG tells you that the Republicans will do anything at all to attempt to keep power.

 

The Munich Beer Hall Putsch in 1922 failed, but the Nazis did eventually get power and declared all other parties to be illegal.  

[Phulublub]

40 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I would welcome the chance use my vote to clearly demonstrate which candidate and party I think is the best in an election, and which I think is the worst.  If the majority of voters could and would do this it would provide valuable information about what the voters really want to all parties.  Much better than the increasingly inaccurate polls that both big parties pay big bucks for.  And it would give small parties a better chance of growing into serious contenders.

I think you over estimate the intelligence of the average voter.  And the engagement fo the vast majority.

 

You could also look at the UK, another 2 party country where, despite long running calls for reform, one of the parties, Labour, despite being at a similar disadvantage as the Domocrats, stil prefer to take on just the Conservatives rather than try any sort of system other than first past the post.

 

PH

[Seth1a2a]

3 hours ago, ChouDoufu said:

3rd party candidates occasionally having enough support to drain votes from one of the uniparty candidates potentially causing a loss..... see perot and nader.

 

2016 Clinton lost 3 critical states to Trump. Votes that went to Green Party candidate Jill Stein would have been more than enough votes for Hillary to beat Him. But as  mentioned before, those voters had no desire to vote for either for Trump or Clinton ....

 

Green Party candidate Jill Stein got more votes than Trump's lead on Clinton

 

 https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/1/13811344/jill-stein-clinton-trump-nader-spoiler

Dec 1, 2016 — But would Stein voters really have gone to Clinton if Stein wasn't on the ticket? ... Jill Stein is now officially the Ralph Nader of 2016.

 

.

Edited December 11, 2020 by Seth1a2a

[cmarshall]

The last third party candidate to be elected president was Lincoln.

[ChouDoufu]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

There has been little trouble counting votes once the ballots were properly processed.  The counting of rank choice voting wouldn't be an issue.

 

Explaining to people that they now have the option of deciding which issues are most important to them and researching which candidate they think is best, which is second best, etc. then getting people to do this would be a problem.  But people who still wanted to vote for only one candidate would have that option.

 

I would welcome the chance use my vote to clearly demonstrate which candidate and party I think is the best in an election, and which I think is the worst.  If the majority of voters could and would do this it would provide valuable information about what the voters really want to all parties.  Much better than the increasingly inaccurate polls that both big parties pay big bucks for.  And it would give small parties a better chance of growing into serious contenders.

 

Also, it would be nice to not have to choose the lesser of two evils when I vote.

 

in a perfect world........

 

maga voters would wear masks.

trump would accept defeat.

rudy G would retire.

 

imagine the court cases if we went with such a complicated system requiring an informed electorate.  as it currently stands, the choice of leader of the free world could hinge on a subjective view of a dimpled chad.

 

[Seth1a2a]

And speaking of trying to undo an election. Here's where Trump must have gleaned several elements his current  plan to hang on to power

 

Texas Governor Edmund J. Davis in 1872 tried it,  including locking himself in the basement..

Hilarious, but true with a few eerie similarities. 

 

Davis ran for reelection in December 1872,  His Democratic opponent, was Richard Coke. Accusations of fraud and other irregularities occurred on both sides... When Davis lost "By A Lot", =(2 to 1}   he declared the entire election invalid. The Texas Supreme Court agreed, but Democrats declared that, actually, the court was invalid.....

 

Quote:

"For two days, there were two governors and as armed supporters for both men paced the streets, violence seemed inevitable.

"Davis then begged President Ulysses S. Grant, a fellow Republican, to send in federal troops. .. Grant’s reply: No federal troops, and “Would it not be prudent, as well as right, to yield to the verdict of the people as expressed by their ballots?”.......

 

Source reference:

The Texas governor who refused to concede after losing a bitter election

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/11/16/concede-texas-governor-edmund-davis-trump/

 

 

 

Ulysses S. Grant was a true patriotic hero if you need a better example or definition.  Surrounding a public officials house and terrorizing her children or plotting to kidnap a governor as Trump supporters have done recently , just does not make the cut ..........

 

[Surelynot]

What a difference a week makes.

Vice President Mike Pence delivered a full-throated endorsement of Donald Trump’s intervention in a Texas case that seeks to have millions of ballots thrown out in several swing states the president lost.

 

If the Supreme Court takes the case, it could hand Mr Trump a second term.

 

????

 

 

 

[Seth1a2a]

2 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

If the Supreme Court takes the case, it could hand Mr Trump a second term.

Surelynot going to happen.............

[Surelynot]

Just now, Seth1a2a said:

Surelynot going to happen.............

God forbid........

[Susco]

WASHINGTON — More than two dozen states filed motions with the Supreme Court on Thursday opposing Texas' bid to invalidate President-elect Joe Biden's wins in four battleground states, a long-shot legal move that Pennsylvania blasted as a "seditious abuse of the judicial process."

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-meet-state-attorneys-general-125800246.html

[talahtnut]

 

I appreciate this new twist on the America First policy. Better they are fighting each other than exporting war around the world.

[KhunFred]

On 12/10/2020 at 6:16 AM, PatOngo said:

I can't wait for this clown to exhaust all his hair brain law suits and finally face the reality that he is a one term loser, will be interesting to see him AFTER he's thrown ALL the toys out of the pram. A disgusting man/child !

Not enough. I want to see him imprisoned and placed in general population. He will be beaten unmercifully every day until he dies.

[PatOngo]

4 minutes ago, KhunFred said:

Not enough. I want to see him imprisoned and placed in general population. He will be beaten unmercifully every day until he dies.

I tend to think he will find more supporters inside the can than out....similar types to himself

[KhunFred]

1 minute ago, PatOngo said:

I tend to think he will find more supporters inside the can than out....similar types to himself

You do have a point. It slipped my mind that Trump will go to a "country club" prison, where he will be incarcerated among other elite criminals.

[PatOngo]

4 minutes ago, KhunFred said:

You do have a point. It slipped my mind that Trump will go to a "country club" prison, where he will be incarcerated among other elite criminals.

General population would be many unarmed Proud Boys...party time for ex 45. They speak the same language....BS!

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, ChouDoufu said:

 

in a perfect world........

 

maga voters would wear masks.

trump would accept defeat.

rudy G would retire.

 

imagine the court cases if we went with such a complicated system requiring an informed electorate.  as it currently stands, the choice of leader of the free world could hinge on a subjective view of a dimpled chad.

 

I haven't read about any chad problems for 20 years.

 

Ranked choice voting isn't that complicated; you have the option of voting for only one candidate or choosing a first choice, second choice, etc. 

 

If you think courts will not require citizens to deal with rules this complicated, I must assume you don't do your own taxes.

[olfu]

United States is democracy?

Something new every day.

[Scott]

A post discussing illegal activity has been removed. 

 

[RJRS1301]

8 hours ago, KhunFred said:

Not enough. I want to see him imprisoned and placed in general population. He will be beaten unmercifully every day until he dies.

Violence is not the answer, never has been, never will be .

They could try banishment as they did in the old days, some place high in the mountains with no MacDonalds nearby

 

[J Town]

WOMP WOMP WOMP!!!

 

Supremes just rejected it. Try it on for size:

 

45 lost.

[Tug]

Just now, J Town said:

WOMP WOMP WOMP!!!

 

Supremes just rejected it. Try it on for size:

 

45 lost.

Oh joy oh joy poor Donald lol that will put a crimp on his grift 

[Somtamnication]

Rejected with comments. Not enough for the Trumplicans to welcome Biden, sadly.

[Salerno]

Quote

The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.

 

Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins: In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. See Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___ (Feb. 24, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting). I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/121120zr_p860.pdf

Edited December 11, 2020 by Salerno

[Seth1a2a]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[J Town]

2 minutes ago, Salerno said:

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/121120zr_p860.pdf

The fat lady has been singing for WEEKS now. Can't we give her a break?

 

45 lost. Get over it. Embrace it. Become one with it.