Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Posted
8 hours ago, Sujo said:

This is not a federal issue. Scotus will deny their application yo be heard.

 

Why has SCOTUS picked it up then? It's basically State versus State. Or 17 versus the rest...

  • Haha 2
Posted
34 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

Trump did not "beat Hilary" , she got more votes, . People just disliked her more than the orange moron

 

She got more votes...democracy at its best. She wins... Oh no, people don't matter, it's the Electoral College that matters. What is the point of people voting? How does that face the outcome?

Posted

A post has been removed regarding the U.S. Supreme Court ruling rejecting a Republican election challenge in Pennsylvania. The court's order did not specify any specific vote tally by the court.

 

Posted
10 minutes ago, placeholder said:

America has the electoral college thanks to slavery. They had a smaller population than the major northern states. It was designed to give the slave states more say in the government than they would have under a simply majority vote system. That's also why the in the Constitution slaves counted as 3/5 of a person for the Census.

 

And also why the states have equal representation in the Senate.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

The stats belie credulity is what he's saying.  Most likely mathematically impossible.

This is from the right wing National Review:

The Dumb Statistical Argument in Texas’s Election Lawsuit

 

The statistical details are from an expert declaration available here, and they’re about as silly as you would expect.

Basically, the exercises simply assume that different batches of ballots should have similar breakdowns by candidate or party... 

And the statistical tests are incredibly emphatic that these differences are real — one a quadrillion! — because of the enormous sample sizes, including millions of ballots.

Texas’s Election Lawsuit Makes an Incredibly Bad Statistical Argument | National Review

 

  • Thanks 2
Posted
8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

This is from the right wing National Review:

The Dumb Statistical Argument in Texas’s Election Lawsuit

 

The statistical details are from an expert declaration available here, and they’re about as silly as you would expect.

Basically, the exercises simply assume that different batches of ballots should have similar breakdowns by candidate or party... 

And the statistical tests are incredibly emphatic that these differences are real — one a quadrillion! — because of the enormous sample sizes, including millions of ballots.

Texas’s Election Lawsuit Makes an Incredibly Bad Statistical Argument | National Review

 

You know what this lawsuit by Texas is? it is The Titanic going down and this lawsuit is the part where only the bow is left in the air and all of MAGA is crowded at the top gripping the rails as the ship plunges into the sea...bon voyage President Trump. Let the scramble for the life boats (in this case, Pardons) commence....

Posted
1 hour ago, RJRS1301 said:

Perhaps "improbable" ( in some eyes) but not impossible

The people throwing out terms like 'statistics' and 'mathematics' to suggest there is something highly improbable in the vote distribution have yet to provide any analysis to support their claims.  I doubt that they can; I don't see anything improbable about high density urban areas providing the majority of the votes for Joe Biden, even if these urban areas don't occupy a large number of counties in the US.

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, heybruce said:

The people throwing out terms like 'statistics' and 'mathematics' to suggest there is something highly improbable in the vote distribution have yet to provide any analysis to support their claims.  I doubt that they can; I don't see anything improbable about high density urban areas providing the majority of the votes for Joe Biden, even if these urban areas don't occupy a large number of counties in the US.

The post  I was responding to stated "impossible" hence my use of "improbable", as statisitics allow for improbabilities

Edited by RJRS1301
Posted
5 hours ago, cmarshall said:

 

It's not just about fearing Trump's revenge, although that is certainly a factor.  The Republican Party is all on board with minority rule, which is their only hope for power, since Americans support progressive policies by a large margin.  That means that they have to support voter suppression, propagandistic news sources, gerrymandering, voter id, purging of voter rolls, lifestyle issues like gay marriage and abortion, and court challenges.  Otherwise the Republican Party is out of business.

 

The business model for the Republican party is collect huge money from the billionaire class, spend it on sophisticated advertising to lure the voters to vote against their own interests, and, when in power, lower taxes on the rich and reduce regulation on their businesses.  The tricky part is getting a presidential candidate who can induce the voters to vote against their own interests.  The spectacular successes were Eisenhower and Reagan.  McCain couldn't manage it; neither could Romney.  Of the 2016 line of Republican wannabes no one, but Trump, could have beaten Hillary.  So, Trump has been a critical element in the successful Republican drive to exercise minority rule.

I think that trump nailed it when he said with mail in voting no Republican will ever become President again.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, placeholder said:

America has the electoral college thanks to slavery. The southern states had a smaller population than the major northern states. It was designed to give the slave states more say in the government than they would have under a simply majority vote system. That's also why the in the Constitution slaves counted as 3/5 of a person for the Census.

 

less to do with slavery although that issue did affect it, more to do with population distribution.

rural agrarian states with low population densities would not have joined a union with urban industrial states if representation were to be based solely on population.

 

silly farmers!  they should have demanded representation based on the number of counties!!!  at least then our trumpistas would have some solid evidence for their arguments.

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, laxman1960 said:

Except the court hasn't dismissed it, and responses are due Thursday to the filing.  It will be a quite interesting read.

As a court does. It waits for the information then decides. Thats what it did in the Pa case.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Mavideol said:

Ted Cruz was asked by Trump to present the case to the Supreme Court, now let's see what the "double face jerk" has to say, hope he will repeat what he said back in 2016...... 555 ????????????

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ted-cruz-what-i-really-think-of-donald-trump/

Ted Cruz: "What I really think of Donald Trump"

By Rebecca Shabad  Updated on: May 3, 2016 / 2:29 PM / CBS News

I'm going to tell you what I really think of Donald Trump," Cruz said. "This man is a pathological liar. He doesn't know the difference between truth and lies. He lies practically every word that comes out of his mouth." And Cruz added, "The man is utterly amoral. Morality does not exist for him."

 

 

He wont get a say, this is only a request to hear the case. It will be refused. Denied.

Posted
1 hour ago, Sujo said:

As a court does. It waits for the information then decides. Thats what it did in the Pa case.

 

Wonder if the statement of dismissal will be shorter than the one for PA?:

 

image.png.5801f2fb4f2d650c6966e2c66621663c.png

 

Posted
4 minutes ago, placnx said:

The irony of this: many of the Trump flock are evangelical "Christians", who should be caring for their fellow man (aside from blacks or hispanics, of course). They are also against science and wearing masks!

Its called a cult.

  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, placeholder said:

America has the electoral college thanks to slavery. The southern states had a smaller population than the major northern states. It was designed to give the slave states more say in the government than they would have under a simply majority vote system. That's also why the in the Constitution slaves counted as 3/5 of a person for the Census.

Ironically, now illegal immigrants are counted in the Census, so that states with big populations of them get more Representatives in Congress, thus more Electors as well.

  • Like 1
Posted
13 hours ago, riclag said:

 Good development ,strength in numbers !

This is how the democratic process works!

Good for you America

The democratic process happened at the ballot box.

 

"This is how the political coup process works", would be more applicable...

  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, earlinclaifornia said:

Convicted felons can run for President but, Legally? Yes. Effectively? No.

With appeals Trump is unlikely to be definitively convicted by 2024. Would he take a plea bargain? If he or his front man is in power in 2025, Trump could get a pardon!!

Posted
1 hour ago, Sujo said:

The people voted as per their legal rights at the time. No matter how many conservatives are on the court will overturn that. Its not the voters fault if things werent perfect.

 

all states have certified, its finished, get over it.

I wish you were right. But this is one of those "lost causes", like the Civil War. It's never over.

  • Thanks 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...