2020 Presidential Race

[Serene]

My reading of the judge's opinion is that she radically differs from your sentiment, most especially the bolded. She specifically wrote:
She seems to indicate the belief that an unconstitutional/unfair election hurts every citizen of the state.
She goes on to confirm that he plaintiffs seem to have established the unconstitutionality of the election:
She indicates that allowing illegal votes to stand actually harm legal voters:
Which is logically consistent with the thought that illegal votes cancel legal votes.
She seems to indicate that setting aside the election (in favor of legislator appointments) would be untenable ONLY IF:
She seems to default to the legal idea that every voter deserves a valid/constitutional election, and the burden of proof should be to prove that wrong.

I've read the judge's opinion. I don't believe that Judge McCullough will decide this case. We'll see how it goes.

 

[TennesseeTopHat]

Absolutely if votes were in fact fraudulent or the system was set up in violation of the constitution.
Let’s play it out and let the chips fall where they may.

No one is saying to count illegal votes.

But there is no evidence of election fraud, and nothing of that sort has been submitted in court. Yet you have people here, and across the country, saying the election was stolen and now wanting to appoint faithless electors. It’s dangerous.

 

[RockyTop85]

I don't think you are actually reading in detail. Most all here have said we are not Trumpsters, we really don't like him personally, wish he would be more presidential, wish we had a better choice to vote for, etc, etc.
It is about not wanting anything Biden or what he stands for. We have said both parties did not have a great choice or representative to vote for. Actually, I can't remember hardly anyone saying it is all about Trump, no it is all about integrity in elections and wanting to avoid the socialist push that the Democrat party is aligning with.

At least you’re willing to admit it’s about the candidates and not the process by which Biden was elected.

 

[evillawyer]

 

[Orange_Crush]

I've read the judge's opinion. I don't believe that Judge McCullough will decide this case. We'll see how it goes.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Pennsylvania’s Certificate of Ascertainment has been filed and the slate of electors chosen.

https://www.archives.gov/files/electoral-college/2020/ascertainment-pennsylvania.pdf

Pennsylvania Republicans To Introduce Resolution Disputing Election Results

 

[Orange_Crush]

Pennsylvania Republicans To Introduce Resolution Disputing Election Results

I'm unclear on what they need to pass this. Rs have a simple majority, but does this take a simple majority or 2/3?

 

[RockyTop85]

Apparently our only shot to remain a constitutional republic is to throw out votes after the election is over.

Yep. And if you rely on the government’s process for exercising a right and that process turns out to be “unconstitutional” then the remedy is that everyone loses the right.

 

[OldVolMan]

At least you’re willing to admit it’s about the candidates and not the process by which Biden was elected.

I have said all along I'm not a Trump person, and not proud or loyal to the Republican party at all. In my opinion both parties are evil and corrupt. That is what is most sad about the current world we live in.
They were able to conceal most of their corruption in years past, but now with the internet and our communication tools we can research more and do our own evaluations.. Not the MSM news!
But, thank you for acknowledging that!

 

[Orange_Crush]

 

[Serene]

Believe me, I'm looking forward to it.

 

[NCFisher]

That's an interesting notion, but it's not held up by, you know, actual law. This is a pretty textbook example of a case where laches would apply.


The only solution in which voters would be disenfranchised would be if votes were tossed out. There's no demonstrable harm caused by the "illegal" votes in Pennsylvania. Had the law been different, all of those voters would have been able to cast "legal" votes and the results would be the same.

I think, "you know, actual law" is why the judge has injuncted the certification, "textbook laches" notwithstanding. If damages are incurred by a law then shown to be unconstitutional, government doesn't get to say "sorry, it was law"; you have legal redress. Damages are the catalyst for requesting redress. Not to mention laches concerns the plaintiff allowing an undue delay to occur after damages before requesting relief, and is clearly not the case here; this occurred Nov 3.

I disagree; the vote for president is a federal election of 50 states. If three states with similar constitutional disability can swing that election, the remainder of states - at least those not subscribing to the same candidate - are materially damaged and not afforded equal protection. That aside from those PA voters disenfranchised by Act 77. And the further illegal actions of the SoS violating Art. II of the U.S. constitution by allowing 110-120K votes arriving after the deadline, to count. The margin for Biden in PA is currently 80K.

The argument further presupposes all those voters would have voted in person and that there is not substantial fraud/malfeasance among the 2.6M PA mail ballots returned. I expect the 5-2 Dem controlled PA SC to find against, and SCOTUS to hear the case.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

No one is saying to count illegal votes.

But there is no evidence of election fraud, and nothing of that sort has been submitted in court. Yet you have people here, and across the country, saying the election was stolen and now wanting to appoint faithless electors. It’s dangerous.

Hmmmm...

 

[37L1]

No one is saying to count illegal votes.

But there is no evidence of election fraud, and nothing of that sort has been submitted in court. Yet you have people here, and across the country, saying the election was stolen and now wanting to appoint faithless electors. It’s dangerous.

What, to you, constitutes an "illegal vote"?

 

[Orange_Crush]

Hmmmm...

lol

My thought as well.

 

[Orange_Crush]

What, to you, constitutes an "illegal vote"?

And "evidence"...?

 

[OldVolMan]

BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: THOUSANDS of Fake Votes Found at Wisconsin Recount in Dane County -- Photos and Report from GOP Observer

 

[NCFisher]

Since you're confident that Trump is still going to be the president when the smoke clears, would you be willing to take a self impose year long ban bet of not posting in the Politics forum if he isn't?

Hey, if I go back and show you where a number of your opinions or assertions were wrong, will you ban yourself?

Good grief...

 

[lostsheep]

BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: THOUSANDS of Fake Votes Found at Wisconsin Recount in Dane County -- Photos and Report from GOP Observer

Breaking news...yet again. From the Gateway Pundit. You guys do realize this is akin to me posting “breaking news” from the National Enquirer, correct?!
I’m constantly amazed at the level to which some of you will grasp at straws, and still deny the only reason you’re doing so is because trump planted this seed weeks prior to the election by sayin the only way he would lose is if the election was rigged.
Wake the F up and start thinking for yourselves. Geeze.

 

[BowlBrother85]

That's not true; illegal contravention of federal and state election laws occurred in a number of battleground states. By state officials who should know better. Those votes must be invalidated.

This is simply fact.

BS. There won't be any votes invalidated. None of the Trump campaign's legal arguments have any merit, so says Judge Stephanos Bibas - who is a Trump appointee.

This is a fact: The Trump campaign demanded a recount in two of Wisconsin's counties. They got it, but had to pay $3 million for it. The recount only served to increase Biden's lead. That is the most Trump thing ever.

 

[Velo Vol]

And the further illegal actions of the SoS violating Art. II of the U.S. constitution by allowing 110-120K votes arriving after the deadline, to count. .

So you're saying that the NC election, which had an even later deadline than PA, is also unconstitutional? Or is that OK because Trump won there?

 

[Orange_Crush]

Hey, if I go back and show you where a number of your opinions or assertions were wrong, will you ban yourself?

Good grief...

There is an incredible amount of arrogance in thinking that someone cares enough about you that they would audition for your approval in such a stupid way.

Why would anyone make a bet like that and the only reward is to not see posts that you've not cared about so far because their author is a nobody in your life? It seems to me that proposing such stupidity presupposes a certain amount of your own importance in the lives of others

 

[OldVolMan]

Breaking news...yet again. From the Gateway Pundit. You guys do realize this is akin to me posting “breaking news” from the National Enquirer, correct?!
I’m constantly amazed at the level to which some of you will grasp at straws, and still deny the only reason you’re doing so is because trump planted this seed weeks prior to the election by sayin the only way he would lose is if the election was rigged.
Wake the F up and start thinking for yourselves. Geeze.

My beliefs have nothing to do with what Trump planted, you should not assume. You don't seriously expect any Liberal MSM report it do you? Regardless what you choose to believe Gateway has reported accurate news, may not match your opinions or what CNN told you.
Geeze

 

[BowlBrother85]

There are three types of Trump loyalists in this forum:
1) Smart, yet misguided and will go to great lengths to rationalize his behavior

2) Smart, yet don't give a damn that he's a classless rube and feckless coward

3) Not too bright and uninformed

Per Business Insider, Trump wants to hold a 2024 campaign rally during Biden's inauguration on January 20th. There is no level of childish pettiness and egotistical behavior to which Trump won't sink.

 

[RockyTop85]

What, to you, constitutes an "illegal vote"?

A vote for Biden!!

Oh... wait I forgot to log in to my other account.