2020 Presidential Race

#81,876
#81,876
Orange_Crush said:
Trump has at least two very capable avenues of trying to overturn this election. (1) Prove fraud in the courts and have the courts overturn the election results--i.e. declared invalid. (2) Point out the fraud and appeal to the state legislators to instruct the state electors to ignore the fraudulent election results and vote Trump in as president.

Before the screams of "Dictator!" arise as wailing and gnashing of teeth, this is the constitutional system in action. It's the way it was designed to work. And it's exactly what Al Gore did in Florida in 2000. It's just that Trump would be asking a few more states to do it.
Click to expand...
The issue with 1 I think is no election has occurred yet within the constitutional framework. That vote is the EC vote. Right now he has 50 individual state contests that stand unique within their state laws abd courts at this time. That is mainly why I think it’s hard to overturn.

On 2 they would have to have separable proof that showed X votes need to be invalidated I think. At the end of the day it comes down to each states processes and I think that would determine if and when a mulligan is warranted.

It seems insurmountable thus why I’m leaning towards the scorched earth path right now.

But this is 2020 and a total redo would be the most 2020 thing thus far 🤷‍♂️
 
#81,879
#81,879
Orange_Crush said:
The more I think about it, the more I suspect Biden is on the outside looking in. He is the underdog in this. I would actually be very surprised to see him as the next POTUS.
Click to expand...
Well I actually hope you’re right but with certification deadlines looming and the count in his favor I just see the odds more in his corner. I am really interested to see what Powell lays down. Rudy is just a distraction and smoke screen.
 
#81,881
#81,881
Orange_Crush said:
The Million Patriot marches are more powerful than you think. The widespread perception that this stinks to high hell is more powerful than you think. All the states need is political capital for the electors to vote Trump in.
Click to expand...

The Million Patriot March means nothing and has no power.

The only way politicians, bureaucrats and judges get to keep ripping us off and stay in power is by us being divided and at least 1/2 the country believing the charade of their vote matters. If the conspiracies of votes being changed, lost or manufactured are true that means immensely powerful forces are at work to ensure another Trump never happens and they remain in control. Those forces will not allow proof to be taken seriously.
 
#81,884
#81,884
NorthDallas40 said:
The issue with 1 I think is no election has occurred yet within the constitutional framework. That vote is the EC vote. Right now he has 50 individual state contests that stand unique within their state laws abd courts at this time. That is mainly why I think it’s hard to overturn.

On 2 they would have to have separable proof that showed X votes need to be invalidated I think. At the end of the day it comes down to each states processes and I think that would determine if and when a mulligan is warranted.

It seems insurmountable thus why I’m leaning towards the scorched earth path right now.

But this is 2020 and a total redo would be the most 2020 thing thus far 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...

I disagree. My understanding is that all they have to show is that the results are untrustworthy.

On 2, they need no proof of anything. The Constitutional system gives the votes to the electors. Only a few states have state laws that those electors must vote the results of the election.

(1) The courts can invalidate the election results or a candidate conceded to the election results.

(2) The state electors vote Trump, and Republicans have the majority of state electors.

(3) If this isn't resolved by Dec 14, the House delegates elect President and Vice President. Republicans have the majority of house delegates.

Those are the three mechanisms for deciding the election. The media can't. Not even the "election results" can, even if every state certifies. The three mechanisms are (1) candidate conceded to the election results two mechanisms are, (2) state electors, (3) House. Republicans have the stronger hand in two of the three, and no one can force Trump to concede the first.

I will not be surprised to see the election results overturned by at least one mechanism if Trump's team can make a strong enough case for election fraud, whether it is courts or the latter two. But as far as "raw constitutional power", it's in the Republican camp from what I understand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#81,885
#81,885
CIA Director Gina Haspel 'Should Be Fired' for Ignoring Election Software Warnings, Trump Lawyer Says

Sidney Powell, an attorney representing President Donald Trump, said that CIA director Gina Haspel "should be fired" for not objecting to the use of election software the president and his supporters claim—without providing evidence—allowed President-elect Joe Biden to win through "fraud."

Although Dominion software did experience some glitches during the election, these were quickly caught and corrected. The problems were largely due to human error. The Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has dismissed the claims about the voting software and described the election as "the most secure in American history."

"There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised," the agency said last week in conjunction with a coalition of security experts and the National Association of State Election Directors.

Dominion has pushed back against the claims, while also debunking a series of widely circulated conspiracy theories that the company is controlled by prominent Democrats. "Dominion Voting Systems categorically denies false assertions about vote switching issues with our voting system," the company says on its website. Newsweek reached out to Dominion for further comment, but it did not immediately reply.

Edward Perez, an election-technology expert at the OSET Institute, which studies voting infrastructure, told The New York Times that allegations against Dominion are "misinformation at best and, in many cases, they're outright disinformation."

"I'm not aware of any evidence of specific things or defects in Dominion software that would lead one to believe that votes had been recorded or counted incorrectly," Perez said.

# # #

This is the standard Trumpism M.O. also used this past weekend by Rudy "Truth isn't Truth" Giuliani:

(1) Make an outlandish claim intended to smear 3rd party;
(2) Claim that you have absolute proof of said claim, but can't reveal it right now;
(3) File a lawsuit against 3rd party without providing evidence or evidence that clearly is heresay, unsubstantiated or unrelated;
(4) Use filing said lawsuit as the establishment of "fact" regarding the smear;
(5) When legal case is to be actually heard in court, quietly retreat and claim the entire system is "rigged";
(6) Pick new target;
(7) Rinse. Repeat.

Ms. Powell should be disbarred once her claims are proved to be wholly fabricated. She's an unmitigated disaster and a complete embarrassment to North Carolina.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJimgo
#81,886
#81,886
Orange_Crush said:
I disagree. My understanding is that all they have to show is that the results are untrustworthy.

On 2, they need no proof of anything. The Constitutional system gives the votes to the electors. Only a few states have state laws that those electors must vote the results of the election.

(1) The courts can invalidate the election results or a candidate conceded to the election results.

(2) The state electors vote Trump, and Republicans have the majority of state electors.

(3) If this isn't resolved by Dec 14, the House delegates elect President and Vice President. Republicans have the majority of house delegates.

Those are the three mechanisms for deciding the election. The media can't. Not even the "election results" can, even if every state certifies. The three mechanisms are (1) candidate conceded to the election results, (2) state electors, (3) House. Republicans have the stronger hand in two of the three, and no one can force Trump to concede the first.

I will not be surprised to see the election results overturned by at least one mechanism if Trump's team can make a strong enough case for election fraud, whether it is courts or the latter two. But as far as "raw constitutional power", it's in the Republican camp from what I understand.
Click to expand...
Like I said I hope you’re right. I am guessing we are waiting on certification in the states they intend to actively contest as until that happens there is no result to contest. So we should know by weeks end in at least one state what the play is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#81,887
#81,887
NorthDallas40 said:
Well I actually hope you’re right but with certification deadlines looming and the count in his favor I just see the odds more in his corner. I am really interested to see what Powell lays down. Rudy is just a distraction and smoke screen.
Click to expand...
See above post. The current election results can in no way elect Biden. The state electors have to do that. Trump could make it easy for them to do so by conceding. He could make it easy for them not to do it by making a very strong public case that fraud occurred. (Again, Gore tried a similar path in 2000.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#81,888
#81,888
NorthDallas40 said:
The popular vote wasn’t even taken before 1824. And no you don’t get a pass that you didn’t know what happened before your time with your usual deflection and blathering circular arguments
Click to expand...
I assume you are attempting to make some type of point.

My point is obvious and worth restating. The popular vote expresses the people's choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OHvol40
#81,889
#81,889
Rasputin_Vol said:
Oh, I'll jump. So what happened in the full video that we didn't see that justified a knee in the neck?
Click to expand...
You’re missing the point. I’m not saying anything was or was not justified. But a narrative was set off of the videos originally released that only showed a small portion of the entire encounter. Then the longer video comes out and it shows Floyd did in fact resist officers, it shows he was clearly saying he couldn’t breathe when he was sitting up and no one was touching him, and it shows that he refused to go into the back of the car which was the original plan. I’m not saying the officer did nothing wrong but there was a whole lot of assuming that happened based on the short videos originally released when the longer video showed those assumptions to be false. By that time it was too late. The narrative had been set that the cop was a racist murderer, his co-workers were accomplices, and the riots were off and running. Had that full video been released from the beginning I’m sure there would’ve been some protests but I don’t think it would’ve turned into anything like what has happened. That’s the point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher
#81,891
#81,891
Orange_Crush said:
See above post. The current election results can in no way elect Biden. The state electors have to do that. Trump could make it easy for them to do so by conceding. He could make it easy for them not to do it by making a very strong public case that fraud occurred. (Again, Gore tried a similar path in 2000.)
Click to expand...
Understood and replied to. Again hope you’re right. The current beast coalescing around Biden looks like it will set us back economically to possibly an unrecoverable point which I hope doesn’t result in default. But hell as long as you can print your own money and the rest of the world buys into your Ponzi scheme I guess you’re fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#81,892
#81,892
Rifleman said:
Because what this is really about is peeling audience away from Fox News so that when Trump and investors acquire NewsMax or another nascent media platform, they will have a ready-made groups of viewers.

The next step will be to hire away a top personality from Fox, so they can do real battle in the Primetime slots where the money sacks for running adult diaper commercials are the largest.

I'll be interested in how the Murdoch family responds. They haven't built this empire just to let Donald walk in and grab his slice.
Click to expand...
So Fox and Newsmax will battle it out? That would be amazing. Let them eat each other!
 
#81,893
#81,893
luthervol said:
I assume you are attempting to make some type of point.

My point is obvious and worth restating. The popular vote expresses the people's choice.
Click to expand...
Your point is meaningless in determining our President as most of your points wind up being and then we go down the circular argument rabbit hole as you try to deflect.

That was my point.
 
#81,895
#81,895
titansvolsfaninga said:
So Fox and Newsmax will battle it out? That would be amazing. Let them eat each other!
Click to expand...

Donald will need branding accommodations, so it will likely be called Trump TV if he gets the money together but that will also drive up the cost for the acquisition.

It does appear to be a business that would be a no-brainer success, so I am very curious to see how he bankrupts this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJimgo and OHvol40
#81,897
#81,897
MG1968 said:
College tuition, health care, internet access, home loans, etc/QUOTE]
You're ignorant. So you are against the military going to college for free and free health care? Only people I know that get free internet are poor people. I've not seen a commercial for free internet for black people or democrats. And free home loans. I mean that is just stupid. A free loan? A free loan?
Click to expand...
 
#81,898
#81,898
Rifleman said:
Donald will need branding accommodations, so it will likely be called Trump TV if he gets the money together but that will also drive up the cost for the acquisition.

It does appear to be a business that would be a no-brainer success, so I am very curious to see how he bankrupts this one.
Click to expand...
he will be spend more than he makes. I don't think host will work for free. How much hate TV can someone watch?
 
#81,900
#81,900
NorthDallas40 said:
Your point is meaningless in determining our President as most of your points wind up being and then we go down the circular argument rabbit hole as you try to deflect.

That was my point.
Click to expand...
Who claimed it determined the president?
I claimed it expressed the people's choice.

Try to keep up.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top