All 50 states have certified the election.

[Mblake81]

Originally Posted by cannobeers3 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's actually over. You can wash the unnecessary camo off now. Pelosi is gross, we can all agree, but that does not change the fact that your leader is pretty much the worst person ever.

(and he lost bigtime)

define worst.

[magnetaress]

Pelosi still 10x hotter than Trump, u all know if that was your grandma you would eat her cookies, stop trolling like plebes.

Also lol Rudy and his Zorg hair dye...

[imperiouskitten]

pelosi was a fox, i always try and see old ppl in their prime nah mean

[cd288]

Originally Posted by douglas1999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

MI, PA, GA and NV all broke their own election laws by arbitrarily changing them at the last minute without amending their state constitutions, which is the proper procedure. There's a lawsuit from the texas AG regarding this, alleging that violating your own state election laws while the rest of the states followed theirs disenfranchises the voters of those other states. It's a fair legal argument. Just sayin!

I'm 99% sure joe biden will be the next president, and I'm 99% sure he will be terrible. Just as long as we get to stick it to that trump guy though! Great perspective.

This suit is frivolous and I’m surprised he isn’t sanctioned for it. It’s not a fair legal argument. It’s an argument that goes against the entire basis of our system and the way it’s set up. You can’t sue based on another state’s process. It’s a laughable claim and clearly just designed so that AG can try and sway trump to give him a pardon since the TX AG is likely to be arrested by the FBI soon.

Also, let’s just assume in some impossible alternate reality that this case was somehow permitted to actually be heard and TX won. Why on earth would you ever want to create that precedent? That would essentially mean every single blue state can challenge your election of a Republican. It’s really the dumbest move you could possibly make.

Yet again, Douglas1999 shows how little actual knowledge he has of our government and the way it and our judicial system work.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by douglas1999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

MI, PA, GA and NV all broke their own election laws by arbitrarily changing them at the last minute without amending their state constitutions, which is the proper procedure. There's a lawsuit from the texas AG regarding this, alleging that violating your own state election laws while the rest of the states followed theirs disenfranchises the voters of those other states. It's a fair legal argument. Just sayin!

I'm 99% sure joe biden will be the next president, and I'm 99% sure he will be terrible. Just as long as we get to stick it to that trump guy though! Great perspective.

Please tell me how throwing out all the votes in those states, disenfranchising millions, addresses anyone's actual problem. Seriously. Violation of election laws disenfranchises voters of other states-- and your response is to disenfranchise millions more? Please be clear in your reasoning. This is the same thought process the current US Supreme Court has already applied to similar Republican lawsuits and it cuts right to the meat of the issue: Republicans are seeking to further disenfranchise.

If the Supreme Court rules that one state's election behavior disenfranchises other states, that precedent would open a Pandora's Box of untold absurdities, and plausibly lead to the abolition of the electoral college if the court had any ideological consistency. It's so unreasonable and ridiculous it would likely tank the legitimacy of the Supreme Court for decades to come.

Note I don't actually expect you to rub your two brain cells together and come up with a cogent response, this post is just rhetorical.

[cd288]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If the Supreme Court rules that one state's election behavior disenfranchises other states, that precedent would open a Pandora's Box of untold absurdities, and plausibly lead to the abolition of the electoral college if the court had any ideological consistency. It's so unreasonable and ridiculous it would likely tank the legitimacy of the Supreme Court for decades to come.

Note I don't actually expect you to rub your two brain cells together and come up with a cogent response, this post is just rhetorical.

This is actually a good point about the electoral college. You’re right you would basically have to abolish it at that point and make it solely popular vote. This would be an ironic outcome for people like douglas1999 because that would essentially guarantee that the presidential election will always be won by the Democrats for the foreseeable future because you would have populous coastal blue states as well as large cities (predominantly Democrat voting of course) driving the election result and the votes of people in the south and Midwest would be virtually meaningless.

So by all means move forward with the TX lawsuit. The ultimate outcome will end up being very negative for Republicans.

[douglas1999]

Yeah, one party rule guys! Great idea! Hail hitler!

(or stalin or mao or chavez take your pick)

[douglas1999]

Sure I mean some states might have cheated, but who cares? Roll over and accept that everything is dogshit. Great attitude comrades.

Oh there was another hearing today btw curious as to people's thoughts about the content

[cd288]

Originally Posted by douglas1999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yeah, one party rule guys! Great idea! Hail hitler!

(or stalin or mao or chavez take your pick)

This is the most ironic thing since that’s literally what the extreme right of the Republican Party is trying to do lol

[douglas1999]

Yes, there are far right extreme fringe retards that do not represent in any way the right broadly. What a newsflash.

The texas lawsuit is essentially claiming that states violating their own election laws and preconditions is just mayyyyyybe a problem. This should be uncontroversial.

It should be telling that there are no legal hearings occuring (like the one that occured today) where democrats are asserting impropriety by republicans. They could, and I think they should if they witnessed any such impropriety. After all republicans did very well downticket, did those republicans cheat to win? I'd like to know. Likewise, I'd like to know if democrat poll workers and poll watchers and the procedures within key democrat swing counties and swing states steered the outcome of the election via their political biases. What sane fair-minded person would be opposed to investigating this?