@digital-wisdom is quite right to acknowledge that this election is far from over and the GOP has Constitutional options available to it that would re-elect Trump.
The Democrats should have thought about this before engaging in fraud and illegal behaviour and then having their mates in the MSM anoint Biden as "President-Elect" when the results are far from certain and we are 8 weeks from anyone having the right to use that term.
They should also stop being so vindictive in "victory". Threatening that anyone who has supported Trump won't ever work again and saying to major US allies that "you picked the wrong side" is not going to calm things down.
Every democracy understands that mail-in votes are problematic from a fraud perspective. For a small percentage of special circumstance votes they may be OK, but not when its a large percentage of the total vote. Israel doesn't allow them at all and Australia only allows them in quite limited circumstances.
The State Legislatures have not only the Constitutional right, but the obligation, to make their own decision on the true will of the people when the vote count is either undecided or irrevocably tainted by fraud or illegality.
There is nothing wrong with them doing this. They were elected by the people of their State (in untainted elections) and thus their decision IS the will of the people of their State.
The Constitution, not custom, governs what is right and wrong in this situation. The Supreme Court has been very clear in old and recent decisions that they have every right to do this. Read the 2020 Supreme Court decision Chiafalo (about faithless electors in 2016) for the law and history of this issue.
There is plenty of historical precedent for this and it almost happened in 2000.
There will be no civil war because empty vehicles and mail-in ballots don't fight wars - people do. Trump has demonstrated his ability to draw crowds of hundreds of thousands of people to his rallies all around the country while Biden struggled to get a couple of hundred.
If you read the history of US elections you'll see that the USA has survived through much more hairy situations than today by staying faithful to the Constitution.
https://peakd.com/trump/@digital-wisdom/will-a-50-state-united-states-exist-in-2022
I find it particularly telling when people I talk to, who insist that this should be done, refuse to say whether they believe that the current results are incorrect -- particularly for the number of states required (three) to reverse the results of the election. They insist that there was fraud -- but they won't commit to whether that fraud made any difference even if it were true. While I can agree with people holding different political views, I find this utter lack of integrity and total disrespect for democracy disgusting and sickening.
Mmmm, Cherry-picking one random Washington Post correspondent and one random "Democratic strategist and public affairs consultant" and making it appear as if they are anything relevant is ridiculous. There are idiots on both sides -- but, quite honestly, we've seen far more such games from one side than the other including their leader (not some random nobodies that you have to quote because you can't find anyone else).
As for no one having the right to use the term "president-elect", have you noticed that Trump has been claiming victory since early morning of the day after the election? Your argument has as much integrity as the Republican Senate games in appointing Supreme Court justices.
You are also seriously in the minority in believing that fraud made any difference. Biden won despite voter suppression including ballots not counted because the USPS was deliberately sabotaged. I understand that you are very unhappy -- as were Democrats in 2016. However, they conceded to the understood rules/social norms rather than baselessly claiming that the vote was fraudulent or illegal. There is no evidence that has been accepted by any court -- including those with Republican judges -- that anything untoward has been done by the Democrats. Trump has acknowledged many actions that are untoward and many more are obvious to the most casual observer (the USPS for example).
If the state legislatures do opt to ignore the will of the voters because they are so desperate that they have convinced themselves that there was fraud, I hope that they realize what will most likely happen next. All the evidence is that there was not fraud/illegality and that this action is therefore a coup. Do you really expect the blue states to accept that and the US remain intact? I don't see that at all.
I'm a firm believer in the democratic process and following both the spirit and the letter of the law even if I believe that they are horribly outdated. Such an action by MULTIPLE state legislatures when no courts have ruled that there are irregularities is a major violation of both the spirit of existing laws, understood social norms and, most importantly, precedent which underlies all law. The founding fathers are currently spinning in their graves.
If you're going to engage him in debate, why downvote his post?
that says everything we need to know about his character
and how much time we should spend taking him seriously
felipejoys, I'll ask you the same question.
Do you believe that voter fraud flipped the results of at least three states (which is required for Trump to win)?
not meant for you specifically since I hadn't read your reply earlier, but certainly answers your question https://peakd.com/hive-174578/@felipejoys/trump-only-wants-you-to-be-happy
maybe you'd be interested in the above too @apshamilton
@digital-wisdom is a good guy.
He is one of the very few Biden supporters even willing to acknowledge that this isn't over and that there is some fraud.
I'm sure he will reconsider his downvote.
He is entitled to downvote for any reason just like the State Legislatures are entitled to directly appoint their State's Electoral College Electors for any reason.
He argues that modern custom should prevent State Legislatures doing this, so its a bit inconsistent for him to ignore Hive custom that downvotes are for stopping abuse of the reward pool or really bad behaviour, not just because you disagree with someone.
yes, I understand that he can be rude if he wants to be rude
I want to say I'm surprised
Good question. I have reversed the downvote which was not for his views but, as I explained to him, for the rhetorical tactics of cherry-picking comments from random people as if they represented a general view. I also have problems with claiming that there is voter fraud (as opposed to alleged) where thus far, even Republican judges have disagreed in all settled cases. I also disagree with not recognizing the blatant voter suppression that manipulating the USPS caused and which changing the rules in Pennsylvania AFTER THE FACT causes. Further, screaming that Biden and his mates in the MSM, despite the fact that the AP call has always been the gold standard in the past is inappropriate when Trump was do EXACTLY the same thing for himself MUCH earlier (i.e. early in the morning after the election).
I believe that people have a right to their political beliefs. I believe that those beliefs should be respected. I do not believe that they have a right to make a mockery of democracy via rhetorical games much less deliberate machinations to overturn the legitimate results of democracy. In particular, I have specifically asked @apshamilton whether he believes that the voter fraud made a difference in the result in Pennsylvania. He declined to respond. I asked him if he believed that it was really even a possibility that voter fraud made a difference in any three states that would flip the election. He declined to respond. I can only assume that he believes that it wouldn't have made enough of a difference to flip the election. Making the statements that he has made while holding those beliefs is disgusting and sickening in their total lack of integrity.
I did not down-vote him for his views. I down-voted him for rhetorics. I reversed the downvote despite this simply because of perceptions and I don't want to hamper political debate. I've seriously considered reinstating it after our conversations where his lack of integrity became clear -- but decided that it would only give irrational haters more ammunition.
It's also worth noting that my policy of down-voting rhetorical games and lack of integrity is not new -- though this is the first time it's been on an overtly political post that isn't blatantly based on bad SCIENCE and STATISTICS (though, of course, the claims of voter fraud mattering ARE statistical).
The State Legislatures won't take action until there are Court rulings calling vote totals into question.
Those rulings will come.
I suggest you read Justice Alito's orders in the Pennsylvania case.
This case is yet to be decided on the merits, but it is likely that the US Supreme Court will rule that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had no authority to water down the Pennsylvania Legislatures rules for mail in voting for Presidential elections.
If they do, then the entire vote in Pennsylvania will be tainted because it is impossible to find those ballots which had defective outer envelopes (missing matching signatures or valid postmarks).
I believe that the Supreme may well decline to hear the case AGAIN. I believe that the Republican-led state legislatures in states that were called for Biden will use that as an excuse to claim that they have no proper recourse except to replace Biden electors with Trump electors. This will "legally" and "constitutionally" give the victory to Trump. All it requires is the total lack of integrity that has already been demonstrated by the Senate with "the McConnell rule" and not even calling witnesses in an impeachment trial that their majority could easily prevent from convicting.
More details at https://peakd.com/trump/@digital-wisdom/will-a-50-state-united-states-exist-in-2022
You are misunderstanding the first ruling.
The Supreme Court did not decline to hear the case.
They split 4-4 on whether to issue an urgent interim injunction to over-ride the PEN SC's decision before a full hearing on the merits.
They likely felt that it probably wouldn't matter because the election would be decided on other states.
Courts often decline to give urgent injunctions - it says little about the merits of the case as merits is not the main determinant - balance of convenience is.
What is the basis for this statement?
The MSM and Big Tech may try to censor all evidence of fraud but that doesn't mean that people are just going along with the the Democrat line.
Gore didn't concede in 2000 until Dec 14.
Claiming victory and appropriating the term "President-Elect" are very different things.
For all the years that the Founding Fathers lived, there was no popular vote for President at all.
State Legislatures directly selected the Electoral College Electors until 1836 in all States and this has continued in limited instances into the 20th century and almost happened in 2000. In this century some States (eg North Carolina) directly legislated to mandate it in certain circumstances.
Popular elections with the Presidential candidate on the ballot didn't become the norm until well into the 20th century.
The Founding Fathers sleep soundly when The Constitution is upheld according to its plain terms.
Just out of curiosity, if you were part of Trump's legal counsel, what would you be telling him?
How would this differ if you were counsel for the GOP (if they even can be represented in this)?
I'd be advising to challenge every issue and also to challenge the validity of no reason mail-in voting under State Constitutions. On my reading the Pennsylvania Constitution does not allow it.
Challenges that call the validity of entire vote into questions like the exclusion of observers, mail-in ballot defects and the Penn case above should be the focus.
The State Legislatures won't take action until there are Court rulings calling vote totals into question.
Those rulings will come.
GOP's interest is same as Trump here. As Senator Lindsay Graham said, if widespread mail-in votes and the fraud associated with it is not stopped here, it will make it much more difficult for the GOP to win elections in future.
A blockchain based system with lifetime voter verification via public/private key encryption but using z-snark or similar privacy protocols is part of the solution.
Its really a joke that so many States are using voting software that has been compromised for years and antiquated mail-in vote systems.
Even if the Pennsylvania Constitution "does not allow it" -- the state government did. Changing the rules after the fact to disenfranchise voters is a mockery of democracy performed solely to let "your guy" win. Are you seriously advocating that this is a good idea and/or good for democracy?
Project Veritas has done a brilliant job covering the issue. Some whistleblowers were brave enough to come froward without anonymity. Bless those souls for what they are doing.
https://peakd.com/hive-177682/@vimukthi/project-veritas-and-james-o-keefe-release-whistleblower-material-on-election-fraud
That's funny. The bottom link claims that a single individual, following the urgeings of a President who (baselessly given the past) claimed that absentee balots were the source of major fraud, performed an action that, given the results, most likely HARMED the DEMOCRATS -- and uses it as evidence that there was wide-spread voter fraud AGAINST the REPUBLICANS. Amazing.
I don't really care who got hurt because of the election fraud. I'm not a citizen of USA and I don't consider either of the candidates to have good enough policies to run a country. The important point here is that election fraud happened and it must be investigated and culprits need to be brought to court.