2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I see your reasoning and that was informative. But that's why I said "if pigs flew". What would you do if the impossible happen and he was inaugurated for part 2? I know you don't live in the USA so if you just continued to shitpost here I feel ya.
Fair point. I would keep making fun of MAGA loyalists for being a bunch of cucks who didn't get a wall (it's a fence and it's 'guarded' by cartel gunmen from Mexico), didn't get jobs coming back to America (trying to move jobs from China to India isn't bringing jobs back), didn't get shit.
 
Is Trump back in play or still done with?
I can't tell if people like you are coming in to troll with "lol is durmpf finished yet or what" since we've gotten so many today, but no he's not. Texas and 18 other states have made a huge lawsuit against the 4 main states accused of fraud and are sending it to SCOTUS.
 
I honestly don't think this is about Trump anymore. If anything I get the very distinct impression the Attorneys General of these states would rather Trump and his "Team" go sit in the corner for the time being. There is a deeper game afoot here, and this one has deep roots in American History. Trump was simply the bull in the china shop that ripped off the band aid. For over a century there has been a steady erosion of State power in favor of ever more massive, ever more overbearing national government. One whose roots lie in the Civil War, but only truly began to flower in the last 50 years of the post world war 2 era. This lawsuit by Texas and its growing coalition is essentially the shot across the bow.

This "lawsuit" (its not a lawsuit) is essentially a declaration that in the mind of these States, other States of the Union have decided the Constitution that binds the country together no longer applies. However, since THEY think it still does, they are asserting their rights. And they are demanding their rights as Sovereigns to have their grievance heard by the Court. Capital "C" Court. An overlooked part of the Texas petition is that they not only argue the Supreme Court is the proper venue, they argue that the Supreme Court MUST hear their grievance. That is has no choice in the matter. If the Supreme Court rejects this notion, it is making a precedent in its simple silence. In that the States cannot hold sovereign grievances of political nature with other States.

More perversely, it would acknowledge that if a State holds a Political grievance with another, then it has no peaceful or legal remedy to address that grievance. Which leaves non peaceful and illegal methods as the only available recourse to address the grievance. An old wound is getting ripped open here, and I am sure @ConfederateIrishman will give me another late sticker as if I am just now realizing shit like this, but this has been a clash a very long time coming. Trump was merely an accelerating agent.
 
Last edited:
I honestly don't think this is about Trump anymore. If anything I get the very distinct impression the Attorneys General of these states would rather Trump and his "Team" go sit in the corner for the time being. There is a deeper game afoot here, and this one has deep roots in American History. Trump was simply the bull in the china shop that ripped off the band aid. For over a century there has been a steady erosion of State power in favor of ever more massive, ever more overbearing national government. One whose roots lie in the Civil War, but only truly began to flower in the last 50 years of the post world war 2 era. This lawsuit by Texas and its growing coalition is essentially the shot across the bow.

This "lawsuit" (its not a lawsuit) is essentially a declaration that in the mind of these States, other States of the Union have decided the Constitution that binds the country together no longer applies. However, since THEY think it still does, they are asserting their rights. And they are demanding their rights as Sovereigns to have their grievance heard by the Court. Capital "C" Court. An overlooked part of the Texas petition is that they not only argue the Supreme Court is the proper venue, they argue that the Supreme Court MUST hear their grievance. That is has no choice in the matter. If the Supreme Court rejects this notion, it is making a precedent in its simple silence. In that the States cannot hold sovereign grievances of political nature with other States.

More perversely, it would acknowledge that if a State holds a Political grievance with another, then it has no peaceful or legal remedy to address that grievance. Which leaves non peaceful and illegal methods as the only available recourse to address the grievance. An old wound is getting ripped open here, and I am sure @ConfederateIrishman will give me another late sticker as if I am just now realizing shit like this, but this has been a clash a very long time coming. Trump was merely an accelerating agent.
So all the bullshit that Woodrow Wilson and FDR pulled, there is a chance that it might get all rolled back.
 
Damn, the Texas lawsuit has really got Redditors and leftists worried.

View attachment 1778382
So much tard cum in there, but the cream of it all has to be the “STATES CAN’T BE SUED” one.

Yes, by citizens and foreign powers. But the federal government? Other states? HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, MORON.
It’s really shocking how uneducated they are. Can’t even read the text under their nose, or do a quick google search.
 
I honestly don't think this is about Trump anymore. If anything I get the very distinct impression the Attorneys General of these states would rather Trump and his "Team" go sit in the corner for the time being. There is a deeper game afoot here, and this one has deep roots in American History. Trump was simply the bull in the china shop that ripped off the band aid. For over a century there has been a steady erosion of State power in favor of ever more massive, ever more overbearing national government. One whose roots lie in the Civil War, but only truly began to flower in the last 50 years of the post world war 2 era. This lawsuit by Texas and its growing coalition is essentially the shot across the bow.

This "lawsuit" (its not a lawsuit) is essentially a declaration that in the mind of these States, other States of the Union have decided the Constitution that binds the country together no longer applies. However, since THEY think it still does, they are asserting their rights. And they are demanding their rights as Sovereigns to have their grievance heard by the Court. Capital "C" Court. An overlooked part of the Texas petition is that they not only argue the Supreme Court is the proper venue, they argue that the Supreme Court MUST hear their grievance. That is has no choice in the matter. If the Supreme Court rejects this notion, it is making a precedent in its simple silence. In that the States cannot hold sovereign grievances of political nature with other States.

More perversely, it would acknowledge that if a State holds a Political grievance with another, then it has no peaceful or legal remedy to address that grievance. Which leaves non peaceful and illegal methods as the only available recourse to address the grievance. An old wound is getting ripped open here, and I am sure @ConfederateIrishman will give me another late sticker as if I am just now realizing shit like this, but this has been a clash a very long time coming. Trump was merely an accelerating agent.
I think Trump and his team would have ultimately failed with the way their lawsuits were going, even with the evidence they had. Texas and the other states pulling this out was a Hail Mary for everyone. But who knows, maybe Trump did have something to do with the Texas lawsuit, especially since he's trying to be directly involved with it now.
 
By 10 AM tomorrow, Georgia will be added to the list of states suing the state of Georgia.

Yes, Georgia on both sides.

this is HUGE since it BTFO of the argument that the court can't decide against the
>will of the people

When these Georgia senators joining the suit actually representing the
>will of the people

This could also lead to the other senators in
Pennsylvania
Michigan
Wisconsin

joining.

THIS IS THE BEST ELECTION EVER BAR NONE.

Georgia suing Georgia.png
 
Hey remember when Biden was supposed to win and everything was supposed to calm down and we would all go back to "normal", and the evil Trump supporters were supposed to shut up and die?
By 10 AM tomorrow, Georgia will be added to the list of states suing the state of Georgia.

Yes, Georgia on both sides.

this is HUGE since it BTFO of the argument that the court can't decide against the
>will of the people

When these Georgia senators joining the suit actually representing the
>will of the people

This could also lead to the other senators in
Pennsylvania
Michigan
Wisconsin

joining.

THIS IS THE BEST ELECTION EVER BAR NONE.

View attachment 1778424
Funny how that works out.
 
I think Trump and his team would have ultimately failed with the way their lawsuits were going, even with the evidence they had. Texas and the other states pulling this out was a Hail Mary for everyone. But who knows, maybe Trump did have something to do with the Texas lawsuit, especially since he's trying to be directly involved with it now.

Having watched the Trump lawsuits, I can confidently say he has absolutely fuck all to do with what Texas just did. There has always been a tension between Washington DC and Texas. Texas is after all the "Second" most powerful state in the Union after California, and unlike California it has always chafed under the federal system. A legacy of its history as first an independent country, and then as a constituent member of the CSA in the Civil War. Its not even a blind spot for the establishment authorities, who have sunk massive amounts of resources in trying to pacify Texas. They may have even succeeded, given another 50 years.

But the clock has run out on their efforts. The die has been thrown now, ahead of schedule, and honestly, even I don't know where it will land. There are too many variables. But I can say with confidence if the Supreme Court refuses to even address the issue the odds are good this won't end well. Biden will assume the Presidency under a cloud, and Texas has, as of tonight, 17 allied Union States to oppose anything and everything he and Kamala will demand to implement.
 
Having watched the Trump lawsuits, I can confidently say he has absolutely fuck all to do with what Texas just did. There has always been a tension between Washington DC and Texas. Texas is after all the "Second" most powerful state in the Union after California, and unlike California it has always chafed under the federal system. A legacy of its history as first an independent country, and then as a constituent member of the CSA in the Civil War. Its not even a blind spot for the establishment authorities, who have sunk massive amounts of resources in trying to pacify Texas. They may have even succeeded, given another 50 years.

But the clock has run out on their efforts. The die has been thrown now, ahead of schedule, and honestly, even I don't know where it will land. There are too many variables. But I can say with confidence if the Supreme Court refuses to even address the issue the odds are good this won't end well. Biden will assume the Presidency under a cloud, and Texas has, as of tonight, 17 allied Union States to oppose anything and everything he and Kamala will demand to implement.
Texas apparently voted for Trump by higher raw count than California also whereas in 2016 California was higher. For all talk of a "BLUE TEXAS MEME" it has gotten even redder.

California GOP is more aggressive but Texas has the long time build up anger.
 
So much tard cum in there, but the cream of it all has to be the “STATES CAN’T BE SUED” one.

Yes, by citizens and foreign powers. But the federal government? Other states? HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, MORON.
It’s really shocking how uneducated they are. Can’t even read the text under their nose, or do a quick google search.
I've seen the argument that "Texas can't tell other states what to do" and the slightly more bizarre argument "The Texas guy is under FBI investigation and is just angling for a pardon."

I stopped listening to them a long time ago.

Edit: Found where that weird nugget came from.

 
All the screeching about the Texas case ignores a key point. The thrust of the argument is the State Legislatures of the defendant States did not approve of the way in which the electors were selected. All the Supreme Court has to do is shrug and order the State Legislatures to look at the matter and direct their electors accordingly. This would pretty much gut the entire argument of Texas and its cohorts, should the 4 defendants state legislatures sit in session and confirm the results of their votes.

What is telling is how pants shittingly desperate the political and media establishment is for this very thing to NOT happen. If the defendant legislatures are called into session, the very first thing they will do is ask questions as to why the fuck they had to be recalled from recess to address this shit. I can only conclude there are forces that really, REALLY don't want that question answered. Because under any other circumstance, if a Legislature was hauled back to go through some bullshit procedural motion, they would just spend 30 minutes on a vote to confirm the result of the popular vote in their state and call it a day.
While I doubt it was his intent for it to be for the Texas suit, Trump made damn sure they can -never- allow this to go to legislatures. He made the case to each of the state legislatures that the election was fraudulent and they -bit-.

In PA and MI, they had to ramrod through certification and stall out as long as possible to prevent them from inquiring, WI wasn't given as much ammo, but was making grumbling noises towards it and the shadiness of the Milwaukee audit only made those grumbles louder. Arizona has all but said they will given half a chance, and even the Georgia Legislature, as hamstrung as it was by the Executive branch and their leadership, was loud and vocal.

Every single in play state save Nevada made a lot of angry noises about this, and so a vote on it wouldn't be to confirm the public vote. It'd at best be to abstain from voting entirely and shove it all to a contingent election.

That is why they are desperate. If by some miracle the SC sides with Trump here, things happen.
 
270 period, or contingent election. Jackson had the majority in 1824, and we all know the end to that story.
As written in the twelfth amendment, it must be an absolute majority of the electoral college, not a simple majority, otherwise it goes to a contingent election. There is historical precedence for this in 1824, where 131 electoral votes were needed to win, yet a contingent election was required because while Andrew Jackson had the most electoral votes out of the candidates, he only had 99.
A State does have the power to not send its Electors. Its never happened, but it could happen. The rule is in order to become President. the candidate must have a majority of the Electoral college. If they fail to achieve this, for ANY reason, the election is mooted, and the State Delegations in the House of Representatives will vote on Contingency. One State. One Vote. The Contingent Election must occur before the end of the existing Presidents term and is constitutionally mandated, which means it cannot be postponed or refused to be brought to the vote. Majority rules in Contingency, and the candidate who wins the most States wins.

The last Contingent Election was the Presidential Election of 1824.
Thanks, but that's not what I was asking. Sorry that I wasn't clear enough. If Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia don't/can't send any electors at all, so that only 476 electors get appointed instead of 538, does Biden still need 270 votes to win? Or just a majority of the 476? Because he still beats Trump 244-232 without the four sued states.
I remember this got brought up somewhere in these threads, but I don't remember what the answer was, or even if anyone knew for sure.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Aaa0aaa0
Thanks, but that's not what I was asking. Sorry that I wasn't clear enough. If Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia don't/can't send any electors at all, so that only 476 electors get appointed instead of 538, does Biden still need 270 votes to win? Or just a majority of the 476? Because he still beats Trump 244-232 without the four sued states.
I remember this got brought up somewhere in these threads, but I don't remember what the answer was, or even if anyone knew for sure.
The old white fart needs 270 to win. Without 270 by the time the electoral college meets for either candidate, it will go the the house where each state gets a vote.
 
Thanks, but that's not what I was asking. Sorry that I wasn't clear enough. If Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia don't/can't send any electors at all, so that only 476 electors get appointed instead of 538, does Biden still need 270 votes to win? Or just a majority of the 476? Because he still beats Trump 244-232 without the four sued states.
I remember this got brought up somewhere in these threads, but I don't remember what the answer was, or even if anyone knew for sure.

The constitution requires an asbsolute majority. The Electoral College was envisioned as a check upon the unrestrained power of the masses. As such, it exists as a body to appoint the chief executive solely upon the plenory power of the State Legislatures. However, should the States fail in their task to give a resounding victory to a candidate, then the people DO get a Say in the Constitution. Via the House of Representatives, which is the forum for the masses. In this case, the States still get a vote, but their vote is now "contingent" upon the representatives in their delegations. Who are elected directly by the people. 1 state, 1 vote. So say a State has 2 Democratic Party representatives, and 3 Republican representatives. 3 to 2, that States 1 vote goes for the Republican candidate. The majority of DELEGATIONS win.

This is why the Democrats don't want a contingent election. They may hold a majority of Representatives in the house, but they don't hold a majority of the delegations. If there is a party line vote in a contingent election, Trump wins.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back