Democrats are bringing a knife to a gun fight - Trump WILL steal the election

I think tens of millions of voters voted early for Biden, and as the weeks wore on they realized they made the wrong vote.

This is anecdotal, but everyone I have met who voted for Biden was completely ignorant about politics. They complained that they didn't like Trump's personality, and all the false news articles and lying campaign ads against Trump managed to work their way into their heads. They could recite a few headlines, and repeat campaign ad lies, and felt that made them an informed voter. Meanwhile, they'd vote for Ron Kind and not even know the name of the person running against him. For the ignorant, uninformed voters, hate for Trump and total ignorance won the day for them on Nov 3rd.

 

Yup, this is how the news media makes sure to keep the proper context out of news stories, so they can spin it with their own personal misleading opinions, substituting for facts, and create an uninformed electorate.

 

If we cannot push back and investigate whether partisan Democrats removed all Republican observerss from the voting places, and then continue behind closed doors to count 500,000 ballots throughout the night, then what chance will we ever have for a fair and honest election process.

 

There's been many a politician of both parties I didn't "care" for, but the visceral, irrational, PERSONAL hatred for Trump I've seen on display here and the nation at large is totally beyond my comprehension. Have we truly devolved that far as a people? If so our fall may be sooner than we dare dream.

 

How could the Democrats do that as the states being most contested now Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Missouri ALL have Republicans controlling the state legislatures?

 

The public hate for Trump has been a creation of media, the same as love for Obama was created by the same media. Post-administration analysis of Obama's actual performance was not nearly as "glowing" within DNC circles, but media constantly praised Obama during his presidency to maintain public perception.

The next Republican to run in 2024, will somehow be "worse than Donald Trump", and Trump will get some whispered post-analysis credit for his many accomplishments after he is gone.

The right figured out "the game" well before Trump came onto the scene. Propaganda and indoctrination tactics can be very effective on a public which is much more naive and under-informed than we used to be when media actually had mostly objective journalists and political activists posing as "news anchors" were fairly rare. Media monopolies are likely to cause our downfall.

 

Read and learn:
https://www.abajournal.com/news/art...critical-date-in-nightmare-election-scenarios
This is the American Bar Association. They know a thing or two about laws.
But I guess you'll believe more in Fox News:
https://www.fox6now.com/news/safe-harbor-deadline-heres-why-dec-8-matters-in-the-2020-election
By the way, there is precedent. Look up the 1876 election.

 

Just so we're clear - you did not post the state laws that state what you believe they allow.
If the state election laws do not allow the state legislatures to do as you suggest, they cannot do as you suggest.
That's why I asked for the links.

 

Trump fans, tell me this: If the states are certified for Biden, and the electors are slated to vote on Dec. 14th, do you REALLY think that Trump will just leave quietly and say goodbye? You know Trump.

 

Or his own words in tweets and videos. Yes, media isn't kind to Trump, but to put the blame solely on the media is just incorrect.

 

Yes, he'll leave office. I think he wants to start an on-line streaming news company, so he is not going away.

 

Oh, you think you have never misunderstood anything here? Well... OK. I'll just file that under "examples of self-serving self-assessments." OK. Moving on.

Again, these lawsuits don't target enough votes to change the results. Absolutely, if Trump doesn't win any of them (they are being systematically tossed) he can STILL pressure the state legislatures to select an alternative slate of EC electors. Can he do this directly? Who cares? The threat is clear, though: anybody who opposes him will face his ire and will have trouble winning the next primaries they have, in order to secure their own reelection. THAT'S what they fear; not a verdict from a judge.

Again, the lawsuits are window dressing. Their ONLY goal is to sow doubt, not to actually reverse anything. How will they reverse an advantage of 60,067 votes by questioning 10,000 votes?

Doubt is the JUSTIFICATION for the state legislatures to save face. The REAL determining factor will be Trump's threats towards the State senators and representatives.

 

Oh, come on. The exact same can be said of ignorant Trump voters who believed in the thousands of lies he's been telling since day one.

 

Explore at will:
https://www.fairvote.org/faithless_elector_state_laws
See that Wisconsin, for example, has no penalty, vote counts as cast
Pennsylvania doesn't even have a law addressing it.
And the above pertains to individual unfaithful electors.
If a state legislature picks an alternative slate of electors, these are not defined as faithful electors, and it is constitutional. Congress then must rule on what slate to consider, if any.
That's federal law, so your idea that state law would have to address it, is false.

The disputed election of 1876 between Rutherford B. Hayes and Democrat Samuel Tilden, in which multiple states in the South cast competing sets of electoral votes, led Congress to pass the Electoral Count Act of 1887 — encompassing the “safe harbor” provision so states could resolve their own disputes without Congress having to get involved.

If the deadline comes and goes and state officials submit conflicting electoral votes, Congress must agree on which to accept, according to the Congressional Research Service. If the U.S. Senate and House don’t agree, the votes certified by the state’s governor win.

Now, what people don't understand is that the House in this, operates by delegations, not by majority of representatives (according to the Constitution). So, in this scenario, Republicans would prevail in the House too, where they have more delegations than Democrats. It's one vote per delegation.

So, the US House delegations could perfectly, and constitutionally, unite with the US Senate and with state legislatures, to count votes for Trump that do not match the popular vote in that state.

 

So it's a conspiracy theory. Figures.

 

Trump has a reputation as being a great human being by people who respect him and his long-term friends. He is a butthead to his enemies. The media and Democrat leaders knew that and certainly used his Achilles heel against him every single day to "Cancel" him.

Had media offered him, not even the glowingly biased praise they showered on Obama, but just simple respect and more fair reporting, things would have been very different.

Elite media moguls are the instigators and fomenters of the deep divisions in this country. They nudge the public further left than the majority of the country is comfortable with in any given year. They can turn a failure into a king, and turn a decent human into Satan incarnate. It's indoctrination of the unwary. It's profitable, and they have an agenda.

 

And does not speak at all to the point under discussion.

Fact remains:
If the state election laws do not allow the state legislatures to, absent a certified election result, chose their own slate of electors, they cannot legally do so.
That's why I asked for the links.

 

Did I say that? You're often such a terrific source of amusement. Thanks! LOL

 

You're right that the lawsuits are not about fraud. Anyone that has actually read them or listened about them from someone who has read them knows that the lawsuits are using what happened in Bush v Gore election/lawsuit. All that Trumps lawyers have to do is prove that ballots were not treated the same from one county to the next.

 

What links? Most states don't even have laws regulating this. They do for unfaithful electors, but not for what happens if they can't certify by the deadline. Federal law then applies, saying that the state legislatures must appoint a slate of electors. That's precisely what the federal law I quoted, the Electoral Count Act of 1887, says. Look it up. As you may know, where there is a vacuum in State law, Federal Law applies.

 

It’s a tactic to kneecap debate and shut out ideas which do not conform with the ‘mainstream’.

For example, I believe that multi-culturalism along with identity politics will inevitably lead to a fractured society which will eventually have a new hierarchy. People automatically think it’s what I want rather than what I think will happen. So I get called a racist.

 

Still doesn't change what we could all see with our own eyes regarding his many tweets.

 

Last week, I would have fully agreed with your assessment. Now, I am not so sure anymore.

 

As much as he's throwing a temper tantrum right now deep down he knows he's lost and ultimately will leave office. He really has no choice, which he knows.

 

Yes, you did. Quoting you (a direct copy and paste of one of your posts, above, the very one I quoted):
"So, yes, I am paying close attention to the details and have not misunderstood anything, "again" or at any other time."
Pray tell, what is the difference between saying that you've not misunderstood anything at any time, and saying that you've never misunderstood anything here? LOL
I'm sorry that you seem to ignore even what YOU have said, yourself.
I'm happy that I provide entertainment to you. Likewise. I'm grabbing some popcorn, to watch you twist yourself into a semantic pretzel to try to get yourself out of the above. It won't work, though, but I'm sure you'll try.