If we can’t validate the election results for 20 years. Does trump remain?

[Care4all]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

Fund the post office, fund the poll/ absentee counters, clean up election rolls, make ballots scanable with tracing, and we're all set.

We sent astronauts to the moon, we spit the atom,

We certainly can handle an election, as safely as possible, during a pandemic.

Cleaning up election rolls is racist.

Some of it most certainly is...!!!

But as far as dead people...

I do not understand why the State's Vital Statistics Dept does not send notification of deaths to the voting precinct for each death certificate issued.... So they can be automatically removed from the voter roll when they die, if they are on it...

Notification of deaths are sent to Social Security when people die?

 

[Billy_Bob]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?

Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID

 

[Billy_Bob]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

"If no candidate receives a majority of electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the president from the three presidential candidates who received the most electoral votes," the National Archives explains. "Each state delegation has one vote."
What happens if no candidate wins an Electoral College ...
New link

What happens if no candidate wins an Electoral College majority?"If%20no%20candidate%20receives%20a%20majority%20of%20electoral,Archives%20explains.%20"Each%20state%20delegation%20has%20one%20vote."

I cited US title code.. Your wiki note is garbage.

 

[bravoactual]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Link?

What a sad, sick, and pathetic little man you are. You find voter suppression funny. But then again that is what Fascists do, laugh at democracy.

 

[bravoactual]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?

Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?

Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID

Except the only people who are being told to get ID are Minorities.

 

[Nostra]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Link?

What a sad, sick, and pathetic little man you are. You find voter suppression funny. But then again that is what Fascists do, laugh at democracy.

Hey Sport, you have shown zero evidence of voter suppression.

What I find funny is your delusions.

 

[BigDave]

Bloody violent Civil War will be coming whether President Trump is reelected or Senile Joe is elected by massive voter fraud. The United States will be Balkanized into 4-5 new independent nations.

 

[Nostra]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?

Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?

Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID

Except the only people who are being told to get ID are Minorities.

Link?

 

[Billy_Bob]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?

Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?

Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID

Except the only people who are being told to get ID are Minorities.

BULL SHIT....

Provide a link and then tell me how they are receiving federal funds and services without one..

 

[Care4all]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?

Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?

Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID

Except the only people who are being told to get ID are Minorities.

BULL SHIT....

Provide a link and then tell me how they are receiving federal funds and services without one..

People who have money, have cars....And already have a driver's license.... a govt pictured ID.

ONLY those without a pictured govt I'D, have to go out and get one.

 

[Care4all]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Link?

What a sad, sick, and pathetic little man you are. You find voter suppression funny. But then again that is what Fascists do, laugh at democracy.

Hey Sport, you have shown zero evidence of voter suppression.

What I find funny is your delusions.

Voter pictured gvt ids for the poor who do not drive..
Closing drivers licence places in lower income areas after pictured voter id laws passed, making it difficult for poor people to get one.
Providing fewer voting machines in poorer precincts, causing long long long lines, making people on hourly wages, to walk away.... while rich precincts have too many voting machines with no lines
Removing anyone with a similar name to a felon, from voting rolls...
Reducing early voting days.
Closing EARLY voting on Sunday, the day black churches bus their parishioners to polls to vote.
Reducing hours of early voting, closing at 5 pm, just when poor people get off work to vote.
Making absentee voting hard.
Gerrymandering.


The Republicans entire strategy is to REDUCE the votes of LEGAL CITIZENS that are poor, and likely vote democratic.

 

[kyzr]

Bloody violent Civil War will be coming whether President Trump is reelected or Senile Joe is elected by massive voter fraud. The United States will be Balkanized into 4-5 new independent nations.

Take your meds and relax. As soon as the vaccine and therapies are available people will return to normal.

 

[Nostra]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Link?

What a sad, sick, and pathetic little man you are. You find voter suppression funny. But then again that is what Fascists do, laugh at democracy.

Hey Sport, you have shown zero evidence of voter suppression.

What I find funny is your delusions.

Voter pictured gvt ids for the poor who do not drive..
Closing drivers licence places in lower income areas after pictured voter id laws passed, making it difficult for poor people to get one.
Providing fewer voting machines in poorer precincts, causing long long long lines, making people on hourly wages, to walk away.... while rich precincts have too many voting machines with no lines
Removing anyone with a similar name to a felon, from voting rolls...
Reducing early voting days.
Closing EARLY voting on Sunday, the day black churches bus their parishioners to polls to vote.
Reducing hours of early voting, closing at 5 pm, just when poor people get off work to vote.
Making absentee voting hard.
Gerrymandering.


The Republicans entire strategy is to REDUCE the votes of LEGAL CITIZENS that are poor, and likely vote democratic.

Lots of claims, zero evidence.

 

[CowboyTed]

No Nancy Pelosi will take the helm.

Why would trump step down? You don’t have the votes

Be a good lad and read the constitution... A few big words but you can handle it...

 

[CowboyTed]

The Speaker of the House (3rd in line) becomes the acting President. President Pelosi. Scares me.

Why?

She is an adult who understands the constitution... Look at Mitch, he puts party before country continuously...

 

[Jitss617]

No Nancy Pelosi will take the helm.

Why would trump step down? You don’t have the votes

Be a good lad and read the constitution... A few big words but you can handle it...

Yes it requires a valid election.. hehe

 

[Billy_Bob]

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?

Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID

It will depend on how the rest of the election goes.

I believe the President Pro Tempore would take the office, and that would currently be Grassley. BUT, if the Congressional elections count and go Democrat, then the President Pro Tempore would be a Democrat, I reckon.

In either case, the President would be neither Trump nor Biden.

Hmm....

I think the House of representatives picks our President, if no winner.... but here's the kicker, I think there is only 1 vote per state.... So I do not know how that works? Do state representatives get together and vote on who gets chosen for their state, then submit that person as the vote from their state?

Incorrect; The electoral College is the only AUTHORIZED body to do this under the US Constitution. There are date certian time lines under Title 1 US Code that codify these. They miss the deadline they lose their electors. Enjoy your mail in ballot mess because it is going to be an unmitigated disaster.

If the electoral college does not meet the timeline, then Congress chooses, is my understanding.

And this is why everyone thought what the SC did in Bush v Gore was unconstitutional. The SC should have let the constitutional process, work through.

What's the likelihood that all fifty states would certify no vote count at all, AND that all fifty of those state legislatures would decline to choose the slate of electors themselves? The House of Representatives decides in the case of no clear majority winner.

And everyone thought what the Supreme Court did in 2000 was "Unconstitutional" primarily because the "everyone" in question consisted of a bunch of morons who hadn't a clue what was actually happening. As I explained at the time, the Florida Supreme Court intervened where it had no business and contradicted the written law of the state. All the US Supreme Court did was hear an appeal of the Florida court's decision and rule - quite correctly - that the lower court had violated the law.

It was the Florida Supreme Court that should have let the process as written in the law of its own state work through.

Not likely that all states would not have a count.... but even a couple of big states not having electors by the electoral college voting day, could cause there to not have 1 candidate who has reached the required 270 EC votes to win.

If states have written in to their election laws a measure for the legislature to just pick them, if out of time, then it seems they could simply select a slate to send.... And depending on the State who has to do that, it could hurt the Dems!!!

But, I'm not certain what states may have that as a provision in their election laws?

Florida in 2000 comes to mind.... You would think if they had this provision of the legislature picking the slate of electors, the republicans for Bush should not have needed to sue, to stop the count, so electors could be decided in time????

The only states pushing for this last minute change to massive mail in ballots are Dimwinger states, so who do you think will get hurt when they can't count the votes like in the NY primary?

The only people actively suppressing the vote of RePuBliKlans.

Tell me moron, can you get your welfare without an ID?, Can you get your food stamps without an ID? Can you get money out of the bank without an ID? Can you get Booze without an ID? Can you get Cigarettes without an ID?

Establishing who you are to vote is far more important than any of those actions... There is no reason NOT TO HAVE AN ID

Except the only people who are being told to get ID are Minorities.

BULL SHIT....

Provide a link and then tell me how they are receiving federal funds and services without one..

People who have money, have cars....And already have a driver's license.... a govt pictured ID.

ONLY those without a pictured govt I'D, have to go out and get one.

And if your indigent EVERY STATE gives you an ID for nothing... Now tell me again how these people recieve federal funds when EVERY APPLICATION REQUIRES ID? How do they cash their welfare checks?

 

[CowboyTed]

No Nancy Pelosi will take the helm.

Why would trump step down? You don’t have the votes

Be a good lad and read the constitution... A few big words but you can handle it...

Yes it requires a valid election.. hehe

Well you will love this:

In cases where there is no president-elect or vice president-elect, the amendment also gives the Congress the authority to declare an acting president until such time as there is a president or vice president. At this point the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 would apply, with the office of the Presidency going to the speaker of the House of Representatives, followed by the president pro tempore of the Senate and various Cabinet officers.

So Nancy Pelosi then...

 

[Daryl Hunt]

No Nancy Pelosi will take the helm.

Why would trump step down? You don’t have the votes

Be a good lad and read the constitution... A few big words but you can handle it...

Yes it requires a valid election.. hehe

Well you will love this:

In cases where there is no president-elect or vice president-elect, the amendment also gives the Congress the authority to declare an acting president until such time as there is a president or vice president. At this point the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 would apply, with the office of the Presidency going to the speaker of the House of Representatives, followed by the president pro tempore of the Senate and various Cabinet officers.

So Nancy Pelosi then...

Pelosi is up for reelection as well but She's a shoe-in. The Decision to whom the next in line would be would be made on Jan 21 at 12:01pm. Pelosi would be sworn back in on Jan 2nd so she would be eligible too fill that Prresidents Post until it can be cleared up or a new special election could be done if BOTH Candidates are unavailable.

 

[Cecilie1200]

No Nancy Pelosi will take the helm.

Why would trump step down? You don’t have the votes

Be a good lad and read the constitution... A few big words but you can handle it...

Yes it requires a valid election.. hehe

Um, I'm sorry, WHAT takes a valid election? For the President to step down. Why don't you cite us the specific part of the Constitution which says the President gets to stay in office indefinitely until - and only until - there's an election? "he he"