PA may still go to Trump if the USSC decides the PA Supreme Court unconstitutionally "made law"

[mamooth]

1. Provisional ballots are in every county, not just Phila & Pittsburgh, so Trump should gain votes

But the majority are from Philly and Pittsburgh. Hence, Biden gains.

2. The PASC cannot make law, contrary to democrat beliefs.

So what law did they make, and how did it violate the US constitution? Be specific.

And contrary to conservative belief, it is the specific responsibility of the courts to clarify law when two laws conflict.

 

[danielpalos]

only in your wet dreams...

You are the one who are dreaming you think that the Conservatives should remain quiet and accept the hold up without flinching?

Or, they could come up with another right wing Hoax.

 

[Obiwan]

1. Provisional ballots are in every county, not just Phila & Pittsburgh, so Trump should gain votes

But the majority are from Philly and Pittsburgh. Hence, Biden gains.

2. The PASC cannot make law, contrary to democrat beliefs.

So what law did they make, and how did it violate the US constitution? Be specific.

And contrary to conservative belief, it is the specific responsibility of the courts to clarify law when two laws conflict.

And the SCOTUS can overule the PASC....

 

[danielpalos]

The 2020 Presidential election may hinge on a USSC decision to enforce PA election law as prescribed by the PA legislature, and not the PA Supreme Court.

Supreme Court allows extended mail-in ballot deadline in Pennsylvania

If the vote totals on Nov. 3 in Pennsylvania are close enough that ballots received after Election Day could impact the state’s results, legal challenges over the ballots could prolong final election results.

www.thedp.com

An opinion accompanying the Supreme Court’s order by Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, suggested that the court may still revisit the case after the election and toss out contested mail-in ballots. Although the Supreme Court declined to rule on the matter before the election, Alito wrote that there was a "strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution."

The USSC decision may come down to the number of votes received after election day, if that number could affect the outcome.
Stay tuned, the PA election is not decided, and won't be for a while yet.

Trump should gain from the "provisional ballot" count, and would gain even more if the USSC disqualifies late votes.

Actually, it's possible that Trump could also pull ahead in Pennsylvania (and some other states) if he can prove to the SCOTUS that some of the Democrats' antics (which he has proof of) have made it impossible to validate the votes from some precincts in the Democrat strongholds (and is irreversible)....

If the Democrats are unable to validate the votes, none of the votes from those precincts can be counted, and all of them must be thrown out....

You mean like purposely interfering with the Postal Service or is this just another right wing Hoax.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

only in your wet dreams...

You are the one who are dreaming you think that the Conservatives should remain quiet and accept the hold up without flinching?

real conservatives already spoke...
look at the numbers, they either already voted for biden or accepted trumps historic defeat...
it is only bunch of brain dead lunatics trying to undermine the country because they got butt hurt...

Isn't this what the left did 4 years ago when losing?

Not in the fucking slightest. There were tears, disappointment, even screaming at the sky. And then four years of endless memes from you jokers rubbing that in our faces. But no Democrat questioned the legitimacy of the election, or claimed that the election was “rigged”, or went to court to claim ballots shouldn’t be counted, or claiming widespread fraud with absolutely no evidence to back it up.

After the Democrats screamed for four years about Russian collusion affecting the election????

Are you saying the Democrats knew the election was legitimate, and they spent four years blowing smoke up our asses????

Stop with this claim. The whole Russian argument came out AFTER the inauguration. Again, post one quote from a Democrat that was claiming in the run up and the immediate aftermath of the 2016 election that it was “rigged”, or “fraudulent”, quote a line from any Democrat claiming that votes shouldn’t be counted or counting should stop. Honestly, your boy lost. Accept it with some dignity. Go out and scream at the sky if it makes you feel better.

 

[Lesh]

Biden is up by 28k in PA, and his lead keeps growing. That tally includes zero of the questionable late-arriving ballots. Those have not been counted, and they've been segregated, so that a corrupt conservative judge can't pretend that all the mail ballots are tainted and have to be discarded.

And no, Trump will not gain in the provisional ballot count. Those are expected to slightly favor Biden.

It's over. It's painful for the Trump cult to admit it, but it will be even more painful for them later if they keep acting stupid.

It is interesting, but not surprising, that the entire trump cult seems to be saying that counting votes cast before the voting deadline violates the US Constitution. The Trump cult is letting its Stalinist freak flag fly high.

Exactly. There simply are not enough votes affected by this ruling to make a difference

The SC will never get involved in such a losing argument. They would look like blatant partisans and gain nothing

 

[colfax_m]

If the PASC made an unconstitutional decision, changing the law they have no reason to change, the USSC can and should step in.
If the PASC made a constitutional decision, there would be no issue.

So you want to punish and take away the voice of the people who were simply following the rules as they stood on Election Day?

 

[Pogo]

The 2020 Presidential election may hinge on a USSC decision to enforce PA election law as prescribed by the PA legislature, and not the PA Supreme Court.

Supreme Court allows extended mail-in ballot deadline in Pennsylvania

If the vote totals on Nov. 3 in Pennsylvania are close enough that ballots received after Election Day could impact the state’s results, legal challenges over the ballots could prolong final election results.

www.thedp.com

An opinion accompanying the Supreme Court’s order by Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, suggested that the court may still revisit the case after the election and toss out contested mail-in ballots. Although the Supreme Court declined to rule on the matter before the election, Alito wrote that there was a "strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution."

The USSC decision may come down to the number of votes received after election day, if that number could affect the outcome.
Stay tuned, the PA election is not decided, and won't be for a while yet.

Trump should gain from the "provisional ballot" count, and would gain even more if the USSC disqualifies late votes.

But they can't do that. It's state law, not federal law.
Federal law doesn't even require an election, let alone tell a state how to do it. And that means the USG has no standing.

If the PASC made an unconstitutional decision, changing the law they have no reason to change, the USSC can and should step in.
If the PASC made a constitutional decision, there would be no issue.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is named that because that's what it is --- supreme. It decides what's in line with the Pennsylvania constitution, not the federal one.

Once again --- how PA or any state runs its elections (or whether it holds elections at all) is entirely up to that state. It is *NOT* up to the federal government. The national Constitution simply says the states shall send electors "in such Manner as the Legislature may direct". Says absolutely nothing about even holding an election, let alone how to do one.

 

[alpine]

only in your wet dreams...

You are the one who are dreaming you think that the Conservatives should remain quiet and accept the hold up without flinching?

real conservatives already spoke...
look at the numbers, they either already voted for biden or accepted trumps historic defeat...
it is only bunch of brain dead lunatics trying to undermine the country because they got butt hurt...

Isn't this what the left did 4 years ago when losing?

Not in the fucking slightest. There were tears, disappointment, even screaming at the sky. And then four years of endless memes from you jokers rubbing that in our faces. But no Democrat questioned the legitimacy of the election, or claimed that the election was “rigged”, or went to court to claim ballots shouldn’t be counted, or claiming widespread fraud with absolutely no evidence to back it up.

After the Democrats screamed for four years about Russian collusion affecting the election????

Are you saying the Democrats knew the election was legitimate, and they spent four years blowing smoke up our asses????

what does some conspiracy theorists spreading their ill prepared theories freely raping brains of masses to make them vote in one direction (which is what dems were screaming about) and the vote counting system have to do...

well, i guess if you could understand it, you wouldnt be whining about it now...

 

[kyzr]

1. Provisional ballots are in every county, not just Phila & Pittsburgh, so Trump should gain votes

But the majority are from Philly and Pittsburgh. Hence, Biden gains.

2. The PASC cannot make law, contrary to democrat beliefs.

So what law did they make, and how did it violate the US constitution? Be specific.

And contrary to conservative belief, it is the specific responsibility of the courts to clarify law when two laws conflict.

I don't know any numbers except that the total of provisional ballots statewide is about 100,000.
Anybody's guess how many are from cities, but we do know that these ballots are all from in-person voters, which is why I think they would favor Trump.
Agreed its grasping at straws, first the ballots would have to be legal, then the margin would need to cover the 25,000 or so Biden lead. A "Hail Mary" for sure.

The "Law" the PASC made was changing the "constitutional" election law passed by the legislature.
Courts need to interpret laws, not change them.

 

[Obiwan]

The 2020 Presidential election may hinge on a USSC decision to enforce PA election law as prescribed by the PA legislature, and not the PA Supreme Court.

Supreme Court allows extended mail-in ballot deadline in Pennsylvania

If the vote totals on Nov. 3 in Pennsylvania are close enough that ballots received after Election Day could impact the state’s results, legal challenges over the ballots could prolong final election results.

www.thedp.com

An opinion accompanying the Supreme Court’s order by Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, suggested that the court may still revisit the case after the election and toss out contested mail-in ballots. Although the Supreme Court declined to rule on the matter before the election, Alito wrote that there was a "strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution."

The USSC decision may come down to the number of votes received after election day, if that number could affect the outcome.
Stay tuned, the PA election is not decided, and won't be for a while yet.

Trump should gain from the "provisional ballot" count, and would gain even more if the USSC disqualifies late votes.

Actually, it's possible that Trump could also pull ahead in Pennsylvania (and some other states) if he can prove to the SCOTUS that some of the Democrats' antics (which he has proof of) have made it impossible to validate the votes from some precincts in the Democrat strongholds (and is irreversible)....

If the Democrats are unable to validate the votes, none of the votes from those precincts can be counted, and all of them must be thrown out....

You mean like purposely interfering with the Postal Service or is this just another right wing Hoax.

I'm referring to the ample evidence of voter fraud, and the fraudulent ballots being mixed in with the legitimate ones (making it impossible to separate them), along with the fact that there is evidence that votes for Trump were thrown out...

That would make it impossible to rectify the situation and get an accurate count....

How can the Democrats certify that the counts are accurate if the SCOTUS says that the vote counts can't be certified as being accurate due to the level of provable fraud???

And none of the votes from the affected precincts can be counted if the results can't be certified!!!!

 

[kyzr]

The 2020 Presidential election may hinge on a USSC decision to enforce PA election law as prescribed by the PA legislature, and not the PA Supreme Court.

Supreme Court allows extended mail-in ballot deadline in Pennsylvania

If the vote totals on Nov. 3 in Pennsylvania are close enough that ballots received after Election Day could impact the state’s results, legal challenges over the ballots could prolong final election results.

www.thedp.com

An opinion accompanying the Supreme Court’s order by Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, suggested that the court may still revisit the case after the election and toss out contested mail-in ballots. Although the Supreme Court declined to rule on the matter before the election, Alito wrote that there was a "strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution."

The USSC decision may come down to the number of votes received after election day, if that number could affect the outcome.
Stay tuned, the PA election is not decided, and won't be for a while yet.

Trump should gain from the "provisional ballot" count, and would gain even more if the USSC disqualifies late votes.

But they can't do that. It's state law, not federal law.
Federal law doesn't even require an election, let alone tell a state how to do it. And that means the USG has no standing.

If the PASC made an unconstitutional decision, changing the law they have no reason to change, the USSC can and should step in.
If the PASC made a constitutional decision, there would be no issue.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is named that because that's what it is --- supreme. It decides what's in line with the Pennsylvania constitution, not the federal one.

Once again --- how PA or any state runs its elections (or whether it holds elections at all) is entirely up to that state. It is *NOT* up to the federal government. The national Constitution simply says the states shall send electors "in such Manner as the Legislature may direct". Says absolutely nothing about even holding an election, let alone how to do one.

BINGO!! WE AGREE!! This precisely summarizes the argument in question:
"in such Manner as the Legislature may direct" (not the PASC!!!!!)

 

[kyzr]

If the PASC made an unconstitutional decision, changing the law they have no reason to change, the USSC can and should step in.
If the PASC made a constitutional decision, there would be no issue.

So you want to punish and take away the voice of the people who were simply following the rules as they stood on Election Day?

Fruit of the poisoned tree, next time vote in-person or on time as prescribed by the Legislature.

 

[Obiwan]

The 2020 Presidential election may hinge on a USSC decision to enforce PA election law as prescribed by the PA legislature, and not the PA Supreme Court.

Supreme Court allows extended mail-in ballot deadline in Pennsylvania

If the vote totals on Nov. 3 in Pennsylvania are close enough that ballots received after Election Day could impact the state’s results, legal challenges over the ballots could prolong final election results.

www.thedp.com

An opinion accompanying the Supreme Court’s order by Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, suggested that the court may still revisit the case after the election and toss out contested mail-in ballots. Although the Supreme Court declined to rule on the matter before the election, Alito wrote that there was a "strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution."

The USSC decision may come down to the number of votes received after election day, if that number could affect the outcome.
Stay tuned, the PA election is not decided, and won't be for a while yet.

Trump should gain from the "provisional ballot" count, and would gain even more if the USSC disqualifies late votes.

But they can't do that. It's state law, not federal law.
Federal law doesn't even require an election, let alone tell a state how to do it. And that means the USG has no standing.

If the PASC made an unconstitutional decision, changing the law they have no reason to change, the USSC can and should step in.
If the PASC made a constitutional decision, there would be no issue.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is named that because that's what it is --- supreme. It decides what's in line with the Pennsylvania constitution, not the federal one.

Once again --- how PA or any state runs its elections (or whether it holds elections at all) is entirely up to that state. It is *NOT* up to the federal government. The national Constitution simply says the states shall send electors "in such Manner as the Legislature may direct". Says absolutely nothing about even holding an election, let alone how to do one.

Actually, the SCOTUS can be asked to overrule the state supreme court...

Remember Al Gore's antics in Florida, and where that ended up????

Now, do you have any other retarded shit to fling out there????

 

[colfax_m]

Fruit of the poisoned tree, next time vote in-person or on time as prescribed by the Legislature.

The court ruled that it was okay to put it in the mail on Election Day. The voter did nothing wrong. Are you saying that the voter should have their rights taken away because they followed a court ruling?

Bullshit. Using the courts to silence voters is disgusting.

 

[mamooth]

I'm referring to the ample evidence of voter fraud,

Which exists only in your imagination and your propaganda.

and the fraudulent ballots being mixed in with the legitimate ones

Reality is the precise opposite of your claim. Before the election, precincts were specifically instructed to set all late-arriving ballots into a separate piles. That was done specifically so that corrupt Stalinists couldn't claim that all of the mail-in ballots were tainted.

Your big lie has faceplanted. Stop humiliating yourself.

along with the fact that there is evidence that votes for Trump were thrown out...

"BUT I SAW IT ON A CONSPIRACY BLOG" isn't actually evidence, you know.

The USSC isn't as corrupt as you are. They'll want actual evidence. There is none. It's over.

 

[colfax_m]

Actually, the SCOTUS can be asked to overrule the state supreme court...

They were asked before the election and they didn’t change the ruling.

You had your chance. Changing the rules after the election is wrong.

 

[Pogo]

The 2020 Presidential election may hinge on a USSC decision to enforce PA election law as prescribed by the PA legislature, and not the PA Supreme Court.

Supreme Court allows extended mail-in ballot deadline in Pennsylvania

If the vote totals on Nov. 3 in Pennsylvania are close enough that ballots received after Election Day could impact the state’s results, legal challenges over the ballots could prolong final election results.

www.thedp.com

An opinion accompanying the Supreme Court’s order by Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, suggested that the court may still revisit the case after the election and toss out contested mail-in ballots. Although the Supreme Court declined to rule on the matter before the election, Alito wrote that there was a "strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution."

The USSC decision may come down to the number of votes received after election day, if that number could affect the outcome.
Stay tuned, the PA election is not decided, and won't be for a while yet.

Trump should gain from the "provisional ballot" count, and would gain even more if the USSC disqualifies late votes.

But they can't do that. It's state law, not federal law.
Federal law doesn't even require an election, let alone tell a state how to do it. And that means the USG has no standing.

If the PASC made an unconstitutional decision, changing the law they have no reason to change, the USSC can and should step in.
If the PASC made a constitutional decision, there would be no issue.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is named that because that's what it is --- supreme. It decides what's in line with the Pennsylvania constitution, not the federal one.

Once again --- how PA or any state runs its elections (or whether it holds elections at all) is entirely up to that state. It is *NOT* up to the federal government. The national Constitution simply says the states shall send electors "in such Manner as the Legislature may direct". Says absolutely nothing about even holding an election, let alone how to do one.

BINGO!! WE AGREE!! This precisely summarizes the argument in question:
"in such Manner as the Legislature may direct" (not the PASC!!!!!)

The state supreme court supervises what the legislature directs.

If you're a floor sweeper at a 7-11 store, your orders to sweep the floor come from your store manager, not the corporate office in Dallas Texas. You can't get your friend to call Dallas and order that floor sweeping be stopped.

 

[Obiwan]

Actually, the SCOTUS can be asked to overrule the state supreme court...

They were asked before the election and they didn’t change the ruling.

You had your chance. Changing the rules after the election is wrong.

They had a 4-4 tie when Roberts voted with the liberals (letting the lower decision stand)...

Now the SCOTUS has agreed to revisit the issue, with Barrett on the SCOTUS....

 

[Pogo]

Fruit of the poisoned tree, next time vote in-person or on time as prescribed by the Legislature.

The court ruled that it was okay to put it in the mail on Election Day. The voter did nothing wrong. Are you saying that the voter should have their rights taken away because they followed a court ruling?

Bullshit. Using the courts to silence voters is disgusting.

And when they did that, they told the voters of the state that they could mail up to election day. The voter then followed that directive in good faith. Now some outside entity that doesn't even live in Pennsylvania wants to take that voter's right away after they followed the prescribed rules.

Dooooooooooooooon't think so.