Break Glass - 2020 USA Elections

1656668707182

Comments

  • stetson wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    stetson wrote: »
    Crœsos wrote: »
    Or to put it another way, 75% of the Michigan Board of State Canvassers voted to follow the law and not subvert American democracy. Yay!

    The bar has truly been set.

    On the ground.

    And 25% of the Michigan Board of State Canvassers still managed to trip over it.

    In fairness, is what that canvasser did all that much different from what a Faithless Elector does?

    It seems to me that Faithless Electors usually just elicit a yawn, because they're just one vote and it usually doesn't make a difference. But you could say the same thing, really, about that canvasser, since the other three voted to certify.
    One difference is that Michigan has 4 state canvaser and 16 electors. A smaller number of people have greater effect.
    Another difference is that there isn't the same discretion in certification as there is in electoral voting.*
    A canvaser is supposed to certify based on procedure, not preference

    *Potential choice

    Is it written anywhere that a canvasser is legally prohibited from doing what our Michigan Holdout just did?

    And if so, is there a penalty?

    As for Michigan's having fewer canvassers than electors, there is at least one state, Maine, with only two electors, and, based on research I've just been doing, no prohibition against Faithless Electors. Maybe it would be more of a scandal if a Maine elector actually did exercise his perogative to buck the vote, but if that's the case, the practice really should have been outlawed long ago.
    Since an elector's jo isn't supposed to rely on faith, I'd be surprised if such a law were felt needed. IANAL, but I would think something doesn't have to be explicitly illegal if it can be implied that it contravenes its mandated purpose. In other words, an elector choosing to no certify an election because of personal preference for a candidate might well be a breach of contract/dereliction of duty. It might also be a basis for a lawsuit challenging the decision.
  • RuthRuth Admin Emeritus
    The Washington Post has a good article on the various factors that led Trump to let the transition formally begin: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/michigan-vote-certification/2020/11/23/c435ed24-2d52-11eb-bae0-50bb17126614_story.html
  • edited November 2020
    Is it written anywhere that a canvasser is legally prohibited from doing what our Michigan Holdout just did?

    And if so, is there a penalty?

    As for Michigan's having fewer canvassers than electors, there is at least one state, Maine, with only two electors, and, based on research I've just been doing, no prohibition against Faithless Electors. Maybe it would be more of a scandal if a Maine elector actually did exercise his perogative to buck the vote, but if that's the case, the practice really should have been outlawed long ago.

    Maine has four electors, I believe. Two elected on a general ticket, and one each for the two congressional districts.

    Corrected quoting code. BroJames, Purgatory Host
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    Ruth, your link is behind a paywall. Is there an alternative or is it possible for you to summarise?
  • I'll slso add that even a lightweight like GW Bush had roughly equal credentials(governor of a large state) with his fellow scion Justin Trudeau, who made a well-received speech at his dad's funeral in 2000, then got elected twice as an opposition MP before winning the Liberal leadership and then the PMship in short order.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    Meanwhile Pennsylvania and Nevada have also certified the election.
  • RuthRuth Admin Emeritus
    Barnabas62 wrote: »
    Ruth, your link is behind a paywall. Is there an alternative or is it possible for you to summarise?

    WaPo says basically it was a combination of legal losses and pressure from some Republicans, plus some conversation with lawyers that made Trump agree to the transition. On Monday Michigan certified Biden's win and "dozens of business leaders and Republican national security experts" said Trump should accept the election results. The nutball news conference by Giuliani and Powell last Thursday is cited as a "turning point." Jay Sekulow, one of Trump's personal attorneys, and White House Counsel Pat Cipollone are said to have helped to persuade Trump to give way to reality.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    Thanks Ruth, appreciated.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    If this age and experience tangent has legs I’ll split the thread.

    Meanwhile, the news this morning is about hearings by State Republicans, firstly in Pennsylvania then in Michigan and Arizona. The intention appears to hear individuals who provided affidavits about possible fraudulent actions. Giuliani and possibly the President will be at the Pennsylvania meeting.

    This looks like an attempt to throw doubt on the credibility of the court decisions, where such affidavits have been dismissed as hearsay.

    Trump has not given up. Not content with trashing the vote he now wishes to trash the judges.

    It will be interesting to see how the process works.
  • Barnabas62 wrote: »
    If this age and experience tangent has legs I’ll split the thread.

    Meanwhile, the news this morning is about hearings by State Republicans, firstly in Pennsylvania then in Michigan and Arizona. The intention appears to hear individuals who provided affidavits about possible fraudulent actions. Giuliani and possibly the President will be at the Pennsylvania meeting.

    This looks like an attempt to throw doubt on the credibility of the court decisions, where such affidavits have been dismissed as hearsay.

    Trump has not given up. Not content with trashing the vote he now wishes to trash the judges.

    It will be interesting to see how the process works.
    It is not just Trump. The Republican party in general have bought into this fight against democracy.
  • BroJames wrote: »
    For good or ill (which is for a different discussion) peers of the realm in the past held significant political roles and had significant political careers without being elected to any office.

    Fair enough, but if unelected positions count for this assessment then why doesn't being a U.S. cabinet secretary (Taft & Hoover), a federal judge (Taft again), or a general leading a successful major war effort (Taylor, Grant, Eisenhower) count? @Furtive Gander's assertion is that it's more "likely" for a U.S. president to have no experience relevant to governing, which seems to be based off a single example (Donald Trump) who assumed office after an election with a lot of weird irregularities. Making sweeping generalities from a single case seems like overreaching.
    A minor quibble is that there is no such thing as an elected office at Westminster/Ottawa/Camberra/etc. I have run into the same issue in discussions in Ottawa- people are appointed to office (as ministers or parliamentary secretaries) and, while almost all of them have been elected to the House of Commons, . . .

    It seems like semantics to argue that being in the House of Commons is not an elected office.
    Barnabas62 wrote: »
    Meanwhile, the news this morning is about hearings by State Republicans, firstly in Pennsylvania then in Michigan and Arizona. The intention appears to hear individuals who provided affidavits about possible fraudulent actions. Giuliani and possibly the President will be at the Pennsylvania meeting.

    Trump and his inner circle are fighting to the bitter end, but for most other Republicans at this point the effort is about crippling the incoming Biden administration. See, for example, Steve Mnuchin's games with COVID relief money.
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    It is not just Trump. The Republican party in general have bought into this fight against democracy.

    Biden will be the third straight Democratic president that Republicans have regarded as inherently illegitimate.
  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Shipmate
    edited November 2020
    In what sense did Republicans regard Bill Clinton as inherently illegitimate?
  • In what sense did Republicans regard Bill Clinton as inherently illegitimate?

    The endless conspiracy theories about him being a drug runner, or a mass murderer, or a deadbeat dad, or using Arkansas State Troopers to procure women, or . . . you get the idea. They were sure he was an illegitimate president, they just had to figure out why. So they kept looking until they finally impeached him over land speculation a blow job.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    Just watched a rerun of Trump’s press conference. He’s not giving up. Nothing like it. Instead he looks set to take this to the confirming vote in Congress.
  • Are we having fun yet? Grrrrrr.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    edited November 2020
    Trump’s Thanksgiving gift to the nation.

    He talked an amazing amount of bollocks but his description of Raffensperger as “Enemy of the People” was about as vile as it gets. The man has already had death threats. Trump is using intimidation as a weapon.

    And 70 million USA citizens are not likely to see that simplicity.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    As previously suggested, I split off the tangent to a thread entitled Age and Experience of Political Leaders

    Barnabas62
    Purgatory Host
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    And another one bites the dust.

    Trump’s lawyers vowed to appeal to the Supreme Court despite the judge’s assessment that the “campaign’s claims have no merit.” If this terribly presented and argued case gets anywhere it will be a major surprise.

    This is also noteworthy
    The three judges on the panel were all appointed by Republican presidents. including Bibas, a former University of Pennsylvania law professor appointed by Trump.
  • And guess what?

    "Attention-Starved Trump May Start 2024 Campaign During Biden’s Inauguration, Report Says.
    He has also been bragging about how easy it will be for him to grab attention away from the new president" (Rolling Stone).


    Does he know that won't make him president? Even if his event finishes before Joe's inauguration?

    To borrow a phrase from the satirical Ig Nobel prize ceremonies, and the person whose job it is to get long-winded speakers to shut up:

    Please stop. I'm BORED!
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
  • On that subject, this is rather amusing :smile:
  • One thing I'm puzzled about is the talk of the Trump lawyers appealing decisions to the Supreme Court. Presumably there is a process for permitting such appeals (or everyone would do it all the time) and this would weed out completely meritless cases (such as these). Or does the President have an automatic right to appeal to the SC or something?
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    JonahMan

    I think in theory the Supreme Court can hear any case it wants to. Normally it functions as a court of final appeal on matters of law and the constitution and the history of the case or cases needs to be included in the seeking of a hearing. I doubt whether the President has any more rights to seek a hearing that other US citizens have.

    But I'm not an expert on such things. That's just my layman's understanding.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    The Wisconsin recount, to nobody’s surprise, has confirmed Joe Biden’s win. The fishing expedition to reveal unfair discrimination or fraud or ignoring State rules has revealed nothing. Trump promises a legal case by 1 December which is certification day. He will be seeking to delay or deny certification.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    From the Guardian
    A donor gave $2.5 million to a pro-Trump campaigning group to support lawsuits challenging the election. The group promptly cancelled the lawsuits. Now the donor wants the money back and is suing, claiming that he heard nothing except vague platitudes from the campaign. He also claims that the group offered to return $1 million if he dropped his lawsuit.
    One has to wonder what part of Trump's business career the donor wasn't paying attention to.
  • {Copying this over from the "Fake News On The BBC!" thread in Purg.}
    Golden Key wrote: »
    --"Secret Service ‘will forcibly remove’ Trump from White House if he won’t leave" (Metro UK, drawing on other news sources).
    Anthony Scaramucci, the former White House communications director, told i News on Sunday that the Secret Service has made confidential plans in case Trump decides to extend his stay in the Oval Office ahead of the president’s inauguration in January.

    --"20 days of fantasy and failure: Inside Trump's quest to overturn the election" (Washington Post, via SF Gate).

    This is long. Goes over Nov. 3-23, 2020, in detail. Written in WaPo's quiet, readable, deliberate style. Worth a read, IMHO.

    Sample:
    The 20 days between the election on Nov. 3 and the greenlighting of Biden's transition exemplified some of the hallmarks of life in Trump's White House: a government paralyzed by the president's fragile emotional state; advisers nourishing his fables; expletive-laden feuds between factions of aides and advisers; and a pernicious blurring of truth and fantasy.
  • Trump is allegedly now musing about holding a 2024 campaign event at the same time as Biden's inauguration.

    That could actually be pretty hilarious.
  • TukaiTukai Shipmate
    And of course T--- will claim that his event had the bigger crowd - or "actually, the bigliest crowd ever".

    But it may well be the biggest coronavirus spreading event ever, which would be an appropriate farewell to office for him.
  • Here's a poor excuse for an analysis of why the US system seems to have worked this time around. I thought that the inclusion of a decentralised system for managing elections was a very good point.

    Often, I have heard my wife and other Australians (including me from time to time) telling Americans that they should have one Federal authority for managing elections, just like us. This article claims the opposite, and I think its right. It was bad enough having a Trump appointee in the Post Office, let alone having one Election Tzar in the President's gift.
  • The issue isn't whether it's central or distributed - as long as those in charge aren't politically appointed, it's good.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    edited December 2020
  • New York state released the results from over a million ballots today, nearly a month after election day. If New York were a presidential swing state we would consider this intolerable. It increased Biden's popular vote margin of victory to ~6.9 million votes and 4.4 percentage points. This will probably increase further as New York still has several hundred thousand ballots to process. (Seriously New York, WTF?) Of course if you flipped ~22,000 votes from Biden to Trump in Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin that would be a Trump victory, highlighting the essential insanity of the electoral college.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    New York is estimating 92% counted which suggests over half a million more votes to be counted. Apparently New York has very complex rules and was not really set up for the huge increase in mailed in ballots.

    Croesus, you are right again about the EC.

    On another tack there is some pretty crazy stuff happening in Georgia. In support of the bogus rigged election claims Sidney Powell and Lin Wood were urging voters to boycott the run off elections to the Senate until they could be assured that the system was safe.
  • In a long rant broadcast yesterday DT not only repeated his usual nonsense but went further to say he hopes the SCOTUS will get involved.

    Meanwhile there must be a hope that his rubbishing of the electoral system may inspire his supporters to refrain from voting in the Georgia run-off. I mean, if the system is so corrupt (!) why would you co-operate with it by voting? 😈
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    New York is up to 99% declared I see and Joe Biden’s lead in the national vote is now over 7 million.

    Various court cases remain to be heard as part of the Trump attempt to disenfranchise voters in the swing States. I’d be surprised if they win one of them but you never know.

    I’m not completely up to date but I read somewhere that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision is being appealed to SCOTUS.
  • Whe decides whether there is sufficient merit in the plaintiff's case to be worth a higher court hearing it?
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    So far as SCOTUS is concerned I think it needs four justices to ‘grant cert’, essentially to say that the appeal is worth a hearing.
  • TrudyTrudy Heaven Host, 8th Day Host
    Could somebody explain the "Georgia - suitcases of ballots" video to me in a way that makes sense? Like, what does the video actually show, why does Team Trump think it's such an amazing piece of evidence, and why is everyone who's not on the hardcore Trump train completely ignoring it -- is it in fact quite benign? (I have obviously seen hardcore Trumpers sharing it online with tags like THIS IS EARTHSHATTERING - ITS OVER FOR BIDEN) and just wondered if anyone had the knowledge (or a reliable link, which I couldn't find) to explain what the video actually showed in the context of how ballots get counted in the US.
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    @Trudy

    Forbes has a rebuttal to the allegations called: "No, Atlanta didn't count illegal ballots in secret(or in suitcases)".

    From a layman's perspective, it's not really a slam-dunk, since it basically just amounts to election officials saying there was nothing untoward going on in the video. But assuming there's no reason to distrust the officials, that probably explains why it hasn't got much traction outside of the true believers.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    edited December 2020
    So far as I am aware, Raffensperger has not yet recertified Georgia. The unofficial record of the second recount shows Biden with 865 less votes than on the audit hand count and holding a majority of just under 12,000. Raffensperger is careful and is probably looking at the county figures in greater detail but the second recount confirms that Joe Biden won the Georgia vote.

    The legal challenges in Georgia are the subject of further court hearings. From what I’ve read and what has happened in other States it seems unlikely that the Georgia courts will uphold those challenges.

    There will also be some formal meetings of State Senators and Representatives to consider what has been going on. In the current atmosphere, who knows what the outcome of those meetings will be.
  • Well, this isn't about Georgia, but:

    "Roger Stone Says North Korean Boats Delivered Ballots Through Maine Harbor As Trump Boosts Fraud Claims" (Newsweek).

    I mean, if Roger Stone says it, it must be so!
    ;) :eyeroll:
  • Such nonsense cannot be pardoned! - Oh, wait, it just has! D'oh!
  • TrudyTrudy Heaven Host, 8th Day Host

    Thanks, that and the Forbes article were both very helpful in better understanding what is going on.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    CNN and the Washington Post have a story that Trump called Georgia Governor today to pressurise him. Cover story is that was a condolence call.

    Nature of the pressure was to get the Governor to make moves to set aside the vote and get the State Legislature to nominate electors for Trump to the EC.

    Obviously we don’t know the truth but the timing of the call couldn’t be more suspicious.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    The story has been confirmed in effect by a tweet from Trump himself.
  • The thing of it is, though he may think a federal pardon will absolve him of all this election interfering, he is, in fact, violating state laws. I hope one of those states go after him.
  • Would a federal pardon rescue him from the IRS and his federal tax problems? AIUI, he's been under audit for a long time.
  • {Copying over my post from the "Biden/Harris" Purg thread.}

    Possibly of use:

    Wikipedia already has an article on the "Inauguration of Joe Biden". Plans, protest permits, etc.

    Down at the bottom of the page, there's a mass of links to Wiki articles about everything to do with Joe Biden. Also links to articles about all previous US presidential inaugurations.

    Have fun!
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
    I’m waiting for Monday. Raffensperger needs to recertify the Georgia vote and I’m not sure why he hasn’t done that yet.
This discussion has been closed.