Trump's Coup d'état.

Status
Not open for further replies.
acbytesla said:
It's not surprising and it is surprising. With a count of 306 to 232 you would normally expect there to be some.

The faithless electors in the past weren't really trying to flip the election, but make some kind of political statement.

No room for that this year.
Click to expand...

Before 17 attorney generals & almost every Republican congressman who is not retiring I actually entertained the thought of 1 or 2 Republican electors being faithless (to make a statement about Trump's antidemocratic clown show).
 
acbytesla said:
It's not surprising and it is surprising. With a count of 306 to 232 you would normally expect there to be some.

The faithless electors in the past weren't really trying to flip the election, but make some kind of political statement.

No room for that this year.
Click to expand...



Not playing silly buggers is itself a political statement.
 
January 6, 2021: the day when Congress officially counts the Electoral College's votes. It is my non-lawyer opinion that the Electoral Count Act of 1877 only allows Congress to disqualify votes from electors if those electors are not properly credentialed, if there is a dispute as to who the real electors are, or if there was some irregularity in the voting process by the electors. I don't see that Congress can disqualify electors on the basis of real or alleged irregularities in the general election because that would violate the constitutional provision that states are responsible for running the elections (and give Congress veto power over the courts); I can't imagine the Congress persons back in 1877 not realizing that if one party controls both houses there would always be the danger of Congress finding an excuse to disqualify electors for the candidate from another party if Congress had the power to disqualify electors based on any alleged election irregularity.
 
dudalb said:
Not surprising, given how the Party that won the state picks the electors.
Click to expand...

But there were faithless electors in 2016, 2004, 2000, 1988, 1976, and more.

Wikipedia says the one in 2004 was probably an accident. He probably filled out his ballot wrong.
 
Meadmaker said:
But there were faithless electors in 2016, 2004, 2000, 1988, 1976, and more.

Wikipedia says the one in 2004 was probably an accident. He probably filled out his ballot wrong.
Click to expand...

Ah, I thought the votes had to be public. The way the law is written is a bit vague. But it turns out the public certificates just have to list the total number of votes of the electors and their names, but doesn't have to say which electors cats which votes. At least under federal law.

ETA: It is a bit surprising that this could have happened and that there wasn't some remedy. The elector casts the presidential vote for "John Ewards" instead of John Kerry and John Edwards for VP. I would think there would they would just select from pre-printed names with an option to write in a candidate instead of having to write out the names. How drunk was this elector?
 
Last edited:
cosmicaug said:
Did a write in candidate win? That's quite a plot twist!
Click to expand...

Judging by some photos I have seen, all the electors write in the candidates.

This could indeed be a new avenue for Trump lawsuits.

Rudy Giuliani: "Your honour, this vote clearly says Juseph Bisen! This one cannot be counted for the obviously different person of Creepy Uncle China Joe Beijing Biden! If the handwritin' don't match, you must dispatch!"
 
angrysoba said:
Judging by some photos I have seen, all the electors write in the candidates.

This could indeed be a new avenue for Trump lawsuits.

Rudy Giuliani: "Your honour, this vote clearly says Juseph Bisen! This one cannot be counted for the obviously different person of Creepy Uncle China Joe Beijing Biden! If the handwritin' don't match, you must dispatch!"
Click to expand...
Sargent of the Court, what is this raving idiot doing interfering in a traffic violation case?


Or more likely...

Yes, sir. But the flower-pots are $20 each, and the lattice is $7.50 per yard. And is that card or cash?
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
It's not surprising and it is surprising. With a count of 306 to 232 you would normally expect there to be some.

The faithless electors in the past weren't really trying to flip the election, but make some kind of political statement.

No room for that this year.
Click to expand...

I think the difference was internal Party results, not results outside of the party.

Bernie Bros and some GOP never Trumpers...

I don't imagine many Democratic Party insiders (where electors come from) were secret Trumpers and vice versa.
 
Last edited:
cosmicaug said:
Before 17 attorney generals & almost every Republican congressman who is not retiring I actually entertained the thought of 1 or 2 Republican electors being faithless (to make a statement about Trump's antidemocratic clown show).
Click to expand...

It might have happened except Trump has so thoroughly infected the GOP proper. He is after all their gravy train.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I think the difference was internal Party results, not results outside of the party.

Bernie Bros and some GOP never Trumpers...

I don't imagine many Democratic Party insiders (where electors come from) were secret Trumpers and vice versa.
Click to expand...

I believe there have been about 2 to 3 dozen faithless electors over the years. Out of that only 1 voted for the candidate of the other party.
 
DevilsAdvocate said:
Ah, I thought the votes had to be public. The way the law is written is a bit vague. But it turns out the public certificates just have to list the total number of votes of the electors and their names, but doesn't have to say which electors cats which votes. At least under federal law.

ETA: It is a bit surprising that this could have happened and that there wasn't some remedy. The elector casts the presidential vote for "John Ewards" instead of John Kerry and John Edwards for VP. I would think there would they would just select from pre-printed names with an option to write in a candidate instead of having to write out the names. How drunk was this elector?
Click to expand...

Most of the elector ceremonies I saw today involved a voice roll call so those were public.
 
Trump is really going to go to his grave never admitting he lost isn't he?

I mean if he hasn't done it by now what's going to tip it in the future?
 
JoeMorgue said:
Trump is really going to go to his grave never admitting he lost isn't he?
Click to expand...
Never in his life has Donny suffered the consequences of his actions. Someone else has always shielded him, supplied his whims, run his errands, fixed his mistakes, and cleaned up his messes after him. His has been a risk-free life of unrelenting entitlement fulfilled, which has turbo-fueled his narcissistic tendencies for 60 years.

So right now Donny believes he is absolutely entitled to the presidency simply because he wants it. The constitution and law and electors and processes are simply irrelevant to him. Donny wants. So he is actually expecting someone else to fix this problem of his election loss. Anyone. Barr, Rudi, Sidney Powell, the SCOTUS, anyone. As long as Donny gets what Donny wants.
 
Norman Alexander said:
Never in his life has Donny suffered the consequences of his actions. Someone else has always shielded him, supplied his whims, run his errands, fixed his mistakes, and cleaned up his messes after him. His has been a risk-free life of unrelenting entitlement fulfilled, which has turbo-fueled his narcissistic tendencies for 60 years.

So right now Donny believes he is absolutely entitled to the presidency simply because he wants it. The constitution and law and electors and processes are simply irrelevant to him. Donny wants. So he is actually expecting someone else to fix this problem of his election loss. Anyone. Barr, Rudi, Sidney Powell, the SCOTUS, anyone. As long as Donny gets what Donny wants.
Click to expand...

THIS. Donnie has never had to face the consequences of his actions before,and he is not going to get what he wants. No wonder he is melting down.
 
dudalb said:
THIS. Donnie has never had to face the consequences of his actions before,and he is not going to get what he wants. No wonder he is melting down.
Click to expand...
I don't believe he has the maturity or even the ability to deal with this. I can't predict how he will act, but he is effectively without his life-long mental support mechanisms. I suspect he will go to Florida and sulk in some form. Whether that is by having rival news events, or just sitting scowling in front of the TV in his filthy underwear scoffing nachos for a year, is hard to say.
 
Norman Alexander said:
Never in his life has Donny suffered the consequences of his actions. Someone else has always shielded him, supplied his whims, run his errands, fixed his mistakes, and cleaned up his messes after him. His has been a risk-free life of unrelenting entitlement fulfilled, which has turbo-fueled his narcissistic tendencies for 60 years.
Click to expand...
Sure, sure. But here's the thing I've never understood about his kind of folk: he uses his wealth and entitlement to play golf in Florida. And yeah do a ton of drugs and leer at underage girls in his pageant and visit Epstein's rape island, but still. Golf. Florida.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom