2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
soy_king said:
I'm still not entirely sure that even if they pass such a bill that it would survive judicial scrutiny. For it to survive they'd have to actually demonstrate that voter ID laws were made with strict racial animus, and the vague accusations they've been making for the last ten years wouldn't actually survive in front of the Supreme Court.

The only way I could see it going through would be if Roberts cucks out so hard that he goes against his own prior opinions, and either Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, or Barrett fold under pressure. Getting rid of Orange Man is one thing, but you're talking about the death sentence for the entire Republican Party if this goes through.
Click to expand...
No standing, no harm, laches, thrown out.
 
Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:
I think it was retarded then and it's equally as retarded now. I'd even say more retarded because they've taken it even further in such a short period of time
Click to expand...
It might be retarded, but you've got your side to thank for it being part of the rules of engagement now. And unlike then, there's actually something to base the hearings off of this time around.
 
Mayor Pete loves rail systems!
20201216_174704.jpg
 
Gustav Schuchardt said:
The interesting thing about this is that I actually respect the Democrats' attempts from 2016 to 2020 to de-legitimize the 2016 election. They had a much worse set of cards than the Republicans will have post-2020 but they sure played them as well as they could.

'Russia hacked the 2016 election in some undefined way' is a lot less convincing than 'Democrats kicked out Republican observers in a couple of counties in PA, GA, MI, WI, NZ, and AZ and then stuffed the ballot boxes to change the result of the 2020 election'.

The GOP could really learn from the 'play the hand your dealt as long as you can' approach the Democrats took.

And when people say 'it's a waste of money', is it, really? The US Federal budget for 2020 is $4.83 trillion. A few tens of millions spend on investigating elections is nothing.
Click to expand...
I mean I respect their tenacity but not their playbook or their endgame.

At the core of 2016's "muh Roosha!" claims was a freedom of speech issue. Even if you believe everything the Democrats were saying, they never once stepped to actually claiming that Russian assets tampered with the physical vote count - their "interference" was changing minds of potential voters in the US prior to voting. This claim, in essence, is implying that US citizens do not have the right to be informed by outside sources beyond what the DC/media establishment approve of.
"You don't have the right to act on information we didn't approve of, pleb" - Dems, 2016

Aside from Q-shit, 2020 is about physical tampering and manipulation of ballots to directly change the vote totals. E.g. physically cheating.
The two are hardly comparable outside of logistical factors like time spent/money spent/hearings/etc.
 
FAQnews Correspondent said:
No standing, no harm, laches, thrown out.
Click to expand...
Standing= Any state is affected by this law as it intrudes on their Constitutional right to decide how to elect their representatives.

Irreparable Harm (subset of standing)= Unconstitutionally interferes on the states' historic right to decide how to elect their federal representatives.

No laches= Isn't happening once an election is decided, and will be crucial in determining their rights moving forward.

I'm sorry, but if you're going to throw words around, you should actually know what they mean. I recommend reading Lujan and Mass v. EPA as a primer on standing doctrine.
 
MarvinTheParanoidAndroid said:
Well that was pretty gay, it was mostly just a bunch of people grand standing about how the election was truly secure and how dare you question it.

Here's a small excerpt from the chat just to get the feel of what people are thinking.
View attachment 1792658
Click to expand...
I mean it makes sense that very few anti-Trumpers are in the chat. We all have jobs.
 
MarvinTheParanoidAndroid said:
Well that was pretty gay, it was mostly just a bunch of people grand standing about how the election was truly secure and how dare you question it.

Here's a small excerpt from the chat just to get the feel of what people are thinking.
View attachment 1792658
Click to expand...
Oh well, if Dinorah Giangrande (1961-09-21) of Palmdale, CA says that Trump really won, it must be true. I mean, she's mad online, just like you!
HTTP Error 404 said:
No. In blue states they claim having to show ID is somehow racist because poor stupid niggers are too dumb to know what ID is, ergo you can't require it.
Click to expand...
I mean, the GOP could just fund programs to give these people IDs, if this was actually a serious concern for your imaginary 'voter fraud', but Trump and the rest of his GOPe buddies never would because that would impact their illegal beaner workers.
 
soy_king said:
Standing= Any state is affected by this law as it intrudes on their Constitutional right to decide how to elect their representatives.

Irreparable Harm (subset of standing)= Unconstitutionally interferes on the states' historic right to decide how to elect their federal representatives.

No laches= Isn't happening once an election is decided, and will be crucial in determining their rights moving forward.

I'm sorry, but if you're going to throw words around, you should actually know what they mean. I recommend reading Lujan and Mass v. EPA as a primer on standing doctrine.
Click to expand...
It should be that way that you say, but with catch-2020, I'm skeptical it'll be that way.
 
krebs cant speak to states following their constitutions and laws but the dems keep saying most secure election.

not addressing the issues.

this is justifying our concerns and the dems are unwilling to speak otherwise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom