8749
Comments (1611)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
186
Hunterscrackbaby 186 points ago +188 / -2

We can't therefore they broke the order to segregate.

The entire count in the facilities that didn't segregate will be thrown out.

83
GroSweng 83 points ago +87 / -4

At most they will order the election invalid. Whole state revotes.

99
ClownTamer 99 points ago +101 / -2

There’d be no revote, it’d go to the electoral delegates to vote based on party lines, which would advantage Trump.

60
zestanor 60 points ago +62 / -2

No, it would devolve to the state legislature, which ultimately is the body that appoints electors. All the disputed states except Nevada are Republican dominated state legislatures

21
deleted 21 points ago +23 / -2
8
Tookens 8 points ago +8 / -0

The PA state legislature could even just not appoint electors at all if they don't have confidence in the legitimacy of this election.

Nobody gets to 270, then it goes to the house of representatives where each state would get 1 vote.

1
Sporadica 1 point ago +2 / -1

But couldn't the state leg decide they want to hold a revote as their method of deciding new electors? I don't see a legal/constitutional reason they can't.

30
PhilipeNegro 30 points ago +31 / -1

^ This is the likely scenario

27
Test_user21 27 points ago +27 / -0

Electors don't vote on party lines, the state legislature for each state tells the electors how to vote.

If they attempt to vote any other way, the state lege can step in and tell the Electoral College to dismiss that vote and elector

The U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously upheld laws across the country that remove or punish rogue Electoral College delegates who refuse to cast their votes for the presidential candidate they were pledged to support.

The decision Monday was a loss for "faithless electors," who argued that under the Constitution they have discretion to decide which candidate to support.

Writing for the court, Justice Elena Kagan said Electoral College delegates have "no ground for reversing"

Kagan's opinion noted that the original Electoral College system created by the framers of the Constitution failed to anticipate the growth of political parties. By 1796, the first contested election after George Washington's retirement, the system exploded in disarray, with two consecutive Electoral College "fiascos."

That led to passage of the 12th Amendment in 1804, "facilitating the Electoral College ... as a mechanism not for deliberation but for party line voting," Kagan wrote.

Nothing in the Constitution prevents the states from "taking away presidential electors' voting discretion..."

15
zestanor 15 points ago +15 / -0

That’s fascinating. The Constitution does not foresee political parties and needed the 12th amendment to account for them.

43
Slowsuby 43 points ago +43 / -0

Hopefully in person this time. If you are too scared of the flu to go vote, you don’t get your voice heard. Plain and simple. Tens of millions of people voted and hundreds of thousands protested, i mean rioted, over the summer.

23
Thrice 23 points ago +23 / -0

They aren't even scared of the virus they're just doing it because they hate our POTUS, I'm already seeing people saying the virus isn't that serious on sports forums, when before the election they were shitting their pants and blaming Trump for everything.

17
magajew 17 points ago +17 / -0

Last time I saw my liberal uncle in Dallas he was hyperventilating about hand sanitizers and masks. Today he said he quarantined with covid, it’s nothing he’s just bored.

13
SHALL_NOT 13 points ago +13 / -0

To be fair it was mostly peaceful rioting, I mean protesting.

10
DeportAntifa 10 points ago +10 / -0

Nice username

6
ikuyas 6 points ago +6 / -0

If they are so scared, the local government can rent the hazmat suit. It doesn't cost that much. The hazmat suits can be used for something else later for the local government or sell them on eBay.

10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
8
GroSweng 8 points ago +8 / -0

Both. We are fighting voter turnout and not just fraud. If only Philadelphia revotes, turnout would be abnormally high.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
5
zestanor 5 points ago +5 / -0

That’s not possible. The authority to appoint electors would return to the PA general assembly where it originated.

2
thunderstorm 2 points ago +2 / -0

Doesn't PA use voting machines for in person voting? That would mean that would remain but the mail in ballots are thrown out.

2
GroSweng 2 points ago +2 / -0

I don't know what PA uses, but it doesn't matter. It's an all or nothing deal. Can't cancel valid votes that were tainted with invalid.

Others are right, legislators likely pick electors. Revote for all other positions later.

2
thunderstorm 2 points ago +2 / -0

It isn't an all or nothing deal. If the in person voting isn't demonstrated to be tainted, then it can remain. What would get purged would be what is demonstrably poisoned. SCOTUS would more likely take the route that disenfranchises the least amount of voters.

6
TheSuperStableGenius 6 points ago +6 / -0

Order new elections in PA, MI, WI, GA, sharpie gate AZ and dead man voting NV

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
KS-76- 3 points ago +3 / -0

Beautiful. Fuck em.