Maybe I'm operating under an erroneous understanding here, but it seems that there's only one reason to prevent dozens of poll observers from being able to do their job, and to further defy an order by the Supreme Court, and that's fraud.
While it hasn't yet been presented in court, there are literally dozens of witnesses and statements under oath already made known by Rudy. Barring some sort of corruption or FUBAR legal prescription, fraud seems to only sane conclusion a court (or other observer) can find. I fail to see how letting the fraudsters have a second attempt is any sort of remedy.
I don't know what to say but atm all we have are our convictions and opinions, and to allow the system to be robust enough to pull through despite the subversion.
Ballot Box (Failed); Jury Box (You are here); Ammo Box (Loaded and full).
I'll put this out there and I'm hoping you might have some insight, if fraud is proven and shows that the results are not valid, would this then just go to the electors? Or will the electors need a special vote after the audit before they cast their vote?
If fraud is proven then no party gets to choose electors.
Each party decides their electors. Winning parties' electors vote for the President.
No idea what happens between fraud and choosing electors. This is historical so we try to bootstrap analogies from the past to make convincing arguments to SCOTUS. I want SCOTUS to throw out all late vote counts but I'm not sure how we get there even if fraud is proven because it's a good argument that there are clean votes mixed with the bad and every vote counts thus an audit is the first necessary step.
Ok, for some reason I was under the impression that electors were picked before the vote... by somebody, didn't think that far ahead. I do remember about 4 years ago and the media encouraging the whole faithless elector nonsense. To live in interesting times, huh?
Maybe I'm operating under an erroneous understanding here, but it seems that there's only one reason to prevent dozens of poll observers from being able to do their job, and to further defy an order by the Supreme Court, and that's fraud.
While it hasn't yet been presented in court, there are literally dozens of witnesses and statements under oath already made known by Rudy. Barring some sort of corruption or FUBAR legal prescription, fraud seems to only sane conclusion a court (or other observer) can find. I fail to see how letting the fraudsters have a second attempt is any sort of remedy.
Frankly, that has to be proven in court and then we can lay it on the table.
I know.
I don't know what to say but atm all we have are our convictions and opinions, and to allow the system to be robust enough to pull through despite the subversion.
Ballot Box (Failed); Jury Box (You are here); Ammo Box (Loaded and full).
I'll put this out there and I'm hoping you might have some insight, if fraud is proven and shows that the results are not valid, would this then just go to the electors? Or will the electors need a special vote after the audit before they cast their vote?
If fraud is proven then no party gets to choose electors.
Each party decides their electors. Winning parties' electors vote for the President.
No idea what happens between fraud and choosing electors. This is historical so we try to bootstrap analogies from the past to make convincing arguments to SCOTUS. I want SCOTUS to throw out all late vote counts but I'm not sure how we get there even if fraud is proven because it's a good argument that there are clean votes mixed with the bad and every vote counts thus an audit is the first necessary step.
Ok, for some reason I was under the impression that electors were picked before the vote... by somebody, didn't think that far ahead. I do remember about 4 years ago and the media encouraging the whole faithless elector nonsense. To live in interesting times, huh?