Win uses cookies necessary for site functionality, as well as for personalization. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies as described in our Privacy Policy.
They also need to be reminded that nothing is final until the electors are appointed and vote. By that metric, Trump and Biden are both sitting at a cool zero
What if by pure chance majority of the electors end up being faithless and vote as president someone who clearly cannot be president, like for example, a foreign politician like Matteo Salvini or Marine LePen?
I don't expect it to happen, was just wondering what would the consequences be.
Yes, to your point. Regardless of how the legislators send electors e.g. a state gets balls and says no to the fraud and sends people to vote for Trump, then they must vote for Trump. That is definitely one less issue to deal with
Electors CAN go faithless and vote however they want, and that vote is official and counts.
States can punish electors for voting 'wrong' after the fact however they want. (as long as due process, jury of peers, equal protections, cruel and unusual punishments etc are not violated)
Electors are still free to 'take one for the team' in order to save the democracy.
More shit house lawyers on here than reddit. The SCOTUS ruling stated that each state was within its rights to treat faithless electors how ever they wish based on that state's laws and guess what all the states' laws say? Faithless electors are simply replaced and votes are recast
No, you are wrong. I have actually studied this case because of all the retarded disinfo about it. I really wish people would stop making stupid assumptions about 'all states' and repeated them everywhere as fact just because they read something from a retard journalist who did zero research.
State ,
Citation ,
Penalty for deviant vote,
What happens to the vote cast?
Alabama Ala. Code § 17-14-31 No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Alaska Alaska Stat. § 15.30.090 No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Arizona Ariz. Rev. Stat § 16-212 No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
California Cal. Elec. Code §§ 6906, 18002, State determination Penalty Vote counted as cast/
Colorado Colo Rev. Stat. § 1-4-304, Secretary of State determination No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Connecticut Conn. Gen. Stat. § 9-176 No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Delaware Del. Code Ann. tit. 15, § 4303(b) No penalty Vote counted as cast/
DC D.C. Code § 1-1001.08(g) No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Florida Fla. Stat. § 103.021(1) No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Hawaii Haw. Rev. Stat. § 14-28 No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Indiana Ind. Code § 3-10-4-1.7; 3-10-4-9 (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Iowa Iowa Code § 54.8 No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Maine Me. Stat. tit. 21-A, § 805(2), State determination No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Maryland Md. Code Ann., Elec. Law §8-505 No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Massachusetts Mass Gen. Laws ch. 53, § 8 No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Michigan Mich. Comp. Laws § 168.47 No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Minnesota Minn. Stat. § 208.46 (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Mississippi Miss. Code Ann. § 23-15-785 No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Montana Mont. Code Ann. § 13-25-307 (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Nebraska Neb. Rev. Stat. § 32-714(3) (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Nevada Nev. Rev. Stat. § 298.075(2) (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
New Mexico N.M. Stat. Ann. § 1-15-9 Penalty Vote counted as cast/
North Carolina N.C. Gen. Stat. § 163-212 Penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Ohio Ohio Rev. Code § 3505.40 No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Oklahoma Okla. Stat. tit. 26, § 10-102, § 10-108, § 10-109 Penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Oregon Or. Rev. Stat. § 248.355(2) No penalty Vote counted as cast/
South Carolina S.C. Code Ann. § 7-19-80 Penalty Vote counted as cast/
Tennesseee Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-15-104(c) No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Utah Utah Code Ann. § 20A-13-304 No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Vermont Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 17, § 2732 No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Virginia Va. Code Ann. § 24.2-203 No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Washington Wash. Rev. Code §§ 29A.56.090 (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/
Wisconsin Wis. Stat. § 7.75(2) No penalty Vote counted as cast/
Wyoming Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 22-19-108 No penalty Vote counted as cast
Assuming their state doesn’t just replace them with somebody who would vote as instructed, we hit an interesting issue. The Constitution (Amendment 12) says that the candidate who receives the most votes wins, “ if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed.” Does someone count toward the elector total if they don’t vote for someone that’s eligible to the office?
Most likely, Congress holds a contingent election if that would have affected who won, which Trump/Pence win since Reps hold the Senate and more state delegations in the House
Exactly. Even the rabid leftists on these electoral boards said it's just procedural and in fact argued that people should just vote for certification because it has no real impact
No matter how much spin we get, the truth is, we were told they should not certify. That the game was to stop certification. Now they're back pedaling.
Yep, Bannon said it every single day for the past 2 weeks...now suddenly we're doomers and shills for being worried, by assholes that just want upvotes. It's why I stopped posting really anything tbh...anything that resembles concern is attacked as a "doomer". That's the fucking kiddy shit I left Reddit and that we swore this place would never become.
I don't have a strong opinion on whether it's a setback or a loss or whatever. I'm watching
now with all the concern I already had, watching and waiting and being as involved as I can be (which is to say, very little in the grand scheme, but as much as I can - protests, research, spreading the word, etc). I'm hopeful that the cases are the slam dunks they tell us they are, and also fearful that they're wrong or just saving face. But at the end of it all, I DO trust Trump. He's not a liar, and he's yet to lose.
You hit the nail on the head about all the labelling, though. Doomer, concern troll, shill, etc. It's what the enemy does to us when they don't want to have a debate. They do it because it works. It shuts down legitimate discussion and hurts everyone involved. Of course there are people here whose only goal is to make trouble and sow discord. They should be deported. These labels are thrown around too casually though, and often used on anyone with even the slightest disagreement.
People need to grow some stones and be willing to debate, and (gasp!) risk having their minds changed. If we can't do this, even here where we are all supposedly on the same side, then I truly fear for our future.
Well we've uncovered undeniable proof of multi-national election tampering, thousands of felonies committed by state government workers, and none of the vote counts can be verified... BUT, we had four people say that it all seemed legit so welcome to the White House, Joe!
That's how the shills and doomers see it working out, it seems.
If GEOTUS can stick them with his EO regarding foreign election interference, doesn’t that mean he gets to seize all their assets? Wouldn’t that include the millions his believers just donated to his “transition”? I need their donations to be used against them!
Good question. I think once he wins SCOTUS, he’ll have more of the cucks fall in line or get fired. Otherwise he can go the insurrection act route if it’s too far gone for that. I’m ok with him using the military to help dig out all the leeches if none of them are following our constitution. He’ll have plenty of names stamped “FRAUD” by then that could get a free ride to the spa.
Detaining presidential candidates is a bad precedent to set, so he needs to wait until he gets re-elected legally and then Biden is just some dementia riddled, pedo traitor again.
The main issue is illegal votes being counted. "Count all legal votes" is not shining enough light on the issue. The problem is not that there are some legal votes that weren't counted. The problem is that there were tons illegal votes counted.
We just keep going. I'm of the opinion that the court cases are the preferred avenue to retain the presidency, but even if none of the "normal" channels get the job done I think there will be a massive criminal case brought forward. It's not going as smoothly as I'd like but I remain confident and I'm not one to blow smoke up my own ass.
Seriously disable those pop-ups. Anything the big tech billionaires push at you through your device is 100percent propaganda at this point. See how this popup made you react? It's all crowd control.
Ya really. Especially if the higher court sees lower ones acting crazy, that doesn’t look good. You contest everything. The lawsuit that matters is the last one.
Because it makes their job easier. Courts don't like to get involved in elections. If the legislature can settle this on their own, the Court would be relieved.
SCOTUS has ordered states to recertify elections in the past, so it's possible they'll do it. But it's not a step that a legal team prefers.
The doomers and the people with low T need to be reminded of this on a daily basis. Sad!
They also need to be reminded that nothing is final until the electors are appointed and vote. By that metric, Trump and Biden are both sitting at a cool zero
What if by pure chance majority of the electors end up being faithless and vote as president someone who clearly cannot be president, like for example, a foreign politician like Matteo Salvini or Marine LePen?
I don't expect it to happen, was just wondering what would the consequences be.
Rogue electors are just replaced. The supreme court ruled on that earlier this year. They can "punish" electors that do not cast their votes correctly
So there is no way that faithless electors could alter results now? Well one less problem to think of I see.
Yes, to your point. Regardless of how the legislators send electors e.g. a state gets balls and says no to the fraud and sends people to vote for Trump, then they must vote for Trump. That is definitely one less issue to deal with
u/rainman informed you wrong.
the outcome of the recent case is thus:
Electors CAN go faithless and vote however they want, and that vote is official and counts. States can punish electors for voting 'wrong' after the fact however they want. (as long as due process, jury of peers, equal protections, cruel and unusual punishments etc are not violated)
Electors are still free to 'take one for the team' in order to save the democracy.
Checks n balances at work!
More shit house lawyers on here than reddit. The SCOTUS ruling stated that each state was within its rights to treat faithless electors how ever they wish based on that state's laws and guess what all the states' laws say? Faithless electors are simply replaced and votes are recast
No, you are wrong. I have actually studied this case because of all the retarded disinfo about it. I really wish people would stop making stupid assumptions about 'all states' and repeated them everywhere as fact just because they read something from a retard journalist who did zero research.
State , Citation , Penalty for deviant vote, What happens to the vote cast? Alabama Ala. Code § 17-14-31 No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Alaska Alaska Stat. § 15.30.090 No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Arizona Ariz. Rev. Stat § 16-212 No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ California Cal. Elec. Code §§ 6906, 18002, State determination Penalty Vote counted as cast/ Colorado Colo Rev. Stat. § 1-4-304, Secretary of State determination No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Connecticut Conn. Gen. Stat. § 9-176 No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Delaware Del. Code Ann. tit. 15, § 4303(b) No penalty Vote counted as cast/ DC D.C. Code § 1-1001.08(g) No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Florida Fla. Stat. § 103.021(1) No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Hawaii Haw. Rev. Stat. § 14-28 No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Indiana Ind. Code § 3-10-4-1.7; 3-10-4-9 (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Iowa Iowa Code § 54.8 No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Maine Me. Stat. tit. 21-A, § 805(2), State determination No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Maryland Md. Code Ann., Elec. Law §8-505 No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Massachusetts Mass Gen. Laws ch. 53, § 8 No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Michigan Mich. Comp. Laws § 168.47 No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Minnesota Minn. Stat. § 208.46 (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Mississippi Miss. Code Ann. § 23-15-785 No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Montana Mont. Code Ann. § 13-25-307 (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Nebraska Neb. Rev. Stat. § 32-714(3) (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Nevada Nev. Rev. Stat. § 298.075(2) (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ New Mexico N.M. Stat. Ann. § 1-15-9 Penalty Vote counted as cast/ North Carolina N.C. Gen. Stat. § 163-212 Penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Ohio Ohio Rev. Code § 3505.40 No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Oklahoma Okla. Stat. tit. 26, § 10-102, § 10-108, § 10-109 Penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Oregon Or. Rev. Stat. § 248.355(2) No penalty Vote counted as cast/ South Carolina S.C. Code Ann. § 7-19-80 Penalty Vote counted as cast/ Tennesseee Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-15-104(c) No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Utah Utah Code Ann. § 20A-13-304 No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Vermont Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 17, § 2732 No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Virginia Va. Code Ann. § 24.2-203 No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Washington Wash. Rev. Code §§ 29A.56.090 (Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act) No penalty Failure to vote as pledged cancels the vote and replaces the elector/ Wisconsin Wis. Stat. § 7.75(2) No penalty Vote counted as cast/ Wyoming Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 22-19-108 No penalty Vote counted as cast
Assuming their state doesn’t just replace them with somebody who would vote as instructed, we hit an interesting issue. The Constitution (Amendment 12) says that the candidate who receives the most votes wins, “ if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed.” Does someone count toward the elector total if they don’t vote for someone that’s eligible to the office?
Most likely, Congress holds a contingent election if that would have affected who won, which Trump/Pence win since Reps hold the Senate and more state delegations in the House
Damn constitution, I could've been POTUS by just bribing 270 people if it wasn't for that meddling piece of paper!
(/s obv.)
Then VP, or if also not applicable, Speaker would become president.
President Pelosi would be worst outcome possible, yikes.
Exactly. Even the rabid leftists on these electoral boards said it's just procedural and in fact argued that people should just vote for certification because it has no real impact
As with all news, it's best to take a step back and think things through/research around before coming to any concrete conclusion of your own.
Seriously. Its so annoying
No matter how much spin we get, the truth is, we were told they should not certify. That the game was to stop certification. Now they're back pedaling.
Yep, Bannon said it every single day for the past 2 weeks...now suddenly we're doomers and shills for being worried, by assholes that just want upvotes. It's why I stopped posting really anything tbh...anything that resembles concern is attacked as a "doomer". That's the fucking kiddy shit I left Reddit and that we swore this place would never become.
I don't have a strong opinion on whether it's a setback or a loss or whatever. I'm watching now with all the concern I already had, watching and waiting and being as involved as I can be (which is to say, very little in the grand scheme, but as much as I can - protests, research, spreading the word, etc). I'm hopeful that the cases are the slam dunks they tell us they are, and also fearful that they're wrong or just saving face. But at the end of it all, I DO trust Trump. He's not a liar, and he's yet to lose.
You hit the nail on the head about all the labelling, though. Doomer, concern troll, shill, etc. It's what the enemy does to us when they don't want to have a debate. They do it because it works. It shuts down legitimate discussion and hurts everyone involved. Of course there are people here whose only goal is to make trouble and sow discord. They should be deported. These labels are thrown around too casually though, and often used on anyone with even the slightest disagreement.
People need to grow some stones and be willing to debate, and (gasp!) risk having their minds changed. If we can't do this, even here where we are all supposedly on the same side, then I truly fear for our future.
New Pede here thank you for summarizing.
NICE TOUCH with the LOW T lol
Jeb!
Yep LOL the leftist shills on here right now think the canvassers certifying the vote means its final..... LMAO LMAO LMAO
Well we've uncovered undeniable proof of multi-national election tampering, thousands of felonies committed by state government workers, and none of the vote counts can be verified... BUT, we had four people say that it all seemed legit so welcome to the White House, Joe!
That's how the shills and doomers see it working out, it seems.
Lotta fake trump supporters here now too, activated old accounts to fake they've been here for a while but they have no comment history
IF THEY CHECK THE SIGNATURES WE WIN
It's as simple as that. Hopefully Giuliani is competent to do what is necessary to get this done
That is precisely correct. Count all legal votes and Trump wins!
Not without MI.
HOLD THE LINE
If GEOTUS can stick them with his EO regarding foreign election interference, doesn’t that mean he gets to seize all their assets? Wouldn’t that include the millions his believers just donated to his “transition”? I need their donations to be used against them!
Who is gonna enforce it though? We obviously don’t have a pro Trump AG and DOJ.
Good question. I think once he wins SCOTUS, he’ll have more of the cucks fall in line or get fired. Otherwise he can go the insurrection act route if it’s too far gone for that. I’m ok with him using the military to help dig out all the leeches if none of them are following our constitution. He’ll have plenty of names stamped “FRAUD” by then that could get a free ride to the spa.
Detaining presidential candidates is a bad precedent to set, so he needs to wait until he gets re-elected legally and then Biden is just some dementia riddled, pedo traitor again.
Agreed.
Bless
Why is everyone keep saying "count all the legal votes" ignoring the issue of illegal votes? Counting both types is still bad.
Illegal ≠ legal
wait, what?
The main issue is illegal votes being counted. "Count all legal votes" is not shining enough light on the issue. The problem is not that there are some legal votes that weren't counted. The problem is that there were tons illegal votes counted.
I'll preemptively downvote myself cause I know what I'm about to ask sounds both doomer-ish, and shill-ish.
Hasn't the argument we've been making been 'Biden isn't the president-elect yet, the states haven't certified'?
Now that states are starting to certify, what do we do now?
We just keep going. I'm of the opinion that the court cases are the preferred avenue to retain the presidency, but even if none of the "normal" channels get the job done I think there will be a massive criminal case brought forward. It's not going as smoothly as I'd like but I remain confident and I'm not one to blow smoke up my own ass.
Hoping Rudy n legal team contest before final MI legislation vote. Don't trust MI GOP to hold the line
I just got a news pop up on my iPad that stated pervert Bidens roadblocks have been removed and he is cleared to transition!?what the hell!
Seriously disable those pop-ups. Anything the big tech billionaires push at you through your device is 100percent propaganda at this point. See how this popup made you react? It's all crowd control.
It makes their job easier.
You contest every step of it, you don't just not contest it and then try at the last minute to go to the SCOTUS.
exactly, what kind of case would you have if you didn't fight at every step.
Ya really. Especially if the higher court sees lower ones acting crazy, that doesn’t look good. You contest everything. The lawsuit that matters is the last one.
Remember Fast&Furious? "You never had me. It doesn't matter if it's by an inch or a mile. WINNING IS WINNING."
Because it makes their job easier. Courts don't like to get involved in elections. If the legislature can settle this on their own, the Court would be relieved.
SCOTUS has ordered states to recertify elections in the past, so it's possible they'll do it. But it's not a step that a legal team prefers.