8466
Comments (1315)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
2
IgnatiusHood 2 points ago +2 / -0

This makes me wonder.

Lets say every red states eventually backs this. The Supremes either decide to not hear the case, or worse, hear it and rule in favor of the defense.

Is it war then? I only say that because:

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

~and~

But, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

1
shaven_llama 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lets say every red states eventually backs this. The Supremes either decide to not hear the case, or worse, hear it and rule in favor of the defense. Is it war then?

I couldn't say. It would mean the SCOTUS has endorsed manifest fraud in MI, WI, GA, and PA, and conservatives in red states will know that they will never be allowed to have a hand in choosing the president ever again (because even if we win, they'll just dump phony ballots into the count until we lose).

What do you do with that? I know it's not a sustainable political situation long term.