Why do you assume that anyone but you thinks an irrelevant thing like the names of electors (alternative or not) matters?
Well I think it should go without saying that a person’s name is probably the most succinct way to identify them if we’re not solely just communicating via pictures or whatever.
You insulted the original commenter for being “retarded” in thinking that Pence was legally obligated to only confirm official state electors. In fact, state laws are clear that candidate electors (of whom there are initially two sets) are not elected as electors at all if the candidate they represent loses the vote — at least as determined by the state’s official certification.
You can rightfully argue that states shouldn’t have certified Biden or Trump as the winner/loser in various cases. But I think it should also go without saying that “shouldn’t have” isn’t the same as “didn’t.”
If you’re so intellectually superior, can you name the names of three alternate electors?
^ When the troll forgets he's logged into a different troll account 😂
Only takes six words to type three names, so you literally went to more effort to divert away from the topic/question.
Three names.
Why do you assume that the goal of commenting is to do so with the least effort?
Why do you assume that anyone but you thinks an irrelevant thing like the names of electors (alternative or not) matters?
Well I think it should go without saying that a person’s name is probably the most succinct way to identify them if we’re not solely just communicating via pictures or whatever.
You insulted the original commenter for being “retarded” in thinking that Pence was legally obligated to only confirm official state electors. In fact, state laws are clear that candidate electors (of whom there are initially two sets) are not elected as electors at all if the candidate they represent loses the vote — at least as determined by the state’s official certification.
You can rightfully argue that states shouldn’t have certified Biden or Trump as the winner/loser in various cases. But I think it should also go without saying that “shouldn’t have” isn’t the same as “didn’t.”
Maybe he doesn’t want to deal with an obvious troll?