I've entirely lost track here. Can anyone say if the cases Rudy started are on their way to the SC? It seems like everything else that has gotten there, has just been political posturing.

I remember NY getting a navy hospital ship to increase capacity this spring. Whether their current capacity is close to full, is not relevant without considering available spare capacity.

Well, sure. But errors and irregularities are the provable - and proven - facts. Fraud is the inescapable conclusion. Specifically, keeping the poll watchers at a certain distance, is an undisputed irregularity. Only signature audits could, maybe, dispell that.

Beyond the name, there are no overt similarities. It ends up creating totalitarian regimes, between which there is no meaningful difference. But, as a talking point, this is not going to be very effective.

No, I admit - I was just pretending to feel silly, for comedic purposes.

Oh yes, that lucid explanation of why all the crucial polling places fake-closed down for a while... I feel so silly now.

That name makes me somewhat doubtful of her motives...

That is partially also an outcome of Pelosi holding things up.

What will Eugene Gu do now?

It certainly broke the public perception that it's only Trump and a few remaining loyalists who are still fighting.

I think that the question of whether state legislatures can delegate, was the reason Alito and Thomas still wanted to hear the case - but with the equal protections aspect left out of, as it's a right only the candidates have. But when they say there wouldn't be relief for it anyway, it means those legislatures could just convene to rubber stamp the actions taken by the delegated-to parties, and Texas would have to settle for that anyway.

The one positive read on the denial of that injunction, is that the SC thinks anything before inauguration can be undone anyway.

Hey, it's gotten thrown out of courts. That means the evidence must be bad.

Please be a nihilist! It makes the world more comfortable for me.

I would say no, no, yes and yes, respectively. But I also wouldn't trust anybody who gives definitive answers to those questions right now.

Legislatures, on the other hand, do and should bend to public opinion. In case it gets kicked back to them - a likely outcome, since most of the argument is that they were circumvented - I hope it's been made clear to them what the public opinion is.

You are what you eat. In this case: china asshoe.

Well... It's a bunch of people who identify as a family.

Well, no. The first interval is 2016-<forever>. The only question is how long they'll allow anyone to disagree with that.

...(but the 2016 election was still the result of Putin hacking the election).

Walk lightly? But, they're just ideas...

Next step: put that money towards non-totalitarian alternatives.

If Biden would have won, at this point they would have gotten him to provide them government subsidies to protect their vital services if their income declines, c f the BBC.

Specifically, them moving away from the positions we agreed on ~15 years ago - a move they themselves acknowledge, by saying that they've "come so far" - while I stayed in the same place, made me radical to them.

Go back to worrying about what you'll do tomorrow at kindergarten. Discussing the future of the country is for grown-ups.

(The portrait of this tweet makes me think it's a prank anyway).