Cleanup in Aisle Lunatic (h/t romad1)

[oblong]

His Chief of Staff has been cooperating/answering their questions and turning over documents.

One thing though.... what if the GOP's play here is to get the dems all on board with "you can't do anything on January 6th.... it's all ceremonial" then in 2025 after some rogue state(s) governor(s) pulls some shenanigans and submits fake electors or fails to submit then the Dems are all on record as saying "We have no options here... Kamala can't change anything".

It still comes down to the fact that in 2020 everyone did the right thing officially.... but what happens when someone doesnt?  What if Kemp didn't certify GA?    

The GOP wants to create as much chaos and disruption so that some elections may not be able to be certified because ballots were destroyed/compromised, maybe polling locations evacuated for bomb threats.... anything to make it "not normal" and therefore they'll have to resort to the state legislator choosing the electors.

 

[chasfh]

Go to a national popular vote to determine the president and none of this is a problem anymore.

[mtutiger]

28 minutes ago, oblong said:

His Chief of Staff has been cooperating/answering their questions and turning over documents.

One thing though.... what if the GOP's play here is to get the dems all on board with "you can't do anything on January 6th.... it's all ceremonial" then in 2025 after some rogue state(s) governor(s) pulls some shenanigans and submits fake electors or fails to submit then the Dems are all on record as saying "We have no options here... Kamala can't change anything".

Is it really clear there was anything that could be done on January 6th, 2020 anyway?

[oblong]

Just now, mtutiger said:

Is it really clear there was anything that could be done on January 6th, 2020 anyway?

what would have happened if a majority of the house and senate didn't rebuke the objections?

What if Pence just didn't do it?  What if he stood at the podium and didn't certify and went along with it?  What does it mean when we say "he can't".  Who would stop him?  Would the Capitol Police have gone up there and taken him away and Grassley preside?  

I mean if there is nothing that can be done on January 6 then what is the Electoral Reform Act all about then?  From my limited reading it changes it from a majority to supermajority vote to support the objections.  So on January 6th, we have David Perdue and James Craig submitted electors that went against the voting results, some Dems object... but they need a super majority to end that objections and it's not there.

It takes a combined 100 crazy people to fuck things up.  A few nameless people in a state to not certify results, a couple of rogue governors, 4 members of congress to object, and a few dozen members of the legislature across the Senate and House to vote against the people's wishes.

 

 

 

 

[mtutiger]

3 minutes ago, oblong said:

what would have happened if a majority of the house and senate didn't rebuke the objections?

What if Pence just didn't do it?  What if he stood at the podium and didn't certify and went along with it?  What does it mean when we say "he can't".  Who would stop him?  Would the Capitol Police have gone up there and taken him away and Grassley preside?  

He would have been in violation of the ECA, it would have been litigated, the Supreme Court would have stepped in and the votes would have ultimately counted.

My understanding is that the ECA reform is looking to remove any sort of ambiguity on the question in the hopes of preventing a repeat of this from happening again. But I'll admit that I haven't read enough about the reform negotiations beyond that to know completely about the details.

[mtutiger]

5 minutes ago, oblong said:

I mean if there is nothing that can be done on January 6 then what is the Electoral Reform Act all about then?  From my limited reading it changes it from a majority to supermajority vote to support the objections.  So on January 6th, we have David Perdue and James Craig submitted electors that went against the voting results, some Dems object... but they need a super majority to end that objections and it's not there.

It takes a combined 100 crazy people to fuck things up.  A few nameless people in a state to not certify results, a couple of rogue governors, 4 members of congress to object, and a few dozen members of the legislature across the Senate and House to vote against the people's wishes.

I can't really disagree with you on any of this.

I just don't think it's a reason to not reform the ECA.

[Tigerbomb13]

3 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

He would have been in violation of the ECA, it would have been litigated, the Supreme Court would have stepped in and the votes would have ultimately counted.

My understanding is that the ECA reform is looking to remove any sort of ambiguity on the question in the hopes of preventing a repeat of this from happening again. But I'll admit that I haven't read enough about the reform negotiations beyond that to know completely about the details.

I’m assuming if Arizona or some other crazy state enacted the state legislature to be able to overturn election results without evidence of fraud it would be similar. I’m assuming that would be litigated as well and the SCOTUS would not allow that to happen?

[mtutiger]

1 minute ago, Tigerbomb13 said:

I’m assuming if Arizona or some other crazy state enacted the state legislature to be able to overturn election results without evidence of fraud it would be similar. I’m assuming that would be litigated as well and the SCOTUS would not allow that to happen?

The ECA is pretty clear, and SCOTUS would have enforced it IMO.

In terms of the hypothetical above, I'm a lot less clear on what would happen.

[Motown Bombers]

 

[Tigerbomb13]

I did not know of the existence of this bill until today. The current day GOP is just nuts. How does this help anything, and what is the party of cancel culture again? 

[1984Echoes]

This is what will happen If/When the Dems lose midterms:

The loss of our Democracy:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-pushing-gop-jan-6-100826189.html

[ewsieg]

11 hours ago, chasfh said:

Go to a national popular vote to determine the president and none of this is a problem anymore.

...and move us closer to class warfare.

[gehringer_2]

12 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

...and move us closer to class warfare.

If you believe more democratic outcomes lead to class warfare than I guess as alternative solutions to class conflict you can take your choice of the total victory of the oligarchy (Russia), which does effectively end the conflict,  or the total suppression of all social dissent (China).

Or another way to put it is that if more democracy is something that will lead to more class warfare, then class distinction has already grown to such a toxic level in your society that you must face that there is no longer any way back to greater social equity without breaking some (nest) eggs. 

Edited February 2, 2022 by gehringer_2

[ewsieg]

6 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

This is what will happen If/When the Dems lose midterms:

The loss of our Democracy:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-pushing-gop-jan-6-100826189.html

Best thing that could happen to help ensure Trump doesn't win in 2024.

[ewsieg]

21 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

If you believe more democratic outcomes lead to class warfare than I guess as alternative solutions to class conflict you can take your choice of the total victory of the oligarchy (Russia), which does effectively end the conflict,  or the total suppression of all social dissent (China).

 

Instead of only have a choice between Russia and China, what about a system that helps ensure different parts of a country have a role in determining who is president and helps ensure that the minority isn't overrun by the majority (USA).

[pfife]

6 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

This is what will happen If/When the Dems lose midterms:

The loss of our Democracy:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-pushing-gop-jan-6-100826189.html

so trump's FBI caused the insurrection? 

these jabronies don't even try to make sense anymore, and even sadder, it works for them.

[pfife]

16 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Instead of only have a choice between Russia and China, what about a system that helps ensure different parts of a country have a role in determining who is president and helps ensure that the minority isn't overrun by the majority (USA).

In the USA its obvious the majority is overrun by the minority.  

[gehringer_2]

21 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Instead of only have a choice between Russia and China, what about a system that helps ensure different parts of a country have a role in determining who is president and helps ensure that the minority isn't overrun by the majority (USA).

If I have a choice a choice of country where the minority elects the President and the Senate, or the majority elects the President and the Senate, sorry but I take the latter every single time. It's called democracy. It's pretty basic that decisions made by majorities leave fewer people unhappy than decisions by minorities - thus within the limitations of general rights protection, minorities are not supposed to have the right to rule.

There is only one presidency, there is no possibility of maintaining distinction of regional input into that election except by giving some regional minority preference, which again, defeats democracy and leaves MORE people somewhere else partially deprived of their franchise. You cannot square the circle you are trying to describe.

Edited February 2, 2022 by gehringer_2

[pfife]

4 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

If I have a choice a choice of country where the minority elects the President and the Senate, or the majority elects the President and the Senate, sorry but I take the latter every single time. It's called democracy. It's pretty basic that decisions made by majorities leave fewer people unhappy than decisions by minorities - thus within the limitations of general rights protection, minorities are not supposed to have the right to rule.

You forgot how the minority stacks the court and also gerrymanders themselves into the house.  And how the minority that is elected in the senate by the minority can stop everything.

None of this is democracy.  It's lunacy given to us by people who counted black people as 3/5.   To hell with them and this

Edited February 2, 2022 by pfife

[gehringer_2]

6 minutes ago, pfife said:

You forgot how the minority stacks the court and also gerrymanders themselves into the house.  And how the minority that is elected in the senate by the minority can stop everything.

None of this is democracy.  It's lunacy given to us by people who counted black people as 3/5.   To hell with them and this

like Churchill said, the worst form of government except for all the others.  And yes for sure the US today is getting to be a pretty poor example of democracy at all.

Edited February 2, 2022 by gehringer_2

[mtutiger]

36 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Instead of only have a choice between Russia and China, what about a system that helps ensure different parts of a country have a role in determining who is president and helps ensure that the minority isn't overrun by the majority (USA).

Except that isn't what we have... rather, we have a system where your vote only matters in 6-8 states and is irrelevant in the rest.

Edited February 2, 2022 by mtutiger

[mtutiger]

 

[oblong]

I think Trump just shit Graham out of his rectum tonight. 

[ewsieg]

15 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Except that isn't what we have... rather, we have a system where your vote only matters in 6-8 states and is irrelevant in the rest.

After the fact, that's absolutely true.  But going into it, you never know (to a point).  

There are absolutely states that aren't changing who they pick anytime soon.  Georgia and Arizona went Dem this year which isn't what I would have expected.  Many feel Texas may change some time in the near future as well.  

Not being able to win an EC vote would eventually lead to a change in a losing party as well, meaning a changing party would look at aspect that a majority of people agree with. 

[CMRivdogs]

7 hours ago, pfife said:

You forgot how the minority stacks the court and also gerrymanders themselves into the house.  And how the minority that is elected in the senate by the minority can stop everything.

None of this is democracy.  It's lunacy given to us by people who counted black people as 3/5.   To hell with them and this

Don’t forget women didn’t count at all and only white guys who owned land were able to vote.

In other words the fabled founding fathers were in effect oligarchs.