AI
Friday, October 30, 2020 6:08:46 PM
Ok, Then IF - Could Trump contest even a landslide? That depends on his fellow Republicans.
"fuagf: FL first and then Texas as I believe Texas will Dem!!!"
I'm guessing twenty years ago few of us, if any, even considered we could be talking about the possibility of an
authoritarian wannabe-strongman disputing an election result in the U.S.A. Yet, here we are doing just that.
President Trump speaks during a campaign rally in The Villages, Fla., on Friday.
(Tom Brenner/Reuters)
Opinion by Edward B. Foley Contributing columnist
Oct. 24, 2020 at 9:54 a.m. GMT+11
Could President Trump defy even a landslide against him?
This is, increasingly .. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.nytimes.com/2020/10/21/us/politics/biden-election-landslide.html__;!!KGKeukY!jDgxUPAKbRXeHHzx2ymnPEW8Bk3ys3fbtdJMOWJ7TG_yI38vI2y8pgH8gi0OBzChAg$ , a serious question, as the polls have widened .. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/__;!!KGKeukY!jDgxUPAKbRXeHHzx2ymnPEW8Bk3ys3fbtdJMOWJ7TG_yI38vI2y8pgH8gi2--Ya-GQ$ .. in favor of Democratic nominee Joe Biden and the president refuses to commit to accepting that result if he loses.
The answer, if it comes to that, will depend on the response of Trump’s fellow Republicans. It’s one thing if the numbers on election night, or in the days afterward, show Biden winning handily and Senate Republicans make clear they acknowledge that reality. Then there will be no suspense over the Jan. 6 joint session of Congress that will serve as official confirmation of the result.
But if Senate Republicans hesitate, waiting to see how things play out, then the responsibility will shift to Republicans in battleground states, where Trump could encourage GOP-controlled state legislatures to overturn their voters’ judgment.
Here, the impact of partisan gerrymandering, and the legacy of Trump’s impeachment, both come into play.
The notion of a state’s elected politicians acting to subvert the will of their own citizens should be unthinkable. But that’s, in effect, what gerrymandering is.
Elections are supposed to be held for the benefit of voters so that the public obtains the officeholders it wants. Gerrymandering is premised on the contrary approach: letting incumbent politicians manipulate the electoral system to defy the popular will for partisan advantage.
Soon, the country may be forced to confront the question of whether this anti-democracy attitude has so taken hold that it could actually undo a presidential election.
Indeed, as much as the pandemic has posed huge logistical challenges for election officials, it’s not the coronavirus .. https://www.washingtonpost.com/coronavirus/?itid=lk_inline_manual_14 .. that is causing the greatest electoral stress this year. The bigger challenge is whether the politicians who currently hold the reins of power truly want the outcome of the presidential election to turn on the preferences of the voters.
That’s where impeachment comes in. The House’s impeachment of Trump, and the Senate’s near-party-line vote to acquit him, impose a particular responsibility on Republicans, both in state government and the Senate.
Although it may seem like ancient history, the impeachment was about the election. Trump was impeached for attempting to abuse the powers of incumbency to subvert a fair fight against Biden, his expected, and eventual, opponent. By his behavior, Trump made clear his willingness to cling to power at all costs. Democrats consequently argued for conviction because, they said, he was too dangerous to be allowed to remain in office.
Senate Republicans were correct to resist that move. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) argued to “let the people decide .. https://www.alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2020/2/alexander-on-impeachment-let-the-people-decide ” the president’s fate in November, and I supported that approach. It does not help democracy to deprive one party of its chosen candidate.
AD
The logical consequence of that acquittal is that Alexander and his party now shoulder a responsibility to ensure that their admonition is put into practice. Letting the voters decide now really means letting the voters decide — not attempting to subvert their choice. It means that if Trump tries to secure a second term despite a landslide against him, other elected Republicans must resist that move even if they have the raw power to help Trump’s effort.
One would think decisive results would tamp down the hyperpartisan forces that might try to defy the popular vote. But given the current political culture of the battleground states, where Republicans hold majorities in the legislatures — and do so after the most aggressive cycle of hyper-partisan gerrymandering in U.S. history — there are reasons to worry.
If the race tightens at the end, there’s even more cause for concern, since any temptation toward a power grab will face less counterpressure.
The result could look like this: A majority of voters in a battleground state — Pennsylvania is one potential example — back former vice president Joe Biden. The state’s Democratic governor certifies that result and approves a slate of electors pledged to support Biden. But the state legislature, controlled by Republicans, agrees with Trump that the results are rigged and approves a competing slate of Trump electors.
Undoubtedly, if Republicans attempt to use their gerrymandered power to subvert the popular vote for president this way, they will face lawsuits and massive protests from Democrats.
However, if state legislatures refuse to accept the certified results of their popular votes, the fight will come to Congress in January. And Republicans — including Mike Pence as president of the Senate — will have to decide whether they remain true to Alexander’s principle.
If Democrats take control of the Senate, this won’t matter under the relevant statute. The Democratic House and Senate would reject the Trump elector slate from any state where the popular vote went to Biden. But if Republicans remain in control of the Senate, Republican senators would then have to choose whether to accept the certified results of the popular vote in that state or to jettison their “let the people decide” rhetoric in order to declare Trump the winner.
America was founded on the basic idea of governments “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” as the Declaration of Independence .. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript .. extols. It would be the ultimate violation if GOP senators repudiated this most fundamental of national values solely for the sake of retaining power.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/10/23/could-trump-contest-even-landslide-that-depends-his-fellow-republicans/
See also:
The Election That Could Break America
[...]
The worst case, however, is not that Trump rejects the election outcome. The worst case is that he uses his power to prevent a decisive outcome against him. If Trump sheds all restraint, and if his Republican allies play the parts he assigns them, he could obstruct the emergence of a legally unambiguous victory for Biden in the Electoral College and then in Congress. He could prevent the formation of consensus about whether there is any outcome at all. He could seize on that uncertainty to hold on to power.
P - Trump’s state and national legal teams are already laying the groundwork for postelection maneuvers that would circumvent the results of the vote count in battleground states. Ambiguities in the Constitution and logic bombs in the Electoral Count Act .. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/trump-biden-electoral-count-act-1887/615994/ .. make it possible to extend the dispute all the way to Inauguration Day, which would bring the nation to a precipice. The Twentieth Amendment is crystal clear that the president’s term in office “shall end” at noon on January 20, but two men could show up to be sworn in. One of them would arrive with all the tools and power of the presidency already in hand.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=158516938
UGLY Six Scenarios for Confusion in Counting the 2020 Ballots: Not Just Scary Campfire Stories Any More
[...]
Earlier this month, some 30 political scientists .. https://spark.adobe.com/page/K1q5fm2S6W9ki/ .. met virtually for a public webinar and discussion of outlandish, yet hardly implausible, scenarios of how the 2020 presidential election could devolve into chaos. It was convened by law professors Edward B. Foley and Steven F. Huefner of Ohio State University. (The full video can be accessed here .. https://u.osu.edu/electionlaw/events/what-if-the-2020-presidential-election-is-disputed/ .)
P - The scenarios fell into three time periods.
P - 1. The period from Election Day to the meeting of the electors in the states. (Procedural nerds will know .. https://www.thegreenpapers.com/G20/EC-Meeting.phtml .. that the electors meet on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December, or Dec. 14 this year.)
P - 2. The period from the electors' meeting to the day that Congress counts their votes, which is fixed by statute on Jan. 6 .. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32717.pdf .
P - 3. The period between the counting of the electoral votes to the inauguration on Jan. 20
P - Each of these three periods, the participants agreed, offers its own unique set of legal and constitutional landmines.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=156408411
"fuagf: FL first and then Texas as I believe Texas will Dem!!!"
I'm guessing twenty years ago few of us, if any, even considered we could be talking about the possibility of an
authoritarian wannabe-strongman disputing an election result in the U.S.A. Yet, here we are doing just that.
President Trump speaks during a campaign rally in The Villages, Fla., on Friday.
(Tom Brenner/Reuters)
Opinion by Edward B. Foley Contributing columnist
Oct. 24, 2020 at 9:54 a.m. GMT+11
Could President Trump defy even a landslide against him?
This is, increasingly .. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.nytimes.com/2020/10/21/us/politics/biden-election-landslide.html__;!!KGKeukY!jDgxUPAKbRXeHHzx2ymnPEW8Bk3ys3fbtdJMOWJ7TG_yI38vI2y8pgH8gi0OBzChAg$ , a serious question, as the polls have widened .. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/__;!!KGKeukY!jDgxUPAKbRXeHHzx2ymnPEW8Bk3ys3fbtdJMOWJ7TG_yI38vI2y8pgH8gi2--Ya-GQ$ .. in favor of Democratic nominee Joe Biden and the president refuses to commit to accepting that result if he loses.
The answer, if it comes to that, will depend on the response of Trump’s fellow Republicans. It’s one thing if the numbers on election night, or in the days afterward, show Biden winning handily and Senate Republicans make clear they acknowledge that reality. Then there will be no suspense over the Jan. 6 joint session of Congress that will serve as official confirmation of the result.
But if Senate Republicans hesitate, waiting to see how things play out, then the responsibility will shift to Republicans in battleground states, where Trump could encourage GOP-controlled state legislatures to overturn their voters’ judgment.
Here, the impact of partisan gerrymandering, and the legacy of Trump’s impeachment, both come into play.
The notion of a state’s elected politicians acting to subvert the will of their own citizens should be unthinkable. But that’s, in effect, what gerrymandering is.
Elections are supposed to be held for the benefit of voters so that the public obtains the officeholders it wants. Gerrymandering is premised on the contrary approach: letting incumbent politicians manipulate the electoral system to defy the popular will for partisan advantage.
Soon, the country may be forced to confront the question of whether this anti-democracy attitude has so taken hold that it could actually undo a presidential election.
Indeed, as much as the pandemic has posed huge logistical challenges for election officials, it’s not the coronavirus .. https://www.washingtonpost.com/coronavirus/?itid=lk_inline_manual_14 .. that is causing the greatest electoral stress this year. The bigger challenge is whether the politicians who currently hold the reins of power truly want the outcome of the presidential election to turn on the preferences of the voters.
That’s where impeachment comes in. The House’s impeachment of Trump, and the Senate’s near-party-line vote to acquit him, impose a particular responsibility on Republicans, both in state government and the Senate.
Although it may seem like ancient history, the impeachment was about the election. Trump was impeached for attempting to abuse the powers of incumbency to subvert a fair fight against Biden, his expected, and eventual, opponent. By his behavior, Trump made clear his willingness to cling to power at all costs. Democrats consequently argued for conviction because, they said, he was too dangerous to be allowed to remain in office.
Senate Republicans were correct to resist that move. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) argued to “let the people decide .. https://www.alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2020/2/alexander-on-impeachment-let-the-people-decide ” the president’s fate in November, and I supported that approach. It does not help democracy to deprive one party of its chosen candidate.
AD
The logical consequence of that acquittal is that Alexander and his party now shoulder a responsibility to ensure that their admonition is put into practice. Letting the voters decide now really means letting the voters decide — not attempting to subvert their choice. It means that if Trump tries to secure a second term despite a landslide against him, other elected Republicans must resist that move even if they have the raw power to help Trump’s effort.
One would think decisive results would tamp down the hyperpartisan forces that might try to defy the popular vote. But given the current political culture of the battleground states, where Republicans hold majorities in the legislatures — and do so after the most aggressive cycle of hyper-partisan gerrymandering in U.S. history — there are reasons to worry.
If the race tightens at the end, there’s even more cause for concern, since any temptation toward a power grab will face less counterpressure.
The result could look like this: A majority of voters in a battleground state — Pennsylvania is one potential example — back former vice president Joe Biden. The state’s Democratic governor certifies that result and approves a slate of electors pledged to support Biden. But the state legislature, controlled by Republicans, agrees with Trump that the results are rigged and approves a competing slate of Trump electors.
Undoubtedly, if Republicans attempt to use their gerrymandered power to subvert the popular vote for president this way, they will face lawsuits and massive protests from Democrats.
However, if state legislatures refuse to accept the certified results of their popular votes, the fight will come to Congress in January. And Republicans — including Mike Pence as president of the Senate — will have to decide whether they remain true to Alexander’s principle.
If Democrats take control of the Senate, this won’t matter under the relevant statute. The Democratic House and Senate would reject the Trump elector slate from any state where the popular vote went to Biden. But if Republicans remain in control of the Senate, Republican senators would then have to choose whether to accept the certified results of the popular vote in that state or to jettison their “let the people decide” rhetoric in order to declare Trump the winner.
America was founded on the basic idea of governments “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” as the Declaration of Independence .. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript .. extols. It would be the ultimate violation if GOP senators repudiated this most fundamental of national values solely for the sake of retaining power.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/10/23/could-trump-contest-even-landslide-that-depends-his-fellow-republicans/
See also:
The Election That Could Break America
[...]
The worst case, however, is not that Trump rejects the election outcome. The worst case is that he uses his power to prevent a decisive outcome against him. If Trump sheds all restraint, and if his Republican allies play the parts he assigns them, he could obstruct the emergence of a legally unambiguous victory for Biden in the Electoral College and then in Congress. He could prevent the formation of consensus about whether there is any outcome at all. He could seize on that uncertainty to hold on to power.
P - Trump’s state and national legal teams are already laying the groundwork for postelection maneuvers that would circumvent the results of the vote count in battleground states. Ambiguities in the Constitution and logic bombs in the Electoral Count Act .. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/trump-biden-electoral-count-act-1887/615994/ .. make it possible to extend the dispute all the way to Inauguration Day, which would bring the nation to a precipice. The Twentieth Amendment is crystal clear that the president’s term in office “shall end” at noon on January 20, but two men could show up to be sworn in. One of them would arrive with all the tools and power of the presidency already in hand.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=158516938
UGLY Six Scenarios for Confusion in Counting the 2020 Ballots: Not Just Scary Campfire Stories Any More
[...]
Earlier this month, some 30 political scientists .. https://spark.adobe.com/page/K1q5fm2S6W9ki/ .. met virtually for a public webinar and discussion of outlandish, yet hardly implausible, scenarios of how the 2020 presidential election could devolve into chaos. It was convened by law professors Edward B. Foley and Steven F. Huefner of Ohio State University. (The full video can be accessed here .. https://u.osu.edu/electionlaw/events/what-if-the-2020-presidential-election-is-disputed/ .)
P - The scenarios fell into three time periods.
P - 1. The period from Election Day to the meeting of the electors in the states. (Procedural nerds will know .. https://www.thegreenpapers.com/G20/EC-Meeting.phtml .. that the electors meet on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December, or Dec. 14 this year.)
P - 2. The period from the electors' meeting to the day that Congress counts their votes, which is fixed by statute on Jan. 6 .. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32717.pdf .
P - 3. The period between the counting of the electoral votes to the inauguration on Jan. 20
P - Each of these three periods, the participants agreed, offers its own unique set of legal and constitutional landmines.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=156408411
It was Plato who said, “He, O men, is the wisest, who like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing”
Discover What Traders Are Watching
Explore small cap ideas before they hit the headlines.
