General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTribe: Trump may be preparing to have red state legislatures declare election results invalid
and then name their own slate of electors, if the voters don't support Trump.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/trump-delay-election-tweet-mail-voting-2020-twitter-a9646786.html
Democratic Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a former constitutional law professor at American Universitys Washington College of Law, said in a phone interview that he was not surprised by Trumps sudden interest in delaying an election he is likely to lose.
-snip-
But according to the man who taught Raskin constitutional law at Harvard Law School, an attempt by Trump to delay the November election is not the nightmare scenario Democrats need to worry about.
He must know or even though he's personally very ignorant, his lawyers must know that three US code chapter one, which sets the date for the election, can be changed only by Congress, said Harvard Emeritus Professor Laurence Tribe, author of the seminal law school text on the constitution, American Constitutional Law.
Tribe posited that because only Congress can change the date of the election, Trump is positioning himself to blame the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives and Speaker Nancy Pelosi for making it impossible to pass any sort of measure to carry out his demand, and to pressure Republican-controlled state legislatures to nullify the results should he lose in states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, or Michigan.
Once he blames the House, then I think it's his plan to try to get a red state like Pennsylvania to invoke three USC section two, [which allows state legisatures to appoint electors directly] and claim that the election failed because of fraudulent mail-in ballots, and therefore the state legislature should name its own slate, rather than rely on the results of the popular election, he said. That's really what we have to be prepared for. We can't simply assume that the guy [Trump] is as dumb as he seems this is a setup for something else.
-snip-
Wanderlust988
(509 posts)There is NO way a state legislature will go against the will of their own people and try to do this. If Trump loses, the GOP will drop him like a hot potato and move on to fight in 2024. They will not go down the drain for him and ruin their own careers for this maniac should he lose in November and it's a clear and convincing loss.
Hekate
(91,005 posts)The Trumpers are quite the crazy bunch and we can't assume they will go quietly.
unblock
(52,489 posts)It's probably safe to say that if Biden wins a state by 5% or more, they're not going to override it.
But gore won Florida in 2000 by any reasonable measure and they gave it to shrub. Obviously that was an extremely close election though. But the election of 1876 was a mess and the eventual agreement didn't really reflect the will of the people.
I think we're crooks to rely on democratic norms and traditions when there's a blatant fascist running. There's just no way he's not already cheating and he's going to continue to find ways to get an edge any way he can. If republicans can win by defying the will of the people in one or two republican controlled states that vote for Biden, You can bet they're looking into how they can throw the election to donnie.
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)Thekaspervote
(32,820 posts)First Speaker
(4,858 posts)...so maybe, it isn't just "alarmism". Today's GOP is capable of anything, especially on the state legislature level, which is where the real lunatics are.
Thekaspervote
(32,820 posts)The objection comes same as in the practice medicine...theres theory, and theres practice. They are 2 entirely different things. This is the very reason most academics with good reason dont practice law ....or medicine
Its a really big stretch.
CousinIT
(9,269 posts)uponit7771
(90,371 posts)CatWoman
(79,302 posts)spanone
(135,924 posts)Lawrence Tribe does not do alarmism
Azathoth
(4,611 posts)and let many of their own citizens die for no reason other than to stick it to the black guy?
The GOP is a death cult. They no longer even pretend to craft policies that will appeal to a majority.
Dustlawyer
(10,499 posts)Governor Abbott, Lieutenant Gov Dan (old people sacrifice for the economy ) Patrick, and Texas AG Ken Paxton would overturn the election in a heartbeat if it is anywhere close. These are Kool-Aid drinking SOB's that have no F's to give when it comes to respecting the process and the Constitution.
onetexan
(13,079 posts)edhopper
(33,658 posts)for 3 and a half years?
Quixote1818
(29,018 posts)unblock
(52,489 posts)I think the list includes:
Wisconsin
Michigan
Pennsylvania
Ohio
North Carolina
Florida
Georgia
Texas
Arizona
I could be wrong on a few of these but I think they all have Republican legislatures and governors but Biden will surely win at least some of these. In fact it's hard to see him winning the election without some of these, which is why we need to be prepared for republican efforts to steal these states through legislative action.
moose65
(3,169 posts)Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina all have Democratic governors now.
Got it from https://ballotpedia.org/Gubernatorial_and_legislative_party_control_of_state_government
But looks like that doesn't reflect the 2018 election.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,703 posts)The legislature has no role in sending the slate of electors to congress, unless they change the law before Election Day.
unblock
(52,489 posts)michigan should be no problem if these aren't in republicans' hands any more.
but other states may have different laws. i don't know what happens if the s.o.s. refuses to certify anything, for instance.
in some states, the legislature would have to change the law prior to the election, but they could do that if the polls look bad for donnie. they could even try to spin it as a contingency just based on covid-19 or protests or something. some states may already have laws to invalidate an election if the s.o.s. determines there was "too much fraud" or something.
moose65
(3,169 posts)These states now have a Dem governor and Secretary of State:
Michigan
Wisconsin
Pennsylvania
North Carolina
None of those states had Dems in both of those offices in 2016. Governors have a lot of influence into how the elections are carried out, and Secretaries of State are responsible for running and certifying the elections.
triron
(22,030 posts)corrupted in 2016 by Russian (and other) hackers. So they went for Trump.
PTWB
(4,131 posts)I thought that was debunked.
stopdiggin
(11,411 posts)LiberalFighter
(51,301 posts)Meaning that the Russians used social medial to sway the voters or have voters not vote.
PTWB
(4,131 posts)That isnt hacking. We are all aware of the misinformation campaign. But this poster was suggesting actual votes were changed after theyd been cast.
brooklynite
(94,950 posts)delisen
(6,046 posts)delisen
(6,046 posts)PTWB
(4,131 posts)uponit7771
(90,371 posts)delisen
(6,046 posts)Don't know if he killed the investigation.
Russians had gotten into over 35 state elections. The las t word to was that they did not have evidence to unequivocally prove changing of votes-which is different from saying it was debunked.
SoonerPride
(12,286 posts)So IOW states Biden needs to get 270
Sugarcoated
(7,736 posts)Red states we could win that have Repub govs: FL, GA, AZ, IA, NC, OH. If Bide wins all the blue states + PA, MI & WI (all Dem govs), none of those states matter.
However, blue states of MD, MA and VT have Repub govs. I don't know if they would participate in a hypothetical scheme to steal the presidency or how it would affect things if they did
Red states with Dem govs: MT, NC
moose65
(3,169 posts)Youve got NC on your list with both a Republican and Democratic governor 😃
Sugarcoated
(7,736 posts)smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)He is not your typical republican. And it would be the end of his career if he even tried. He and his family would have to move somewhere far away.
Thekaspervote
(32,820 posts)Hekate
(91,005 posts)Response to highplainsdem (Original post)
StarfishSaver This message was self-deleted by its author.
elleng
(131,370 posts)stopdiggin
(11,411 posts)sh*t on Twitter. This time (and because he's sinking like a f*cking rock) it's stupid enough that the GOP comes out publicly to say BULLSH*T. And now we have Lawrence to come nattering along about how it's all really a cleaver feint -- because he really has this super-dooper election cheat up his sleeve!
K then.
--- ---
Thekaspervote
(32,820 posts)C_U_L8R
(45,035 posts)Me.
(35,454 posts)That positing worries such as this depresses the vote and is part of a planned action to suppress the vote. I am surprised at such a man as Tribe passing this along.
Doodley
(9,176 posts)Thekaspervote
(32,820 posts)That most of the time was just that, pretty far out stuff
Me.
(35,454 posts)But as I said, I'm only repeating what PBO said in his eulogy for John Lewis
NYC Liberal
(20,138 posts)PBO is right. This is a distraction designed to suppress turnout by making people think their vote wont matter.
Me.
(35,454 posts)MFGsunny
(2,356 posts)Doodley
(9,176 posts)He will destroy our democracy to stay in power. That is a reason for a strong vote against him. We need to win by such a wide that he will look like a poor loser.
Me.
(35,454 posts)but I agree with the last real president...we don't want people saying what's the use and staying home.
Zorro
(15,756 posts)There would be massive riots and legislators who would support such tactics would be painting a target on their backs.
LiberalFighter
(51,301 posts)LiberalFighter
(51,301 posts)Thekaspervote
(32,820 posts)The state is going to have 2 dem senators. That guy is all in it for himself.
andym
(5,446 posts)necessary.
Trump cheats at golf, on wives, and apparently at businesses with scams like Trump U. He lies or states untrue information habitually--greater than 20000 lies so far according to the Washington Post. Most importantly, he has a deep psychological need to win at any cost. So would he try to cheat at the election? Of course he would.
.
The GOP has a recent history of trying to win by any means necessary. Forget Bush V Gore and Florida in 2000. The voter suppression tactics that we agree they have employed to keep hundreds of thousands of not millions of minorities and Democrats from voting is well documented. They clearly believe the integrity of the voting system in America should be tampered with to favor themselves. Would they go along with Trump in his greatest scam of all time? You be the judge.
Thekaspervote
(32,820 posts)State politics is a different ball game, they would be risking more than they care to
mac56
(17,575 posts)Thekaspervote
(32,820 posts)Support the popular vote
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/06/politics/faithless-electors-supreme-court/index.html
Azathoth
(4,611 posts)SCOTUS held that state legislatures can place any restriction on their electors they want, including binding them to vote a particular way and punishing them if they don't.
The plaintiffs in the SCOTUS case didn't pledge to vote for the "popular vote winner", even though it was widely misreported that way. They pledged to vote for their party's nominees for POTUS and VPOTUS. The state fined them because they broke that pledge.
States can appoint whichever electors they choose, however they choose, and they are free to put any restrictions on them they choose. The popular vote plays absolutely no role except in state law.
Thekaspervote
(32,820 posts)The Supreme"The Constitution's text and the Nation's history both support allowing a State to enforce an elector's pledge to support his party's nominee -- and the state voters' choice -- for President," she added. Court said Monday that states can punish members of the Electoral College who break a pledge to vote for a state's popular vote winner in presidential elections.
Today, we consider whether a State may also penalize an elector for breaking his pledge and voting for someone other than the presidential candidate who won his State's popular vote. We hold that a State may do so," Justice Elena Kagan wrote.
"The Constitution's text and the Nation's history both support allowing a State to enforce an elector's pledge to support his party's nominee -- and the state voters' choice -- for President," she added.
Washington state Attorney General Robert Ferguson told the justices that since the creation of the Electoral College, there have only been 165 faithless electors representing less than 1% of the Electoral College votes cast for president. Of those, 71 changed their vote in 1872 and 1912 because the candidate they pledged their vote for died.
"The scattered examples that remain have been largely symbolic gestures with no chance of impacting results," Ferguson said, adding that "over the last century, no elector for a winning presidential candidate has switched votes to the losing candidate."
Also https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/the-electoral-college.aspx
Some states have passed laws that require their electors to vote as pledged. These laws may either impose a fine on an elector who fails to vote according to the statewide or district popular vote, or may disqualify an elector who violates his or her pledge and provide a replacement elector. In July 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it is constitutional for states to enact this type of law. The states with laws that attempt to bind the votes of presidential electors are below:
States With Laws That Attempt to Bind the Votes of Presidential Electors
Alabama Mississippi
Alaska
Montana
Arizona Nebraska
California Nevada
Colorado New Mexico
Connecticut North Carolina
Delaware Oklahoma
District of Columbia Ohio
Florida Oregon
Hawaii South Carolina
Indiana Tennessee
Maine Vermont
Maryland Virginia
Massachusetts Washington
Michigan Wisconsin
Minnesota Wyoming
Most of the laws cited above require electors to vote for the candidate of the party that nominated the elector, or require the elector to sign a pledge to do so. Some go further: Oklahoma imposes a civil penalty of $1,000; in North Carolina, the fine is $500, the faithless elector is deemed to have resigned, and a replacement is appointed. In South Carolina, an elector who violates his or her pledge is subject to criminal penalties, and in New Mexico a violation is a fourth degree felony. In Michigan and Utah, a candidate who fails to vote as required is considered to have resigned, and a replacement is appointed.
Kaleva
(36,395 posts)Thekaspervote
(32,820 posts)coti
(4,612 posts)PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,927 posts)That and the "Trump isn't sure if he'll abide by an election vote not in his favor" b.s. The results are the results. Candidates, even incumbents don't have a choice about abiding by the results.
Thekaspervote
(32,820 posts)PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,927 posts)I get extremely tired of and exasperated by the posts that say the election will be postponed or cancelled or Trump will refuse to leave the White House. I wish there would be some kind of a ban on them.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,703 posts)Legislature would have to change the law BEFORE Election Day.
C Moon
(12,226 posts)They were hoping to pull the same tricks they did in 2016, but everything is falling apart.
His only hope is to break the law.
GETPLANING
(846 posts)because they know they will lose. Don't think Trump is aware of what is going on in Bolivia and thinks to himself, "why not?"
CaptainTruth
(6,616 posts)I will be one of them.
wiggs
(7,820 posts)lies, grifting, and incompetence behind us what is the wiser course:
...to prepare for additional abuse of office by exposing, discussing, and doing what we can to prevent it (thank you Professor Tribe)
or
...give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that even this WH and enablers wouldn't dare use power in this way to benefit themselves
From the beginning it was always clear who this guy is and he continues to prove it every day yet, still, there are opinions that destruction of the next 'norm' couldn't possibly happen. Because.
The silence and complicity of the GOP tells me they see a way through this that doesn't include a normal election. Tribe's warning describes just one of many ways this happens and deserves serious attention. I'm sure if Tribe sees it as a possibility, the Stephen Millers, the Bannons, the McConnells, the Barrs, and the Carlsons have been evaluating it. I hope dems realize they need to be thinking ahead as well.