After Mr. Paxton filed, Republican attorneys general from across the country rushed to declare themselves on board, posting their support on social media and issuing statements that echoed the legally questionable claim in the Texas brief that its citizens are harmed if elections in other states are not conducted properly.
The 17 states behind the amicus brief represent a majority of the 25 Republican attorneys general across the country, and include Alabama, Florida, Kansas, Missouri, Louisiana and South Dakota. Notably, the two Republican attorneys general in the battleground states that Mr. Trump lost — Arizona and Georgia — are not part of the brief.
Legal experts and a handful of Republican elected officials have questioned the seriousness of the suit, pointing out that states like Texas have no standing to bring a case involving how another state awards its electoral votes.
Except it seems to be the majority of Republicans we're talking about, not a fringe group:Well they're not particularly wedded to the Republican Party and their media toadies. These people are like the right's version of the #BernieOrBust-ers.
70 percent of Republicans now say they don’t believe the 2020 election was free and fair, a stark rise from the 35 percent of GOP voters who held similar beliefs before the election. ... Among those who believed that the election wasn’t free and fair, 78 percent believed that mail-in voting led to widespread voter fraud
HOUSTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a lawsuit backed by President Donald Trump to overturn Joe Biden’s election victory, ending a desperate attempt to get legal issues rejected by state and federal judges before the nation’s highest court.
What specifically did Democrats do in 2000 that strikes you as equivalent to:Fascism when Republicans cry fraud, legit when Democrats cried in 2000 about it.
What specifically did Democrats do in 2000 that strikes you as equivalent to:
- the President refusing to formally concede the election, routinely alleging widespread voting fraud in the absence of evidence, and systematically pressuring state leaders to ignore their vote tallies
- the GSA delaying the transition process of the President-Elect
- a DOJ investigation of state election boards
- red states suing blue states over their election procedures
- a member of the President's legal team in federal court asking the judge to bar a state from certifying its vote tally and instead have the state's legislature choose the electors in violation of the Constitution
What specifically did Democrats do in 2000 that strikes you as equivalent to:
- the President refusing to formally concede the election, routinely alleging widespread voting fraud in the absence of evidence, and systematically pressuring state leaders to ignore their vote tallies
- the GSA delaying the transition process of the President-Elect
- a DOJ investigation of state election boards
- red states suing blue states over their election procedures
- a member of the President's legal team in federal court asking the judge to bar a state from certifying its vote tally and instead have the state's legislature choose the electors in violation of the Constitution
Gore didn't formally concede until Dec 13 himself
It's not "just making hot air" when a President is such a fervent liar that he convinces half the country he won an election that he actually lost. It's a personality cult, the kind of shit that puts dictators in power in countries with weaker rule of law. Though the GOP hasn't outright disregarded the law, the absurd number of avenues they pursued to overturn this election suggests that they would have gladly stolen it from Biden if they had the power to.Trump has already stated that he will accept the loss when the electoral college votes in Biden's favor, he's just making hot air as he always does
You're making a false equivalency. The media does not possess the authority of a government institution. Trump used his authority as President to delay his successor. And John Adams doesn't "set a precedent" -- that was over 200 years ago, and no outgoing President has pulled anything this crazy in modern times.Trump's entire presidency was arguably delayed (assuming he didn't use it as an excuse to do little) by countless false allegations spread by our state-controlled media that he had committed treason. I don't know the full history of President-elect transitions but can tell you there's at least precedent going back to John Adams of fucking over the incoming President (the midnight court packing and all of that). Not sure how making life uncomfortable for your political opponent is fascist.
Right, and while we're at it let's go around shooting holes in bridges to see if they collapse. That'll motivate the DOTs to enforce bridge inspection standards.And to the broader point of election fraud itself, there is no question that we have an incredibly inefficient system when countries like Brazil can carry out elections faster and more verifiably than us. Our system was pretty much founded on back-dealing and anti-democratic principles of giving power and land to small respective minorities of each state, and issues like election observers not being able to observe, ballot harvesting, and judges being able to arbitrarily change the law under "emergency circumstances" all contribute to . If Trump is able to force Congress to standardize our federal elections by sheer willpower of trolling then all the better.
Actually neither party should be doing any of this shit, and the fact that you're cheering on this kind of batshit conflict escalation goes to show how useless it is discussing any of this with you, because ultimately you just don't give a fuck and would be fine with watching the country burn.A great move. Red states should continue to sue and grind the system to a halt just as blue states repeatedly did to try and prevent the Executive from fulfilling its role in matters of immigration, taxation, and trade.