The Trump campaign is reportedly 'discussing contingency plans to bypass election results'

It doesn't sound like what they are talking about is a split system, more "all or nothing . . . but send them all my way even if I didn't have more votes in your state" thing. If they were just talking about a split system, I'd actually be in favor or that as well. I wish my state would do it so that I could feel like my vote actually meant something.

 

Yep, and still has the gall to claim that russian bots were out to get Hilldawg....when it was that bitch that paid for the fabricated russian dossier.....I mean really...you can't make this **** up.

The democrats and deep staters ran a 3 year coup attempt against the man and now they get all upset when Trump doubts their integrity???? **** yeah I would too.

Al Franken is their model. They will try to steal one again if given the chance.

 

Talk talk, feelings.

What really happened, thousands of women wearing puusies on their heads marching in the streets. Spare me the hypothetical right wing drama. the real queens are on the left.

 

I do. Again, these are means to try to convince voters, and parties often use unethical means or even fraudulent means. But once the voters express their wishes, to alter that and steal the election is a whole other level of magnitude of electoral fraud.

 

The debate (if there was any) if Trump will or will not accept an election defeat is long over.
Trump himself has made it perfectly clear he has NO intention of stepping down, not on 4th of November or in January 2021.
Probably not ever, unless his death forces him to.
Trump said he will contest his defeat all the way to the Supreme Court. (Should he lose.)
Which is why he quickly wants to install a new conservative judge.

But this is old news.
He has been planning this all along, from the moment he ascended his golden escalator in 2016.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

If Trump loses the election he will blatantly assault American democracy by ignoring his defeat.

The banality of immorality.

And the world will watch and observe. What else can it do?
Same old story.

 

It would have to get past the House, and don't see that happening.

 

Class and integrity???? Are you serious? Maybe 40 years ago that would be IMO a valid statement but now, with that overstuffed potato occupying the White House ruling in an authoritarian style and now issuing a veiled threat regarding what he'll do if he doesn't win and the party overall has become the party of hypocrisy by walking in lockstep with whatever McConnell tells them to do (does the recent SCOTUS fiasco ring any bells??).

They should never, ever complain what the democrats do after what they've done in the past 4 years. They are close to dismantling the democracy we've all enjoyed since the founding of this country.

 

Trump stops being President on January 21, unless the Democrat-controlled House votes to certify the election.

If Republican-controlled states have decided to throw out the popular vote due to so-called "fraud" from mail and absentee ballots, the House will simply choose not to certify those state results.

And if the House cannot certify that anyone won 270 Electoral votes, than Congress does an election and the House votes for President while Senate votes for VP.

House will surely pick Joe Biden.

 

No, it wouldn't. I don't think you understand the process. The states are the ones that select the Electoral College electors, not the Federal House of Representatives.

 

Unfortunately it's not a vote by majority of all representatives. It's by state delegation in the House (like all North Carolina representatives pick one, then all Georgia representatives pick one, etc, and the one with more states picking him, wins), and the Republicans have more delegations. They would elect Trump.

 

i heard that he was going to unleash Godzilla, Bigfoot and Loch Ness monster on us. please discuss

 

I'll discuss it right after you discuss what I also heard, that the sky will fall and that America will be utterly destroyed and will become a socialist s... hole with no borders if Biden is elected and they will come for our guns (same claims issued before both Obama elections and last I checked the sky was still up there, and my gun was still in my walk-in closet, although I haven't checked today... hang on... [runs to the living room and looks out from the backyard door, runs back to the walk in closet and looks at the gun, runs back to the laptop]... yep, the sky is still up there and my gun is still here. So, address that first, then I'll address your Godzilla, Bigfoot, and Loch Ness monster claim.

 

I don't think stealing the election as you suggest is constitutionally possible. The President must be certified as the winner of the election before January 20 or his term runs out and the House elects a President

 

First, per your request, I would not support such a move. Why? Because it is completely ignoring Article Two, Section 1 and Clause 2 of the US Constitution:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The states choose the Delegates. Most states allow the individual parties choose their own delegates. Assuming that "TheWeek" who is quoting "The Atlantic" is correct, and this is being discussed, then it is not a way to bypass the elections. It would be a manner to bypass a group of GOP "Never Trumpers" from hijacking the process to unseat Trump and put someone that someone that was not on the ballot in his place. That is the only reason to ensure that the delegates are loyal to you. The President has no authority to decide which Democrat Delegates are appointed. Therefore, this is fake news that you fell for. Both parties are putting this type of crap out there hoping to delude Moderates and Independents into voting for someone based on false information. Don't fall for it. Research the subject before you parrot it.

Just some friendly advice.

 

Well, thank you for the friendly advice but you didn't seem to understand the issue. It is perfectly possible in a DISPUTED election result in Pennsylvania where the Board of Elections would NOT certify the results, and then the State Legislature would select a number of electors to the Electoral College loyal to Trump regardless of what the total for the popular vote was showing at the time.

As in: The Dems win the election in Pennsylvania by 100,000 votes. The GOP disputes 200,000 mail-in ballots on various claims of fraud. Recounts drag on and on. No resolution is found, lawsuits fly all over the place, the courts take their time considering it, the deadline for naming the Electoral College electors for Pennsylvania approaches with no resolution, there is no certification of results, then Pennsylvania names delegates loyal to Trump, who proceed to vote for him, regardless of the apparent victory by the Democrats by 100,000 votes. Get it? There would be no way for the Democratic Party to select electors if there was no certification of a Democrat victory.

And again, I'm not "falling" for anything. I said, IF true, would you support it? Thank you for answering "no."

What part of IF you don't understand? It's a very simple word with only two letters.

You might want to think twice before you call me a parrot, despite your claim of being "friendly." A parrot wouldn't question the veracity of what is being reported, wouldn't add the conditional IF, and wouldn't think deeper about possible scenarios even beyond what the article is saying.

So now I expect you to take back your accusation that I'm a parrot, and apologize. Waiting...

Oh, and by the way, Trump has just added more suspicious behavior to what I had already said previously: he said that we need to rush through the nomination of RBG's Supreme Court replacement, so that the full Court can rule on disputed state results.

I mean, it does seem like Trump is trying to sow doubt on results already... and anticipating that such moves will happen but will be challenged and the SC will rule, just like in Bush v. Gore. So, getting a loyalist there at the SCOTUS *and* invoking this reason, already doesn't bode well.

 

Did the article explain how the President would actually bypass the Constitution Clause that I provided. Nothing states that the President can bypass the Constitution if a state does not certify the elections. What is more likely going to happen in a replay of 2000. In that election, Florida certified the elections, and then allowed campaigns to fight it out in the courts.

In the case of Pennsylvania, there is no automatic recount based on a small margin of victory, but all it takes to get a recount is for three qualified electors to alleging fraud or error in the tabulation. They do not even have to state what they are claiming happened. I guarantee, the DNC will have at least three poll workers in every precinct ready to claim problems with the tabulation of absentee votes. So, there will almost certainly be a recount of the entire state. If there is not a recount, or if the recount goes in favor of one candidate, then there would be no reason for the state not to certify the elections results. If they still refuse, then it would go to the courts. There is nothing that states that the President can certify the election results, or choose delegates, on his own. So, the article, as I stated, is not based on facts, but on pure speculation that ignores the actual facts.

Again, please research, before you post!!!!

 

First, I changed my post #40, you quoted an earlier version. Re-read it please. I said I was going beyond the article, and did.
Second, where did I say that the PRESIDENT would certify the election results, or choose delegates on his own???
Please kindly point to where I said it. Oh, you can't? That's because I never said it!!!
And yes, see my changed post, edited 24 minutes ago when your response quoting an earlier version was posted 10 minutes ago, and you'll see that I had already considered the involvement of the courts.
Still waiting for that apology...
Oh, and by the way, I don't see the Democrats saying all the time - in advance - that there will be fraud and the results will be invalid. It's Trump who is saying it, so why in the hell are you singling out the DNC on this?

 

The House has to certify the EC results. There is no winner until they do.

 

There is no bigger, more vocal drama queen in the US than the one in the Oval Office.

 

Trump did not say he would contest the election. He was asked if he would support the outcome on Nov. 3 as it was and he said he didn't know. This is the same crap the media tried with Trump and Hillary. Why would he accept ant concede if he thought there was fraud? Trust me Biden is already planning to contest if he loses. So why would Trump doubt the results of the election?

1. Could it be the states that are sending out ballots and are open to be being filled out by anyone.

2. Some states are allowing anyone to pick up ballots from nursing homes or collecting them from neighborhoods which opens them to the possibility of being opened and cherry picked or tossed in a garbage can.

3. Democrat judges have constantly ruled against Republicans on voter I.D.

4. Democrat governor's have made a concerted effort to release prisoners this year and restore their right to vote.

5. Democrat governor's have extended voting hours in black districts .

6. Michael Bloomberg has pumped millions into Florida to pay fines of blacks so they can vote. (Criminal)

7. A couple Democrat states now don't require a person to show proof of who they are at the polls.

8. Some Democrat States now are allowing voters to mail their ballots in up to 6 days after the election.

9. The Democrats have already hired 100's of lawyers to challenge districts Trump wins this year.

10. As usual the media will continue to distort any truth of Trumps and twist his words.

There are other scams they have set up. So don't be surprised if Trump has suspicion of the results of the election. These are the same Democrats who did not except

the 2016 election and impeached Trump on a scenario of lies and false facts.

 

If he does, Dems only have themselves to blame for handing him everything he needs to contest results. Im not voting for Trump and I am getting a mail in ballot shoved down my throat by Dems.

When Hillary lost, well known actors had TV commercials trying to persuade electors to go against voters. Dems are the ones trying to change the rules and if this does happen, they deserve it.

 

Before you worry about this too much, you ought to look just a little more deeply into the claims made by the source, and the source's source.
"Reportedly".
No specifics - not even a claim of an anonymous source.

This is nothing but MSDNC propaganda, disseminated by the dishonest for consumption by the ignorant.

 

if Trump does actually try to pull something like this, we may have civil war

 

Absolutely! Who knew a Sweet Potato Hitler would be such a whiner. He's always crying about being a victim...Trumplethinskin

 

Yes, people do think that is a possibility. That is Trump not getting re-elected and telling his fans that it is a fix, he really won. Trump now has apparently 500 militia groups who he can call on. These right wing militias appear to have the support of the Police in places like Portland. Watching Trump is a display of how Dictators actually manage to come into being - not that he necessarily will.