Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Zoonart

(11,879 posts)
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 09:17 AM Sep 2020

Best logical explanation yet of why 45's ballot disqualification charade is just that!



How exactly is that going to work, in practice? Because—bear with me people, and let me know if I’m totally off base here—but doesn’t every single ballot that has Trump’s name on it also have the name of every Republican and Democratic candidate for offices ranging from U.S. Senator to county dog catcher?

In some cases you have up to twenty or thirty candidates on the ballot. And that’s true whether you mail your ballot in or slog it out at the voting booth. Literally thousands of elections are happening on November 3rd, not just Donald Trump vs. Joe Biden. Do we really expect every single Democrat on those mail-in ballots, candidates for county solicitors, city councils, school boards, district justices, sheriffs, Senators, Congressmen and Congresswomen, Clerks, Prothonotaries, Mayors, Judges, Attorneys General, Governors, Lieutenant Governors, state representatives and state senators, to sit there quietly while Donald Trump’s distinctly unstellar lawyers tie up—and possibly ruin-- their careers for what could be months of litigation by bogus allegations of fraud? For that matter, how many Republican candidates for office are going to be willing to stand for that? Now multiply that by a whole lot of states, and you’ll see a morass emerging on an incalculable scale. Are they planning on going to go district by district? You gotta be kidding me.

Because every single mail-in ballot that Trump’s lackeys say is fraudulently cast also must be deemed fraudulent for those other candidates—on the same ballot--as well.

No amount of Republican collusion gets us past that fact. If he tries this, he will run into opposition on a scale he can’t possibly cope with. And a whole lot of angry people, on both sides, because mail-in balloting is hardly monolithic to one party, everywhere around the country. They vary, district to district based on population and other demographics.

And these people have huge egos, most of them. And a whole lot of money, power and influence. Their entire careers are going to be on the line. Does anyone expect them to sit on their hands while Donald Trump runs his last big con?


Part of a longer article worthy of a read.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/9/24/1979752/-Americans-are-finding-out-this-Emperor-is-naked-and-his-private-parts-are-not-very-impressive





11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Best logical explanation yet of why 45's ballot disqualification charade is just that! (Original Post) Zoonart Sep 2020 OP
All true, but how could these people stop Trump from acting? Laelth Sep 2020 #1
It's called an Amicus curiae brief. eppur_se_muova Sep 2020 #2
That just keeps the matter before the Courts. Laelth Sep 2020 #3
IMO, a big win for Biden in the EC Just_Vote_Dem Sep 2020 #4
If Joe win Ohio, Arizona, Iowa, Florida on Election night...it is over. Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #5
If Biden wins just FL, it's all over- Trump can't win without FL (since he's losing Rust Belt) nt Fiendish Thingy Sep 2020 #9
And at a certain time...January 21st...if it went that long and I doubt it would...Nancy is Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #6
HAHA THIS! Zoonart Sep 2020 #7
Or, at some time BEFORE January 21 ... Laelth Sep 2020 #8
That is NOT what SCOTUS did in 2000 Fiendish Thingy Sep 2020 #10
In effect, that is EXACTLY what they did. Laelth Sep 2020 #11

Laelth

(32,017 posts)
1. All true, but how could these people stop Trump from acting?
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 09:36 AM
Sep 2020

If Trump wants to tie up the election in the Courts, he can, and there’s no mechanism for all these adversely-affected politicians to stop him.

-Laelth

eppur_se_muova

(36,296 posts)
2. It's called an Amicus curiae brief.
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 09:46 AM
Sep 2020

In principle, anyone who can show they are affected by a court's action can file such a brief. It is not uncommon for there to be dozens such briefs in important cases.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amicus_curiae

Laelth

(32,017 posts)
3. That just keeps the matter before the Courts.
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 09:49 AM
Sep 2020

It doesn’t stop Trump from tying up the entire election in the Courts, as suggested by the OP.

-Laelth

Demsrule86

(68,691 posts)
5. If Joe win Ohio, Arizona, Iowa, Florida on Election night...it is over.
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 10:00 AM
Sep 2020

Trump has to win everything he won last time and three states are already out of reach IMHO.

Demsrule86

(68,691 posts)
6. And at a certain time...January 21st...if it went that long and I doubt it would...Nancy is
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 10:01 AM
Sep 2020

President.

Zoonart

(11,879 posts)
7. HAHA THIS!
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 10:05 AM
Sep 2020

But I think that, to the point of the author of this article, the shit storm that this would put into motion would not be countenanced by the GOP in general. None of the down ballot nominees want to have this shit storm effect their chances to win their own elections.
It is a shit storm of mammoth proportion that no one needs.

Laelth

(32,017 posts)
8. Or, at some time BEFORE January 21 ...
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 10:23 AM
Sep 2020

The SCOTUS steps in and says, “This is a mess. To prevent panic, to provide certainty, to avoid civil unrest, and to insure the peaceful transition of power, we hereby declare that Donald J. Trump is the duly-elected President of the United States.”

Then what?

That’s what they did in 2000.

-Laelth

Fiendish Thingy

(15,657 posts)
10. That is NOT what SCOTUS did in 2000
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 11:03 AM
Sep 2020

They ruled on whether a recount should proceed or not.
SCOTUS has no authority to rule on the winner of an election, only on voting process and violations of voting rights.

If Trump is able to get a court to stop an INITIAL counting of ballots, and succeeds in getting uncanvassed ballots thrown out simply because they are mail-in ballots, without allowing each state to canvass the ballots for authenticity themselves, then the American Experiment is truly over.

I think it is highly unlikely that SCOTUS would even agree to hear such a case, let alone rule against the states.

Laelth

(32,017 posts)
11. In effect, that is EXACTLY what they did.
Fri Sep 25, 2020, 11:06 AM
Sep 2020

The legal posture and various legal arguments they put forward are irrelevant. The result of their ruling was that George W. Bush became our 43rd President. They ruled against the Supreme Court of Florida in 2000. What makes you think that they wouldn’t usurp state sovereignty again?



They could, and might, do the same thing this year if the conditions allow for it.

-Laelth

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Best logical explanation ...