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

sunonmars

(8,656 posts)
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 05:17 PM Nov 2020

Supreme Court declines to Take Up Pennsylvania Absentee Ballot Case




Supreme Court Does Not Take Up Pennsylvania Absentee Ballot Case
Republicans have asked the high court to block all absentee ballots that arrived in Pennsylvania after Election Day. The Supreme Court on Monday took no action on the case.

.......................

Trumpy is gonna blow a gasket.
52 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court declines to Take Up Pennsylvania Absentee Ballot Case (Original Post) sunonmars Nov 2020 OP
But...but...but they marched to the court on Saturday. Grins Nov 2020 #1
Trump drive by and waved, sort of underpants Nov 2020 #5
I hope he blows two gaskets. grumpyduck Nov 2020 #2
Well, he BLOWS.............. MyOwnPeace Nov 2020 #12
This is not going to look good on Rudy's resume... Grins Nov 2020 #3
Giuliani Arrives in Ukraine to Look for More Votes underpants Nov 2020 #11
Another gem from good ol' Andy. BobTheSubgenius Nov 2020 #50
What's Borowitz going to do after Jan. 20? central scrutinizer Nov 2020 #52
they won't even notice, they're all distracted by finding 2k votes in a red county in GA Amishman Nov 2020 #4
Biden's lead in Georgia has gone up 33 in the recount to 14,205. sunonmars Nov 2020 #6
Oh too too perfect!! Thekaspervote Nov 2020 #9
Oh that is why he was tweeting about the recount being unfair.. helpisontheway Nov 2020 #21
The republicans are trying to toss out legitimate signatures, from initial voter registrations, not_the_one Nov 2020 #49
I hadn't heard about this yet. underpants Nov 2020 #8
not sure its made the national news circuit yet Amishman Nov 2020 #14
Thanks. Net 778 for Trump. underpants Nov 2020 #15
Dems will have zero objection to counting those votes. maxsolomon Nov 2020 #10
or just suddenly appeared out of nowhere........ sunonmars Nov 2020 #16
The right will be screaming that they finally have concrete evidence that Chainfire Nov 2020 #18
You don't just find 2K votes, what came in would not have matched the totals posted. Sounds suss. sunonmars Nov 2020 #19
As it is said, in the Holy Bible, Chainfire Nov 2020 #20
This orangecrush Nov 2020 #27
Not really out of nowhere. The amount of total votes tallied by the tabulator was less than the LiberalArkie Nov 2020 #35
Important note: they didn't find 2,000 votes for tRump... robbob Nov 2020 #48
This really is the end! But when ya got a crack legal team headed by rudy..never know Thekaspervote Nov 2020 #7
great news T Ruth Phairy Nov 2020 #13
This was bound to happen. Eyeball_Kid Nov 2020 #34
He's going to march up there and drag Barrett out by her hair! spooky3 Nov 2020 #17
The Underwear Gnome legal team Trump hired isn't doing well. Kaleva Nov 2020 #22
Roberts wants him gone. He has a 6-3 majority, they don't need Chump. Hassler Nov 2020 #23
"Once they get what they want (from Trump) they'll get rid of him." Auggie Nov 2020 #24
The article just says they didn't take it up today, not that they said they won't Alhena Nov 2020 #25
I don't think this is accurate StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #26
Correct. People should read the article before commenting onenote Nov 2020 #29
My sense is that, and maybe I'm wrong, dware Nov 2020 #31
This kind of headline is why the RW says what they do about the media. oldsoftie Nov 2020 #40
na na na na, goodbye BainsBane Nov 2020 #28
That song has a funny back story. BobTheSubgenius Nov 2020 #51
And yet... Emily Murphy doesn't do her job. treehuggnlibrul Nov 2020 #30
But, HE WON THE ELECTION! According to last night's tweet. Crunchy Frog Nov 2020 #32
What's the point of being able to appoint Judges if they won't do what you want? Midnight Writer Nov 2020 #33
They did not take up the case today, but that does not mean it will not be heard in the future. 33taw Nov 2020 #36
If by "blow a gasket" you mean warmfeet Nov 2020 #37
Rudy,,,,,,,, wDF! Cryptoad Nov 2020 #38
Another loss in the court for trump. I believe that makes it 1 for 22. The "1" was a minor win. George II Nov 2020 #39
Not a loss and not a win StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #44
Rt.. & So Is his Stupid Cult! Cha Nov 2020 #41
Who makes the decision if the Supreme Court will take a case or not take it. patricia92243 Nov 2020 #42
Four justices have to agree to grab certiorari StarfishSaver Nov 2020 #45
I hope he blows them all. Dark n Stormy Knight Nov 2020 #43
I could be wrong, but by my count he's 1 for 19 with two more left. ancianita Nov 2020 #46
This was predicterd by many after MCB was elevated to SCOTUS. BadGimp Nov 2020 #47

Grins

(7,217 posts)
1. But...but...but they marched to the court on Saturday.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 05:21 PM
Nov 2020

It was all over the news. You mean it was all for nothing?

underpants

(182,803 posts)
11. Giuliani Arrives in Ukraine to Look for More Votes
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 05:28 PM
Nov 2020

Borowitz 😀


Speaking to reporters at the Kyiv airport, a highly animated Giuliani said that he expected to return to the United States with “bags full of votes” for Trump.

“Joe Biden is leading Trump by about sixty thousand votes in Pennsylvania,” the former mayor of New York said. “The population of Ukraine is forty-three million! You think I can’t find sixty thousand votes in this country? Get out of here! Get out of here!”

Giuliani added that he was confident that his quest for votes would be a success because “every time I go to Ukraine, I come away smellin’ like a rose!”

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/giuliani-arrives-in-ukraine-to-look-for-more-votes

central scrutinizer

(11,648 posts)
52. What's Borowitz going to do after Jan. 20?
Tue Nov 17, 2020, 02:17 PM
Nov 2020

He’ll have to write his own material. Probably consternation at The Onion, as well.

Amishman

(5,557 posts)
4. they won't even notice, they're all distracted by finding 2k votes in a red county in GA
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 05:24 PM
Nov 2020

that weren't counted as they were lost in the shuffle from a machine breaking down and getting swapped out.

That isolated incident will have them crowing for days and ignoring the bigger picture.

 

not_the_one

(2,227 posts)
49. The republicans are trying to toss out legitimate signatures, from initial voter registrations,
Tue Nov 17, 2020, 01:15 PM
Nov 2020

possibly from 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago. And of course they target democrats.

How has THEIR signature changed?

Maybe we should have a campaign for all democrats to update our signatures. We have two years to get it done. Hell, update EVERYTHING. Make sure there is nothing they can use to challenge our vote.

underpants

(182,803 posts)
15. Thanks. Net 778 for Trump.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 05:32 PM
Nov 2020

According to Floyd County GOP Chairman Luke Martin and tentatively confirmed by Rees, there were an additional 1,643 votes for Republican President Donald Trump, 865 for Democrat President-elect Joe Biden and 16 for Libertarian Jo Jorgensen.

Chainfire

(17,538 posts)
18. The right will be screaming that they finally have concrete evidence that
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 05:42 PM
Nov 2020

Trump votes were intentionally undercounted and demand recounts in every state he lost.

Over on the Conservative forum they are saying that the Congress will now be paying Democrats back for all of the obstruction they have been involved with over the past four years.....Don't ask me.....Sometimes I think that this is all a bad dream. I am going to have to lay off the Chocolate Mousse in the evenings......

Chainfire

(17,538 posts)
20. As it is said, in the Holy Bible,
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 05:57 PM
Nov 2020

There will be lawsuits, and rumors of lawsuits..... (or something like that)

LiberalArkie

(15,715 posts)
35. Not really out of nowhere. The amount of total votes tallied by the tabulator was less than the
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 07:23 PM
Nov 2020

number of ballots put into it.

robbob

(3,530 posts)
48. Important note: they didn't find 2,000 votes for tRump...
Tue Nov 17, 2020, 12:53 PM
Nov 2020

...they found 2,000 votes TOTAL. I think they broke 60/40 in the dumpsters favour, which gave him a net gain of a couple hundred votes. Nowhere near enough to change the results.

Eyeball_Kid

(7,432 posts)
34. This was bound to happen.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 07:07 PM
Nov 2020

USSC was not going to demean itself by acquiescing to Trumpy-Boy’s nonsense. All of Trumpy’s work to get his lackeys on the Court to rule in his favor meant nothing. THIS is his biggest fail. Now he’s up the creek without a paddle.

spooky3

(34,452 posts)
17. He's going to march up there and drag Barrett out by her hair!
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 05:37 PM
Nov 2020

"This is what I get in return for appointing you to the USSC?!!!"

Auggie

(31,169 posts)
24. "Once they get what they want (from Trump) they'll get rid of him."
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 06:34 PM
Nov 2020

-- Adam Schiff quote (not verbatim, but words to that effect)

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
26. I don't think this is accurate
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 06:39 PM
Nov 2020

According to this article, the Court didn't decline to take the case ... It just didn't act on it today. But there was no requirement that they do anything today and they could still take the case.

onenote

(42,703 posts)
29. Correct. People should read the article before commenting
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 06:44 PM
Nov 2020

Lots of the comments here apparently were posted by folks who didn’t bother to read the article.

dware

(12,377 posts)
31. My sense is that, and maybe I'm wrong,
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 06:47 PM
Nov 2020

but I'm thinking that the SC is waiting for PA to certify their vote and then when it's obvious to even the stupidist Trumper, they are going to decline to rule on it.

Is this a possibility?

oldsoftie

(12,536 posts)
40. This kind of headline is why the RW says what they do about the media.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 08:15 PM
Nov 2020

What a terrible job of half-assed reporting.
I guess since they made NO decisions today, ANY case could have been put up there.

treehuggnlibrul

(137 posts)
30. And yet... Emily Murphy doesn't do her job.
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 06:44 PM
Nov 2020

When will she sign the damn letter of ascertainment? And what happens if she continues to be negligent in her duties?

Midnight Writer

(21,765 posts)
33. What's the point of being able to appoint Judges if they won't do what you want?
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 06:55 PM
Nov 2020

Transactional Don, whose favorite word is reciprocate, will never get over this.

warmfeet

(3,321 posts)
37. If by "blow a gasket" you mean
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 07:48 PM
Nov 2020

he will die a horrible, agonizing, humiliating death, I completely hope for this outcome.

Here's to hope.

 

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)
44. Not a loss and not a win
Mon Nov 16, 2020, 11:26 PM
Nov 2020

The Court just didn't take it up today. They could still take the case.

This is a nom-story.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Supreme Court declines to...