How to prevent the next Jan. 6, as revealed in an important new analysis

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Tweet text:
Greg Sargent
@ThePlumLineGS
NEWS:

A coalition of election experts is issuing an urgent call for reform of the Electoral Count Act. This is a critical way to safeguard against future stolen elections and even against another 1/6. Their blueprint is detailed and important. My latest:

Opinion | How to prevent the next Jan. 6, as revealed in an important new analysis
A new report sounds an urgent warning. Will we listen?
washingtonpost.com
8:04 AM · Aug 30, 2021

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/30/how-prevent-next-jan-6-revealed-an-important-new-analysis/

As it happens, there is a critical way Congress can minimize the possibility of another Jan. 6 — by addressing glaring legal vulnerabilities in the presidential electoral process that encouraged Donald Trump’s movement to try to overturn his loss, creating the conditions for the worst outbreak of U.S. political violence in recent times.

We’re talking about revising the Electoral Count Act (ECA) of 1887. That may sound dry and unexciting, but it would shore up hidden weaknesses that made the 2020 breakdown possible.

This week, a bipartisan coalition of pro-democracy experts will release a new blueprint laying out a way to revise the ECA along those lines. The report from the National Task Force on Election Crises — which includes dozens of experts in election law and voting rights — outlines major fixes.

How a future election might be stolen

The ECA’s language, which sets the process for Congress to count presidential electoral votes, is vague and prone to abuse.

*snip*

[slightlv]

1. I REALLY want to read this article

but its behind a paywall. I've done the Chrome Incognito, but it doesn't work. Even if I click on the link from an Incognito page, all I get is a blank page. Any other ideas? Anywhere else to get the info (Yahoo, etc)?

Any ideas (other than subscribing) would be most appreciated!

[Nevilledog]

2. Don't know why it doesn't work with incognito. Can you try Safari private mode?

[slightlv]

3. Don't have Safari on this PC system

I'm working with Chrome (newest version) and the newest version of Firefox. Haven't tried it with Firefox, I need do that. That would eliminate any cookie issue, tho I've already deleted the cookies.

I looks like the paper got wise and did a check of some type against running incognito. That's the only thing I can think of, checking the code behind the blank page comes up blank, as well. Normally if there's an article I want bad enough to read, I can go into see the code, save it, bring it into my HTML program and strip away the code. Can't do that if there's no code behind the blank page! (gryn)

If it doesn't work with Firefox, I'll download Safari. I'm assuming, being a browser, that it's readable on a PC... didn't it start out as an Apple only browser?

[Nevilledog]

4. I'm using it on my iPad. Probably not available for PC.

Maybe you can try this?

https://archive.ph

[slightlv]

5. Thank you!

It worked beautifully!! I'm going to have to remember this. At my age, that means copying that URL and saving it to a text of such on my desktop. But, man, is it worth it!

Can't thank you enough! Have a great rest of day, cause ya sure made mine!

[Nevilledog]

6. ...

[scipan]

8. In the future, try AdBlock plus (for mobile)

Because it works for me and it acts almost exactly like chrome.

I can't do incognito with NYT, however.

Another trick is to Google the title. There are often other sites that have copied it with no wall.

[scipan]

7. Since this probably can't pass

I propose that it should say somewhere that the standard is that each resident US citizen of said state should have exactly 1 vote counted. Take away from legislatures the ability to go against that.

What I would really like to see: if a state is contested in Congress, and they can't come to a super majority consensus, like 60 in the Senate, AND it would change who is the winner of the election, the person with the most popular votes in the country wins.

Hell, why don't we just codify that the popular vote wins. But I think it's unconstitutional.