2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumElectoral College has failed us but Supreme Court can reject Donald Trump before inauguration
https://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/electoral-college-has-failed-us-but-supreme-court-can-still-disqualify-donald-trump/503/Not sure on this one .....but interesting
AirmensMom
(14,815 posts)I have read that it's not.
Iamaartist
(3,300 posts)needs research on it.......if true or not..a lot of people use this site here..
Amishman
(5,795 posts)Playing to the hopes and fears of the most upset among us.
golfguru
(4,987 posts)We already created a multi-millionaire in Jill Stein.
Next Palmer?
SlimJimmy
(3,247 posts)mythology
(9,527 posts)He is a sensationalist who has no grounding in reality. Nobody should take him seriously at all.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)EL34x4
(2,003 posts)The Florida recount guy netted $65k. The "petition the electors" guy had over a quarter million at his GoFundMe page. Of course, all pocket change next to Stein's $7.5 million.
Strike while the iron is hot.
MrPurple
(985 posts)I want to avoid the Trumpocalypse as much as anybody, but it's almost delusional to talk about this. It's time to brace for impact.
If the NSA hacked Trump's email and it could be definitively shown that he was coordinating with Putin, maybe the SCOTUS could step in, but short of that, we're doomed.
zipplewrath
(16,690 posts)Prior to be president, it isn't clear what the SC would use as a justification for preventing his taking office. After inauguration, only congress can do anything. The constitution is pretty clear on these things.
Iamaartist
(3,300 posts)I think the president knows more then we do ???? since there is a lot of investigations going on... as yet
rzemanfl
(30,282 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)It's a done deal. He won.
Time to rally the troops.
Iamaartist
(3,300 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)MFM008
(19,998 posts)Disappointed.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)How do you get to that reply from my comment?
mythology
(9,527 posts)These sort of posts are embarrassing. It's just as foolish as those on the right who just knew the Supreme Court was going to declare Obama to not be a natural born citizen.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)use his term to point out differences in parties, etc. All this recount, Electoral College, Supreme Court junk, just make us look foolish and unable to accept reality. The Palmer Report is just fake news.
I went into a 3 months depression after Kerry lost to george war bush, so I get it.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)It's why I'm really trying to stay polite when stating my feelings on this. I really think it's time to move forward and view Trump as an asset. If this is played correctly over the next four years, we can see a significant shift in offices all across the country, in our favor.
This is a painful loss. I actually understood Kerrys loss better than I did this one. It hurt just as bad for me because I think Kerry is what we needed at the time.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)I'm surprised GOPers need a reminder so soon after bush, but apparently they do.
nycbos
(6,329 posts). To quote Andy Horowitz.
Only one of these is a realistic scenario:
1) The Electoral College, which has a storied history of paying close attention to Facebook petitions, will vote to keep Trump out of office
2) Trump, a towering narcissist, will decide he does not like being the most powerful person in the world and will abruptly resign
3) Congress, which is controlled by spineless members of Trump's own party, will rise up in moral outrage and impeach him
4) Concerned citizens will try to limit the damage Trump wreaks on the country by doing the hard, often boring work of political activism in the 2018 midterms and again in 2020
https://www.facebook.com/andyborowitz/photos/a.312831060680.191322.38423635680/10155061842295681/?type=3&theater
Lint Head
(15,064 posts)But Trump could ram a Supreme Court appointment through and that would be it.
jodymarie aimee
(3,975 posts)Grey Lemercier
(1,429 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Historic NY
(37,819 posts)you didn't vote when it counted and now you grasp for straws. I never realized our party was filled with so many morons.
Iamaartist
(3,300 posts)Everybody has right to there own opinion..... and this is ours at home.......the GOP stole America.. GOP .... always has been corrupt
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)And unless proven, which I know isn't being looked into at the level I would like, it's nothing more than bluster.
That is the point. The whole link in your op along with a lot of other rhetoric is little more than bluster. More is needed for these things to be considered in reality.
BzaDem
(11,142 posts)for birther-related reasons.
Every time one of those cases moved an inch through the system, some non-credible source would write an article about how there was a chance a court might finally overturn the election, before inauguration day.
I laughed at the time about how Republicans simply would not accept the other side won the election. The last month has shown me that this attitude is not limited to their side
We need to focus on winning future elections.
Iamaartist
(3,300 posts)If a Con like Donald Trump can get in the White House,, I guess anybody can ,....
BzaDem
(11,142 posts)There is literally no compelling evidence that any votes were flipped. Trump won by tens of thousands of votes in three states, and he only needed to win in one state.
ElementaryPenguin
(7,838 posts)The unadjusted ones...
Here's the Baiman report:
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/12512645901
BzaDem
(11,142 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)sarisataka
(20,939 posts)Takket
(22,479 posts)whoever wrote that nonsense should have their keyboard confiscated.
elleng
(135,882 posts)'The case, Marks v. Stinson, is the first and only known case in which a federal judge reversed an election outcome.
In 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review an appellate courts decision of Marks v. Stinson, a case originally brought before a federal district judge in Pennsylvania in 1993, which was subsequently appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in 1994. The Third Circuit partially upheld the federal judges decision to intervene and invalidate a 1993 state senate election due to fraud. Interestingly, the federal district judge ordered the winner be removed from office and the subsequent vacancy be filled by his opponent.
The 1993 state senate contest pitted Republican Bruce Marks against Democrat William G. Stinson. Stinson was named the winner, but was later accused of participating in a scheme with elections officials to commit election fraud. Namely, Stinson was accused of conspiring to cast illegally obtained absentee ballots in his favor.
In February 1994, after Stinson had already taken office, the federal judge ordered he be removed from his State Senate office and that [his opponent, Bruce Marks] be certified the winner within 72 hours.
Two of the elected officials who testified in the Pennsylvania case said under oath that they were aware of the fraud, had intentionally failed to enforce laws, and hurried to certify Stinson the winner in order to bury the story. To some, the narrative draws parallels to the Washington Posts revelation that Republican Mitch McConnell was aware of the CIAs conclusion that Russians had intervened and opted to do nothing.
Interestingly, the appellate court affirmed the district courts intervention in the matter. But, the Third Circuit vacated the district courts decision on ordering the certification of the winner: We will vacate that portion of the district courts preliminary injunction that required the Board of Elections to certify Marks. Marks, 19 F.3d at 890. However, Mark was allowed to remain in the seat after having replaced Stinson for the rest of the term.
The case deliberates interesting rationale that could theoretically be applied in part if, after Donald Trump assumes office, it is shown that Russian hacking (or any fraud, for that matter) robbed Hillary Clinton of the presidency. The case offers clues that imply courts may intervene.
Obviously both the stakes and the office in question are much higher than in Marks v. Stinson. There has been no case of first impression with regards to the presidency being overturned to a wrongful winners opponent.
There is also, of course, no constitutional Electoral College process or system in Pennsylvania, so the situations are not exactly analogous. But the reasoning behind the federal courts decision may hold muster. It is not clear how the case would impact a presidential election.
As of December 9, Clinton has won the national popular vote by more than 2.8 million votes. According to Cook Political Report, the vote count has Clinton approaching 66 million votes, meaning the first female major-party nominee has already earned more votes than any other presidential candidate in history, second only to Barack Obama (the totals suggest she is on course to surpass the presidents 2012 count, as well).'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/russian-interference-could-give-courts-legal-authority_us_584be136e4b0151082221b9c
Uggwearingdad
(78 posts)SCOTUS has ZERO authority to do squat unless there are challenges from Mrs. Clinton's campaign and that's not happening.....the lower Court ruling they site...totally irrelevant to a POTUS election.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)of happening have been smoking too much crack.