Their goal is to suppress enough votes to bring the election within range of dispute, then count on Republican judges to handle it. On Jan 6, the goal was to delay the certification long enough to get a request to the Supreme Court to stop the certification and throw the decision to the state legislatures. Speaker Pelosi got wind of it and reconvened Congress. The crazies weren’t the plan. They were a cog in a bigger machine.
teri - I don't understand what you are objecting to. To say that "Speaker Pelosi got wind of it" makes it sound like Trump was about to commit a crime. What is wrong or illegal about "throwing the decision to the state legislature"? The fact that the U.S. has this avenue open to electoral contestants must mean that it is fair and reasonable. Is it, ipso facto, a foregone conclusion that whatever the Supreme Court decides is invariably morally and legally correct?
Here is how it goes Gunnar. If the decision gets thrown to the state legislature, Each state, and there are 50 of them) gets one vote. There are 17 Blue or Democratic states and 33 red or Republican states.
The Republicans using cultural war issues, like racism, and misogyny have taken over those states.
If the vote goes to the state legislatures then Trump wins. The population of red states combined is less than the population of blue states. The population of New York and California are greater than all of the red states combined,, save perhaps Texas.
Thus sending the question to the state legislatures is not recognize the will of the people, the popular vote.
I will patiently explain more about our election process if need be.
William - Thank you for your information about state legislatures. I'm at a loss to understand how this state of affairs came about; at one time, it must have seemed fair and equitable - or maybe it was simply a pragmatic compromise between the Federal and State systems? Is the state of affairs that you describe enshrined in the U.S. Constitution?
Yes the state of affairs is enshrined in the constitution. The only way to get all of the states to sign the Constitution and become United was to limit the authority of the Federal Government,and the authority not relegated to the Federal Government remained with the states. The States,per the Constitution are sovereign except where laws are passed, by Congress, which has representation of the states.
The Constitution can only be amended by Congress with a 3/5ths vote and then ratified by 3/4's of the states. Alterntively if 3/4's of the states get together and assemble and vote for an Amendment, then the constitution is amended.
Ok William. Understood. - So the arrangement was indeed a Federal-State compromise, based on the U.S. Constitution. The Founding Fathers opted for a Federal system, and that's what the U.S. has got. So, what Donald Trump tried to do was within that arrangement and within the law.
So, I repeat, it sounds like Pelosi felt that Trump was about to commit a crime. According you (if I have understood you correctly) he was well within his rights but Pelosi somehow managed to block him. Maybe she, too, was withing her rights to do this, I don't know. Maybe this whole thing is yet another benign example of the endless Federal-State tussle which is simply an inevitable part of the American political system, and which we all have to accept in the context of the two-party system. I'm not criticising, just observing. All government systems have drawbacks, not just the U.S. one.
By the way, William, you say something partisan: "The Republicans using cultural war issues, like racism, and misogyny have taken over those states". - Yes, they do, but the main weight behind the voter support for Donald Trump lies elsewhere, namely in MAGA - the blue-collar anger at the total waste of money on endless warfare and on supporting other natins warfare, so-called proxy wars. Republicans used to be fiery supporters of U.S. driven wars globally, but since the Trumpists assumed dominance over the party it has become much more focused on domestic affairs - to the relief of people in many other parts of the world!
Just for the record - and before you offend me by calling me a 'Trump apologist' - I disagree with Trump on abortion rights; he should keep his nose out of women's affairs. I also disagree with his locker-room bragging about his behaviour towards women. But this isn't the first crass U.S. president to grace the world stage: we had Truman and LBJ not so long ago. Even Jack Kennedy had his moments.
Is Erik Prince still building one for him? They closed the KKK training site in north Idaho, (but I think they are still active) not sure if there's a training area hidden in Alabama or somewhere in the South. There was a small cluster in the California mountains, some moved to Florida. I have a few relatives who participate - I think they will stay organized to prepare for the next time ... they love toting those guns and feeling important. So sad.
Wouldn’t be surprised, but an unexpected consequence of all those forest fires was numerous exploding militia ammo dumps. I think God spoke, but they don’t seem to have gotten the message.
You people are over reacting. Trump is not going to take over the government with a bunch of crazies dressed up like Vikings. It takes an army.
Their goal is to suppress enough votes to bring the election within range of dispute, then count on Republican judges to handle it. On Jan 6, the goal was to delay the certification long enough to get a request to the Supreme Court to stop the certification and throw the decision to the state legislatures. Speaker Pelosi got wind of it and reconvened Congress. The crazies weren’t the plan. They were a cog in a bigger machine.
teri - I don't understand what you are objecting to. To say that "Speaker Pelosi got wind of it" makes it sound like Trump was about to commit a crime. What is wrong or illegal about "throwing the decision to the state legislature"? The fact that the U.S. has this avenue open to electoral contestants must mean that it is fair and reasonable. Is it, ipso facto, a foregone conclusion that whatever the Supreme Court decides is invariably morally and legally correct?
Here is how it goes Gunnar. If the decision gets thrown to the state legislature, Each state, and there are 50 of them) gets one vote. There are 17 Blue or Democratic states and 33 red or Republican states.
The Republicans using cultural war issues, like racism, and misogyny have taken over those states.
If the vote goes to the state legislatures then Trump wins. The population of red states combined is less than the population of blue states. The population of New York and California are greater than all of the red states combined,, save perhaps Texas.
Thus sending the question to the state legislatures is not recognize the will of the people, the popular vote.
I will patiently explain more about our election process if need be.
William - Thank you for your information about state legislatures. I'm at a loss to understand how this state of affairs came about; at one time, it must have seemed fair and equitable - or maybe it was simply a pragmatic compromise between the Federal and State systems? Is the state of affairs that you describe enshrined in the U.S. Constitution?
Yes the state of affairs is enshrined in the constitution. The only way to get all of the states to sign the Constitution and become United was to limit the authority of the Federal Government,and the authority not relegated to the Federal Government remained with the states. The States,per the Constitution are sovereign except where laws are passed, by Congress, which has representation of the states.
The Constitution can only be amended by Congress with a 3/5ths vote and then ratified by 3/4's of the states. Alterntively if 3/4's of the states get together and assemble and vote for an Amendment, then the constitution is amended.
Ok William. Understood. - So the arrangement was indeed a Federal-State compromise, based on the U.S. Constitution. The Founding Fathers opted for a Federal system, and that's what the U.S. has got. So, what Donald Trump tried to do was within that arrangement and within the law.
So, I repeat, it sounds like Pelosi felt that Trump was about to commit a crime. According you (if I have understood you correctly) he was well within his rights but Pelosi somehow managed to block him. Maybe she, too, was withing her rights to do this, I don't know. Maybe this whole thing is yet another benign example of the endless Federal-State tussle which is simply an inevitable part of the American political system, and which we all have to accept in the context of the two-party system. I'm not criticising, just observing. All government systems have drawbacks, not just the U.S. one.
By the way, William, you say something partisan: "The Republicans using cultural war issues, like racism, and misogyny have taken over those states". - Yes, they do, but the main weight behind the voter support for Donald Trump lies elsewhere, namely in MAGA - the blue-collar anger at the total waste of money on endless warfare and on supporting other natins warfare, so-called proxy wars. Republicans used to be fiery supporters of U.S. driven wars globally, but since the Trumpists assumed dominance over the party it has become much more focused on domestic affairs - to the relief of people in many other parts of the world!
Just for the record - and before you offend me by calling me a 'Trump apologist' - I disagree with Trump on abortion rights; he should keep his nose out of women's affairs. I also disagree with his locker-room bragging about his behaviour towards women. But this isn't the first crass U.S. president to grace the world stage: we had Truman and LBJ not so long ago. Even Jack Kennedy had his moments.
/S amirite?
What does "/S amirite" mean, teri?
/s means you’re being satirical. Am I right?
Is Erik Prince still building one for him? They closed the KKK training site in north Idaho, (but I think they are still active) not sure if there's a training area hidden in Alabama or somewhere in the South. There was a small cluster in the California mountains, some moved to Florida. I have a few relatives who participate - I think they will stay organized to prepare for the next time ... they love toting those guns and feeling important. So sad.
Wouldn’t be surprised, but an unexpected consequence of all those forest fires was numerous exploding militia ammo dumps. I think God spoke, but they don’t seem to have gotten the message.
Look at the $$$ behind him
Like a boy whistling in the dark.