I am looking at it pragmatically. It's a logic puzzle to me. What is more likely than not - from a practical perspective not an emotional one? I took the same approach in 2016 to come to the decision that Trump was the legal winner given as much - arguably more - questionable circumstance. There were people touting bellwether stats as to why Clinton had to have won. Shenanigans in the vote. It was all detritus. I came to the conclusion that Trump won in 2016 - just as I have come to the conclusion that Biden won this year.

It seems to me that the SCOTUS case is just granting legislatures and congressmen legitimacy so they're confident enough to do what they probably already know they should.

If this one fails I think that is the final nail in the coffin, because if the highest court in the land is like “...nah, this would be too controversial.” Where do you go from there?

if the scotus case fails OR it goes back to the states and they dont change their mind, it COULD in principle still be disputed by congress

I can't wait for this grotesque charade to be over. All the false conviction, flip flops and goal post contortions have rendered no change to people we always knew would never need convincing in the first place.

but that would probably mean nancy being temporary president

Frankly I think the GA legislature should call an emergency session and meet despite the governor not granting it - if COVID is enough of a crisis to change election rules against the law, then this is enough of a crisis for the GA legislature to meet without the governor's approval.

Let’s make up rules as we go along.

We're here because people did that with election rules.

The rule making always favors the rule maker.

Yes it does

It's more fun to create the game than it is to play.

That’s for sure

question, assuming there is no fraud why would the GA governor not want to call a special session?

@Phil the inner dimensional aliens are controlling his mind.

We've clearly established this.

Because he wants to hold the power he's seized illegally from the legislature.

Wouldn't a lot of these claims fall away quicker of they were confronted with evidence rather than hiding behind legal doctrine

Any honest person would want these things to be heard so they could be disproven, at least. And any honest governor would let his legislature meet.

They won the case where the ballots were altered but a sample showed not enough it should be easy to of the same with signatures, out of state addresses, dead people etc?

I will raise you one forever and say there is good contextual evidence that other countries (China, Iran, Russia) have successfully sewn the divisiveness we have now

But...but...but

That would just leave pure law ie qere states acting legally and conspiracy theories that would never have a vote count

@jimmy two, you just advanced to level 1!

did anyone hear any news today about the NV machine audits?

The worst things for those countries would’ve been a US united under trump, ending policies that exploited the us.

If you like your conspiracy theory, you can keep your conspiracy theory.

No news.means no evidence

I think that SCOTUS will weigh whether the election results likely reflect the will of the people in each of the states in question. If the Texas case included a list of election fraud cases (or even a single case) in each of those states where people who exploited actions of each state and resulted in substantial fraud that would have altered the result of the election - a list of people arrested for fraud and being brought up on charges. This would show how the changes made in each state actually impacted the other states negatively and could be cause for action. Instead, Texas is asking SCOTUS to disenfranchise voters in other states over what amounts to a technicality. SCOTUS chose not to intervene in any election in the past where clear proof of voter suppression was presented, how and why would they ever intervene in this one with absolutely zero proven cases of fraud - let alone enough to show that the outcome was in question?

@jimmy two well i wasnt expecting it to be on CNN

lol, yeah.

But suggest any if the gang would be screaming it and none our, strange time to keep quiet

Possibly... I think we are doing a pretty good job on our own, though.

Who knows if it'll even appear on Youtube since that policy change

@TaLoN132 i dont get the disenfranchise argument

US united period. It doesn't matter too much who it is under. They are just the recognized captain. The real power lies in the ship and its crew.

@TaLoN132 if you for example cancelled out 200,000 votes, would those people know that their specific vote didnt count or just that some votes were removed but they cannot know if theirs was or not

My God.

There is nothing we can really call our own anymore though. The Soviets have subverted our universities since ww2 and the effects of that live on and magnify as time goes on. Being the #1 superpower decades ago also resulted in being the #1 target for subversion for the whole world.

@Phil they d know why votes were struck out and if theirs matched that?

What about self disenfranchisement? We haven't discuss this.