Message from @busillis
Discord ID: 786452146295144489
It always is the asshole
Cat cracker...
@TaLoN132 You are correct, I forgot about that part.
But I don't see taht being the logical direction at this point for 5 reasons: (1) it would affect furtue elections, not this election; (2) what's to stop the DNC from hijacking 5 small texases; (3) any state can split it's electoral college votes w/o becoming more states; (4) the smaller Texases would have fewer electoral college votes anyways.
The only way I see that comming into play, would be if there were already existing factors internal to Texas which would be reason for such a split (beleive me, there are, considering one of my reasons for moving to Travis county (from Waco/Robinson) was to make my sextoys legal).
-- OR --
If this went to a contested election, in which each state get one vote...but I've seen a legal analysis done by another Attorney-With-A-YouTube-Channel which argues that could be stalled indefinitely in the house with a Nancy Pelosi Acting President which I don't think anyone in either party wants.
*(You think I'm kidding -> McLennan County threatened me with jail because someone reported that I owned "an excessive number of obscene devices [dildo], among which were some which simulated obscene activity [vibrated] by electronic means" --> I was like fuck this. Travis County was like, sex toys cool, bisexual, cool, adult oriented website operated from a server in your house, cool --> I was like, ok, moving to Austin)*
@Autumn_Katrina LMFAO
Yeah... It's not very likely, but having 8 Senators vs 2 might be appealing. If they did it right, it would be 6 Rep and 2 Dem, probably. It would probably force CA to split up to in order to maintain adequate representation.
Yeah... If this goes the way it looks, I'm fixin' to move back
In the 19th century, thereabouts, the USA had about 50% of the world’s oil and about 2/3 of the world’s gold.
Texas joined the union with the understanding that executive branches would not have the power to modify rules for elections.
If this isn't remedied, they can now say yall broke your contract and the courts upheld it. We're done with this union.
Oil isn’t just in Texas, Texas is just smarter.
Yippee kayay mar
it's in the US Constitution all the states depend on all the other states following the rules
Well if they’re going do it or better be now too many Californians finding their way here. Austin and Houston gone way left
I think there's been some decent polling on this. The people who move to Texas from other states are politically aligned to Texas.
it will be like Berlin when there was an East Germany
@meglide true but those cities have gone way left I’m sure there is some factor to it
Even DFW is going
@DrSammyD Yes, taht is correct. But, another key for Texas, is that other states need congressional approval, Texas had the approval as part of the contract ... and it has not been repealed.
just the D, please no, not the FW
True but they’re so close Fort Worrh still has the western element
Worth dam it
The Californians moving to Texas are people with jobs. Not likely to be turning Texas blue.
Ilan
That’s HUGE
Just a reminder, we do have 4 smaller political parties people don't talk about much (3 if you don't count the coalition of The Independance Parties, of which Donald J. Trump was also once a member) and I've never really felt Texas was quite Red or Blue to tell Ya the truth...
Wall pricing starts to look more reasonable without Texas. They could build their own all around.
When is the last time EC went blue?
Great point. EC shapes up nicely too.
TX Electoral..
Yes, it's been a minute.
It seems to me that the most significant issues here, IMO, were barely skimmed over if not completely disregarded, resulted in eliminating any perceived transparency and fairness in the election results. These issues, being the “chain of custody” and the rules [of having Dem. and GOP pole workers/watchers sharing in the process], are absolutely vital and must be strictly enforced in each and every election going forward. I honestly believe that if this election had been properly supervised, followed the lawful procedures, and pole watchers had been allowed to actually observe and given a real voice in the challenge process, that the outcome could have been much less contentious. By properly following the procedures, any reported problems that might arise could be easily verified and proven by examining the logs and signatures in the chain of custody, putting the controversy to rest. And as long as there is accountability and strict adherence on chain of custody in the voter registration office in verifying the signature and residential address of the voters, the process should be considered fair and legitimate to all. If this election had been operated honestly and correctly, there would have been no reason what so ever for election officials not to simply verify any concerns or challenge to the vote counting as they occurred. We will experience the same if not a more serious situation in a few weeks if the election laws and procedures are not completely understood and precisely complied with, under penalty of law with serious consequences.
@SassyCate, you just advanced to level 1!
Presupposing that there was an inordinate degree of procedure ignoring, I agree. I don't know that there was but perhaps there was a chance that fraud claims would still have run rampant due solely to the undesired outcome, regardless. Just a thought.
We're here now.
I’m out night all..
If you get abducted by aliens good luck.
From the data I found, the number of total votes cast in the election increased by 26,664,915 from 2016 [Trump v Clinton] Like 21% increase. That is a LOT of new votes
Indeed. And still far below eligible voters.
~65% of eligable voters
@SassyCate Yeah, but that's not demonstrative. Maybe we just got a lot of newly motivated votes. So an example of demonsterative might be : https://rumble.com/vb2xn1-evidence-of-trump-votes-switched-to-biden-a-high-level-walkthrough.html