Not even conservative, just center-right people.

It’s either centrist right or hard right that watch his stuff. The hard right hate watches

According to what?

You?

According to the comments

Even if PA legislature decided to throw out the vote of the people, I have heard conflicting opinions as to whether it could be vetoed by the Governor. This just made me think of something else... The idea has been put forward that because the US Constitution gives the states' legislatures control over deciding the slate of electors that this exclusive authority could mean that the governor cannot impeded them. So, this means that if the state's constitution gives the governor the right to veto legislation, the state's constitution would be subordinate to the Article 2 powers given the legislature. If this is true, wouldn't the PA legislature have the authority to enact any law governing the election regardless of the PA constitution? Just a thought...

If the legislature attempted to overturn a successfully certified election, it could possibly be challenged, because the US Constitution says that state legislatures are to specify the *manner* that the electors are chosen - and that has to occur on the day the the US Congress specifies (11/3 this year). Once they establish the manner (popular vote) and the day has passed, the only way they have any more say is if it ends in a "failed" election. It's pretty vague. A couple of Textualist articles I've read indicated that this means that the manner that they prescribed "failed". In all of these states, the process has run the course and the elections have been certified as prescribed by law. Which would preclude them from asserting that the election is failed. There are some folks that think there are some cases that could be construed as saying that the legislature can decide to intervene at any time.

I like thought experiments...

Comments are hardly a judge of demographics.

You really think Tim pool isn’t a grifter have at it @Maw I’m not gonna try and convince you

Naw, I don't.

Same with the finance hub guy

Ok

Candance Owens ,Tim pool , Dave Rubin . Understand the conservative market well and just play into it.

Cool.

Hence why they are prone to the more cult like mentality as I explained the other day

Must be nice to completely dismiss people because you just presume they're grifting.

I watch his videos

I listen for language and emphasis and it’s all marketing to one group , there is no consistency of outrage

It’s clear as day

All this tech experts. All happened to be ex military and government employees... im guessing it give them more validity to their words. Than mark Mark Zuckerberg or the smartest guy in MIT and Harvard

Good for him

Make that cash

Trump does it

"Clear as day."

K bud

He clickbaits his videos for sure.

But that's like, something everyone does.

The idea that he's portraying to be something he's not though is kinda amusing, not going to lie.

That’s not the only kind of grifting.

You could have no real personal stake but still thrown in your own personality every now and again

Barr is gonna get canned next 😅

But if you don’t see it you don’t see it

Oh, so we're diluting the term 'grifter' now as well.

No

There is no diluting of the term

You are.

No

The idea of being a grifter came from being a swindler.

A con-man.

You can have different gradients of personal beliefs and still play to a crowd

So are you claiming that you know what Tim Pool is thinking?

A party must petition the SCOTUS to issue a Writ of Certiorari.
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1