Do you think the American people will not hold these people accountable?

The rules were in place because they envisioned a multiparty system where one candidate might not get a majority. They could have legislated a run-off, they chose the House thinking it was uncorruptable. Little did they know that the House would be artificially capped at 435 members. For our current population, they figured we'd have over 10K members of the House.

I don't think that's fair no.

The left has had positions in history with a stacked court.

As have republicans.

I don’t think the trump base will recognize (or not be be willing to overlook ) the lengths trump would be willing to go to get re elected, also he isn’t gonna telegraph he is bribing someone so it’s not something the public would know about if he does it. It’s just a possibility

You can't just change the game because you don't like the outcome.

@Maw it’s wouldn’t be changing the game, it’s would be adjusting for hypocrisy

It's a possibility that Santa Claus is real but I don't leave my Christmas tree out

Back to a neutral starting point

What?

No, absolutely not.

This is not the precedent you want to set.

I think a lot of people are overblowing this election. It plays out, Biden wins, he wins. nbd. Try again in 2 and in 4 years

It’s also a possibility that trump can bribe someone, or convince someone to not certify the election. Doesn’t involve any magic @Elzam

Dems tried this multiple times and it's backfired on them when republicans did it in return numerous times.

please don't spam the election channel with left-right philosophy

@nachik, you just advanced to level 1!

I wasn't saying it wasn't possible without magic. I was just pointing out that we don't typically take actions based on statistically unlikely outcomes

@nachik I thought that was how elections were conducted?

@Maw precedent has been blown out of the water , again how is evening out the courts after the hypocrisy the senate pulled not fair. Neutral is fair

@Maw 20 of the last 24 nominations for SCOTUS have been from Republicans. That being said, I don't think it has ever been stacked with a multi-vote majority. Until 4 years ago, Presidents followed the precedent of trying to keep a balanced court.

In grad school I had to calculate the probability of one of my electrons being on the moon. I'm not panicking because I don't have a space suit

@Doc you were lied to, elections have nothing to do with generic philosophy about progressivism vs conservatism

@Elzam no one would be taking action? I’m am laying out what trump needs to do to get it to the house. It is very much in the realm of possibility and very much something trump would be willing to do

@nachik I never thought that.

btw there's news about Powell

What @nachik

"President Trump's campaign said in a Sunday statement that Sidney Powell is neither a member of its legal team nor a lawyer for Trump in his personal capacity." https://www.axios.com/sidney-powell-trump-campaign-lawyer-b37fc70d-9935-4ffd-a810-0d01ae909584.html

@TaLoN132 There have been.

Well MI has already certified and I don't think they can take it back so it's not like MI is changing

No way

@Elzam, you just advanced to level 5!

@nachik I thought it was about selling your narrative to the most people, so you could then sell your services from a public office.

@Elzam well that’s good

But... But... the Kraken????

This is why I've been saying you need to stop with your conspiracies and whatnot. We don't need this discussion of how the President Stole the Election

Damn I should copyright that fast

@TaLoN132 Let me translate Kraken to the original swedish: 1) An octopus 2) Something that does not exist, a fable animal.

That's amazing... I have to go watch the RWEC explode as all Kraken hopes are dashed.

And keep in mind: The only reason ACB could even be confirmed was because the dems changed the rules.