[Jim Noble]

Essentially, any U.S. citizen with voting rights should be able to challenge Kamala. Any voting citizen should qualify as having a standing on the issue. And something that important is not a local issue and could go straight to the Supreme Court. It is a NATIONAL issue as far as the vote is concerned.

Please show us where in the Constitution there is anything about individuals "voting for President"

State Legislatures appoint Electors, who meet in 50 different locations and send their ballots to be counted in public by the President of the Senate.

It is true that in recent years all 50 Legislatures have chosen to use people voting as the method of appointing Electors, but it is not required, and this process creates 50 State elections, not one National one.

[adorno]

Please show us where in the Constitution there is anything about individuals "voting for President"

I don't get the entirety of your argument, but, it is individuals who vote for president, even if they are accumulated towards groups known as electors. Without the citizen voters, there would not be electors appointed. Thus, it comes down to the lowest point where the individual citizen voters determine who will be elected. Why do you think polls represent a survey of what the voters are thinking? It's not polls about state 'electors' or state legislators.

And, btw, the constitution doesn't spell out exactly what is exactly meant 'individual voters' but, it's well understood what it meant. That's why we have supreme court justices to 'interpret' what is or was meant by what the constitution provided.