To: Jim Noble
I really don’t understand,if one candidate was ineligible and clearly fraudulent why no new election.
1,568 posted on
08/02/2009 9:10:26 AM PDT by
rodguy911
(HOME OF THE FREE BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE--GO SARAHCUDA !!)
To: rodguy911
"I really don’t understand,if one candidate was ineligible and clearly fraudulent why no new election."I think ALL of us are just grasping at straws here. There is nothing in the Constitution, that I know of anyway, that states what we the people should do in the case of a fraudulent election.
It does cover what should happen if POTUS can no longer "perform" as POTUS, but nothing about a usurper.
1,623 posted on
08/02/2009 9:22:46 AM PDT by
NoGrayZone
(Where's The Birth Certificate)
To: rodguy911
I really don’t understand,if one candidate was ineligible and clearly fraudulent why no new election.Because the Constitution provides a mechanism for ineligbility after the Electoral College votes, and it ain't a new election.
1,766 posted on
08/02/2009 9:52:15 AM PDT by
Jim Noble
(I hope Sarah will start a 2nd party soon)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson