[Lazamataz]

Federals cannot suspend state elections. Elections are held at the state level.

[nascarnation]

Elections are held at the state level.

And the states most likely to suspend are ones that Baraq would likely win, LOL.

[GeorgeWashingtonsGhost]

But, what if most Secretary of States are George Soros property? And what if huge purchases of ammo by the Feds need something to do? And what if the company that COUNTS THE VOTES (SCYTL of Spain) complies with the Feds orders NOT to count them?

[calex59]

This is a load of crap, even Bozo knows better than to try this sh**.

[supremedoctrine]

There COULD BE more OWS style pandemonium orchestrated
by surrogates of Team Obama, but they will have an even MORE
negative impact on Obama’s chances in the election, which is
why I ultimately don’t think it will happen.
And any noise from the WH and its agencies of authority about
“suspending” elections will make ‘Bama look like the wannabe
dictator we always knew he was.
Ain’t gonna happen.
“Wouldn’t be prudent”.
The only way it COULD happen would be if the protest found
a way to take on another identity and make themselves appear to be in some way “Pro Romney” and ANTI-Obama.But I don’t think these folks can think that quickly on their feet.

[Slyfox]

You are right, elections are held at the state level. It would be difficult for BodyOdor to completely halt 50 state elections, especially in the red states.

Elections still took place during the Civil War.

[Forward the Light Brigade]

You believe that the president couldn’t by decree stop the elections til 2013? All it takes is one large terrorist act, or “crisis” and he would evoke war powers act. I bet Mitt would agree with him!—at first. The postponed election would be pushed to 2016 then—never and we would have President Obama for life—and a People’s Republic with one Party—the Democrat party. Others would be deemed “Hate Parties” and banned. The states would cease to be important—like the congress. On that day—we raise the Bonnie Blue Flag!

[arthurus]

The President can do pretty much what he wants to do. The Congress has recognized his right to issue and enforce Executive Orders (Edicts,Ukases, Dictats, or whatever) and the Courts have not disapproved. They are accepted as within the President's power. Congressmen and public figures have complained about the contents and purposes of the EOs but not about their very existence or the President's right to issue and enforce them. It is said that the President should not have contravened the immigration laws duly enacted by Congress and should enforce the other duly enacted laws (as stated in the Constitution) of Congress but no voice is raised about the Unconstitutional and tyrannical nature of the issuance and enforcement of such Edicts. No voice is raised because the principle of rule by decree is already generally accepted by the entire political class. We have not yet got Lenin but Chavez is trying his wings.

Electing Romney(assuming an election) won't make any difference in the long run. Congress and the nation have not just granted those powers to a man, but the the Presidency. The president will exercise them. Once a second president has these rights they are in concrete and will not go away again.