Posted on 12/04/2016 9:37:06 PM PST by roostercogburn
The federal courts trample us again.
If the re-count isn't finished in time to meet the deadline for certification (Dec 13), the state legislatures are empowered to appoint their own slate of electors. These electors would attend the Electoral College and cast their votes on Dec 19.
Republicans control both houses of the Wisconsin, Michigan an Pennsylvania legislatures. In all liklihood, they would re-appoint the current slate of Trump electors.
No state is going to lose their EC votes. Trump is going to receive every one of the 306 EV he earned.
270 is NOT the number. The number is a majority of the electors actually appointed.
No?
No dinero, no count. ‘I'm sorry, your honor, but our legislature hasn't met to authorize the spending of those funds, and until they do, we are unable to spend the people's money for your whims. Moreso, there is no possible way in the world that Jill Stein can win the election. So our reply is our already certified results, and you're more than welcome to come on down and count them yourself.’
I hope you are right.
Still concerned they can flip a States.
This is absolutely ridiculous a person who received less than 1% of the vote, with no evidence is allowed to go on a fishing expedition that only favors Hillary.
Jill will not win and she choose only States that Hillary could steal. It’s really disgusting.
Preserving voting integrity means purging the voter rolls of illegals, other non-citizens, fakes, felons, duplicates, residents of other states, the deceased, etc; enforcing proof of citizenship to register; enforcing voter ID at precincts; abolishing 2-month-long early voting (ballot stuffing) periods and generally discouraging early voting; actually counting absentee votes from military personnel instead of throwing them out; etc.
But we already know what federal judges have to say about all of that.
If Jill Stein demanded recounts in any other states, nobody would pay attention to her. She belongs in a psychiatric ward.
Okay what is the number then?
270 is the only number I have heard.
No re-count has ever overturned a lead in excess of 1,000.
Chill.
That’s exactly what should happen in any case where a Federal judge orders a state to do anything.
She is obviously working for Hillary.
The state will not make its decision until Wednesday. The Federal judge is saying, if they make no decision until Wednesday, there would be a due process violation because the recount can't be finished if it doesn't start until after Wednesday. The Federal decision can still be mooted if the state court says there will be no recount, which will make Goldschmidt (the US district judge) look quite stupid.
I don’t know who she’s working for. She’s doing nobody any favors, and even many Democrats are alarmed about this because of the long-term damage it can do to them — especially in these three states.
How many votes did the Florida recount overturn in 2000?
I thought is was over 1,200 votes. Remember the entire hanging chads debate?
However, a Freeper found this, which is weird.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3498111/posts
and this which is weird
https://i.sli.mg/oZ0cE6.png
Stein says Soros isn't backing her.
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/jill-stein-soros-ballot-recount/2016/11/29/id/761177/
However, she is wrong about donations by individuals for recounts. A recount & legal proceedings fund that may accept up to $100,200 per year from an individual and up to $45,000 per year from a multicandidate PAC. The NRCC and NRSC are also eligible for these types of funds.
If she's wrong about that, what else is she wrong about ?
The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed;
The number is not "a majority of the possible electors" (which is 270) it is "a majority of [those] APPOINTED."
If MI doesn't appoint any electors, the number needed for a majority decreases accordingly.
Still not going to happen. The state legislature has plenary power in this matter, and can simply say "Screw you, your honor, we hereby appoint Trump's slate of electors. Bugger off."
HAHAHA!!!
You don’t know who Jill is working for? HAHAHA!
She raised more money in 6 days than she did in her entire campaign.
How do you explain that? Do think that comes from her less than 1% voters????
Oh but you don’t know who she is working for? HAHAHA!
Gee who would benefit from this if they flip the States?
HAHAHA!
I would love for the State to do that.
“If a state isn’t certified by the Electoral College, isn’t one option to subtract that state’s EVs from the total of 538, producing a lower 50% mark to win the election?”
That is an open question and not clearly spelled out in the USC. It depends on what the term “ appointed” electors means The question arose in 2000 when there was a possibility that Florida’s EVs would be lost. At that time Bush’s legal team ( Ed Meese among them) argued that 270 is a fixed number and Gore needed FLA ( and 270+) or the election went to Congress for resolution.
How does someone go out and raise all this money to fund recount efforts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, and claim to have raised more than $7 million ... only to file a Federal lawsuit in Pennsylvania today claiming that the $1 million bond required to initiate the recount is excessive?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.