[DugwayDuke]

DesertRhino wrote: “If Pence does this, he will be one of the greats in American history, and I for one will be very proud to be wrong in my estimation of him.”

So, you think it’s a good idea to establish a precedent where the sitting VP gets to choose the next President? Seems like there might be a bit of a problem with that. How would you like Harris to have that kind of power?

[Salvey]

So, you think it’s a good idea to establish a precedent where the sitting VP gets to choose the next President? Seems like there might be a bit of a problem with that. How would you like Harris to have that kind of power?

You raise an interesting point, but it seems to me that if Trump gets a second term, he'll make a (successful) push to clean up voting procedures for federal office, and with those reforms in place, there would be no future fraudulent federal elections, and therefore, no need for a future VP to "choose" a president.

[No.6]

> So, you think it’s a good idea to establish a precedent where the sitting VP gets to choose the next President? Seems like there might be a bit of a problem with that. How would you like Harris to have that kind of power?

You’re saying, “Let’s not defend the country against the destruction of its election and the takeover by fraud of the CCP.”

??!??!!!

If there’s bad precedent being set, our team didn’t do it.

[elenvee]

The uniparty and the CCP have conspired to install a puppet president who will move us swiftly toward a global socialist oligarchy and you’re worried about setting a bad precedent?!

[going hot]

So, you think it’s a good idea to establish a precedent where the sitting VP gets to choose the next President?

Seems like there might be a bit of a problem with that. How would you like Harris to have that kind of power?

Pence, or any other VP is/does not choose the next president. They have the power to not accept a particular set of electors, after which debate occurs, during which evidence is presented to support the allegations of fraud.

The dems do it each election where a republican wins, but have not mounted a sufficient set of evidence to overturn.

In this case, Pence is actually doing his constitutional duty when he rejects a set of electors and their votes, which gives the whole body time to digest facts and then decide.

I have no problem with EVERY election being contested that is this close, and then hammer out the details to make sure no shenanigans have taken place.