I think it's over, come next Tuesday (11/24).

[roguenuke]

I think Governor Kemp is going to rain on that parade to some extent:
Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp certifies election results, calls for audit

This circus seems like it will continue through at least mid-December.

Actually, those other states are set to certify Dec 1st. So even if Georgia has issues, it should be done by then because odds are that most of them will still certify. While Dec 14th is still crucial, once the certifications are in, it is highly unlikely any legislatures will go against them. They would risk uprising within their own states.

 

[Irwin Corey]

 

[element94]

Not for a segment of the media that still thinks its best path to higher ad revenue is paved by clicks on headlines with the word "Coup" in them.

Or "Election Fraud".

 

[element94]

Federal judge tosses another Trump attempt. It is beyond ridiculous as desperation reaches red alert for the Trump campaign. Ironic how he abandoned the states during a pandemic and now expects them to commit treason so he can stay in office.

https://apnews.com/article/election...pennsylvania-87eaf4df86d5f6ccc343c3385c9ba86c

“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption,” Brann wrote, so much that the court would have no option but to stop the certification even though it would impact so many people. “That has not happened.”

 

[rjay]

If what Trump has attempted happened in any other country, we would cover it here as a coup attempt. We are just lucky that Trump is utterly incompetent, and thus had no hope of ever pulling it off.

The problem is the next person to try this might be competent and they may only have to change the outcome in one state.
This election should be a huge wake-up call to the American electorate. There has to be a way you can run an election where the results are beyond question.

You know, like every other western democracy manages to do.

I think about 80% of the perceived problems in the American electoral system, are there on purpose. They seem to be there so, if needed, they can be pointed to as a reason to cast doubt on the outcome.

 

[NatMorton]

Or "Election Fraud".

Yes, because those words are just all over the media headlines these days.

 

[Juggernaut74]

The size of the gap does not give Trump fewer rights than Gore when it comes to pursuing recounts. (Or than Stacey Abrams, for that matter.)

If the Trump team were limiting its activities to requesting recounts, which I agree is perfectly acceptable, you’d have a point.

Gore, however, did not continue to make public statements that there was significant electoral fraud (coupled with any absence of evidence), or that the election should be overturned regardless of what the recounts turned up, or that states should refuse to certify their results, or.....

As the other poster said. False equivalence of the highest degree.

 

[Jetboogieman]

I agree! Absolutely!

Our Founders & Framers did a great job. We've also learned a lot about norms & the powers of the Presidency, too.

*taps you on the shoulder

*whispers: he’s not out of power yet.

the moment that happens, you can say that.

there are still two harrowing months left in which he can do a lot of damage and Push things even further because as we know, there is only one constant in the Trump universe.

Tomorrow will always be worse.

 

[bongsaway]

It's over, it's been over. End of subject.

 

[NatMorton]

If the Trump team were limiting its activities to requesting recounts, which I agree is perfectly acceptable, you’d have a point.

Gore, however, did not continue to make public statements that there was significant electoral fraud (coupled with any absence of evidence), or that the election should be overturned regardless of what the recounts turned up, or that states should refuse to certify their results, or.....

As the other poster said. False equivalence of the highest degree.

Note that this was almost a month after the election and they were still fighting (emphasis added):

December 5, 2000
Web posted at: 1:56 a.m. EST (0656 GMT)​

TALLAHASSEE, Florida (CNN) -- A Florida Court dealt a major blow Monday to Vice President Al Gore's legal efforts to challenge the results of Florida's presidential election.​

​

Leon County Circuit Court Judge N. Sanders Sauls ruled that the evidence presented by Gore's legal team does not establish any gross negligence or fraud in the balloting process, or prove that alleged problems with the voting would have changed the outcome of the election.​

​

Gore's attorneys immediately appealed Sauls' decision with a request that it be certified as a matter of great urgency and importance, "so that we can resolve once and for all what the right is for citizens to have their votes counted," said Gore attorney David Boies.​

​

CNN.com - Court rejects Gore challenge to Florida election results - December 4, 2000

 

[Trippy Trekker]

Not unlike the "Great Gore Coup of 2000," yes?

Derp! Ridiculous beyond the pale!
A decision ultimately decided by a Conservative-majority USSC that overturned a Florida Supreme Court 7 - 0 decision in favor of Gore. GW won by a 537 vote margin in a state governed by the candidate's brother (Jeb), certified by a GOP Secretary of State (Katherine Harris) who also held the top spot in GW's Florida campaign.

 

[NatMorton]

Tomorrow will always be worse.

I think we have a leading candidate to replace the now long obsolete NY Times tagline of "All the news that's fit to print."

 

[Juggernaut74]

Note that this was almost a month after the election and they were still fighting (emphasis added):

December 5, 2000​

Web posted at: 1:56 a.m. EST (0656 GMT)​

TALLAHASSEE, Florida (CNN) -- A Florida Court dealt a major blow Monday to Vice President Al Gore's legal efforts to challenge the results of Florida's presidential election.​

​

Leon County Circuit Court Judge N. Sanders Sauls ruled that the evidence presented by Gore's legal team does not establish any gross negligence or fraud in the balloting process, or prove that alleged problems with the voting would have changed the outcome of the election.​

​

Gore's attorneys immediately appealed Sauls' decision with a request that it be certified as a matter of great urgency and importance, "so that we can resolve once and for all what the right is for citizens to have their votes counted," said Gore attorney David Boies.​

​

CNN.com - Court rejects Gore challenge to Florida election results - December 4, 2000

Emphasis (underlined) re-added.

While ultimately unsuccessful, Gore’s team actually submitted evidence of their claims (the notorious “hanging” or “dimpled” chads.)

Gore’s team used this evidence to claim erroneous results in one county in one state. That the Courts ultimately ruled that the evidence wasn’t persuasive enough doesn’t negate its existence.

Trump’s team presents no evidence and demands the results of entire states be disregarded or overturned.

 

[NatMorton]

Derp! Ridiculous beyond the pale!
A decision ultimately decided by a Conservative-majority USSC that overturned a Florida Supreme Court 7 - 0 decision in favor of Gore. GW won by a 537 vote margin in a state governed by the candidate's brother (Jeb), certified by a GOP Secretary of State (Katherine Harris) who also held the top spot in GW's Florida campaign.

I think you're confused. Gore contested the results of the election as Trump as doing. And the court's conservatives were not the only ones who had a problem with the FL recount. Too many think the vote was 5-4. The 5-4 tally was the second vote in the case related to the decision on what to do after the FL recount was deemed unconstitutional. That first vote, on the constitutionality of the recount, was a 7-2 decision; i.e. only the Court's left wing thought the recount, as conducted, was legal.

Revising history is never a good game.

 

[element94]

Yes, because those words are just all over the media headlines these days.

There are several a week getting thrown out of court, are you saying they aren't getting coverage? I'm surely reading them. I haven't seen an inordinate amount with coup in the heading, though with all the suits getting axed by judges it's easy to see it as an attempt.

 

[NatMorton]

Emphasis (underlined) re-added.

While ultimately unsuccessful, Gore’s team actually submitted evidence of their claims (the notorious “hanging” or “dimpled” chads.)

Gore’s team used this evidence to claim erroneous results in one county in one state. That the Courts ultimately ruled that the evidence wasn’t persuasive enough doesn’t negate its existence.

Trump’s team presents no evidence and demands the results of entire states be disregarded or overturned.

Discrepancies are being found, though I agree it is entirely unlikely they will amount to much.

But that is not the point. A candidate has legal means at their disposal to challenge an election. Taking advantage of those means -- no matter the odds of success -- is not, per se, and illegal act. You folks just can't seem to get past your Trump-hate and realize that.

 

[NatMorton]

There are several a week getting thrown out of court, are you saying they aren't getting coverage? I'm surely reading them. I haven't seen an inordinate amount with coup in the heading, though with all the suits getting axed by judges it's easy to see it as an attempt.

trump coup - Google Search

www.google.com

 

[Juggernaut74]

Discrepancies are being found, though I agree it is entirely unlikely they will amount to much.

But that is not the point. A candidate has legal means at their disposal to challenge an election. Taking advantage of those means -- no matter the odds of success -- is not, per se, and illegal act. You folks just can't seem to get past your Trump-hate and realize that.

And again, if he were limiting himself to the legal means of challenging, I would absolutely agree with you. However, he is attempting extralegal means of challenging. (ie - meeting with state legislators and asking them to not certify the results of the popular vote) “You Trump-loving folks” just can‘t seem to realize that.

(And I realize that you are probably as much of a Trump-lover as I am a Trump-hater, which I why I strongly advise against refraining from falsely categorizing posters in a pathetic attempt to discredit them).

 

[Xilnik]

The size of the gap does not give Trump fewer rights than Gore when it comes to pursuing recounts. (Or than Stacey Abrams, for that matter.)

I never said Trump did not have the right, but pretending they are equivalent is still a logical fallacy.

 

[element94]

trump coup - Google Search

www.google.com

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1......0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.0.0....0.BCE-yXBgWc0

 

[BrotherFease]

Why?

Well, after taking a look at the electoral map and the certification dates for the six pertinent swing states ....

Election results certification dates, 2020

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

270toWin - 2024 Presidential Election Interactive Map

Create your own forecast for the 2024 presidential election

www.270towin.com

... it looks to me GA certed yesterday (Fri - 20th), and MI & PA cert Monday (23rd).

That leaves only the remaining low-count swing states of AZ, WI, and NV left to cert - with a total of only 28 electoral votes between them. With Biden at 306 EC, he will be certed or non-disputed at over 270 come Monday, even without those 28 remaining votes. Actually, he will be at 278. So to me, it seems the whole shebang is over at the start of the coming week.

Is my case legit?

The real election is on December 14th. All what we're seeing now is the process of selecting the electors. Biden's odds of winning the December election continue to rise as more states are certifying their results and the more Trump's legal defenses fall apart.

To me, the election was over when all of the networks declared Biden as President-Elect on September 7th. Trump's odds of winning rests on the concept of a Biden electoral revolt on December 14th or the courts agreeing to disenfranchise absentee voting from Atlanta, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Milwaukee. Neither scenario is particularly logical or probable.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

The problem is the next person to try this might be competent and they may only have to change the outcome in one state.
This election should be a huge wake-up call to the American electorate. There has to be a way you can run an election where the results are beyond question.

You know, like every other western democracy manages to do.

I think about 80% of the perceived problems in the American electoral system, are there on purpose. They seem to be there so, if needed, they can be pointed to as a reason to cast doubt on the outcome.

The results are beyond question.

 

[Trippy Trekker]

I think you're confused. Gore contested the results of the election as Trump as doing. And the court's conservatives were not the only ones who had a problem with the FL recount. Too many think the vote was 5-4. The 5-4 tally was the second vote in the case related to the decision on what to do after the FL recount was deemed unconstitutional. That first vote, on the constitutionality of the recount, was a 7-2 decision; i.e. only the Court's left wing thought the recount, as conducted, was legal.

Revising history is never a good game.

Your attempt to revise history by comparing Gore v. Bush to Trump's deluded claim election fraud cost him this election failed miserably. Credibility matters to me. Remember your ridiculous question, "Not unlike the "Great Gore Coup of 2000," yes?" A better question asks, "Do you spew nonsense knowingly or out of ignorance?"

I registered to vote in Florida in 1974 and continue to vote in Florida. Specify where I revised history.
Jeb? Katherine? Florida Supreme Court decided 7 - 0 in favor of Gore? a Conservative-majority USSC voted in favor of GW?

Bush v. Gore - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

.

Jeb Bush - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Katherine Harris - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

.

Supreme court rules in favour of Gore

Al Gore's hopes of winning the White House rose dramatically early today when the Florida supreme court ruled decisively in his favour in his dispute with George W Bush over election recounts.

www.theguardian.com

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Not unlike the "Great Gore Coup of 2000," yes?

You strike me as someone far too intelligent to make such an ignorant comparison. In 2000, there were just a few hundred votes that determined the winner of Florida, and thus the election. To this day, we really don't know who won it. However, when Al Gore lost at SCOTUS, even though he had several legal avenues still available to him in the Florida state courts, he conceded for the good of the nation.

In contrast, this is a decisive win for Biden, yet Trump still won't concede. Moreover, unlike with Gore in 2000, Trump and his legal team - such as they are, are out promoting lunatic conspiracy theories.

 

[Xilnik]

You strike me as someone far too intelligent to make such an ignorant comparison. In 2000, there were just a few hundred votes that determined the winner of Florida, and thus the election. To this day, we really don't know who won it. However, when Al Gore lost at SCOTUS, even though he had several legal avenues still available to him in the Florida state courts, he conceded for the good of the nation.

In contrast, this is a decisive win for Biden, yet Trump still won't concede. Moreover, unlike with Gore in 2000, Trump and his legal team - such as they are, are out promoting lunatic conspiracy theories.

The only part of your post I may disagree with is Trump conceding. The way he is going about things, I agree that he should concede, but I also believe he has a right to conduct impartial investigations into any reports of fraud or suspicious behavior at polling stations. That is where the two diverge because his current investigations are anything but impartial. If he were conducting his investigations to uphold the security of our elections, I would be 100% in support of that. For him to do so with the sole goal to flip the election is despicable.