(Politico) The Very Real Scenario Where Trump Loses and Takes Power Anyway

[Chomsky]

(Politico) The Very Real Scenario Where Trump Loses and Takes Power Anyway
--

Dozens of interviews with people deeply familiar or involved with the election process point to a clear consensus: Not only could Trump make a second attempt at overturning an election he loses, he and his allies are already laying the groundwork.

--

I was originally thinking of commenting,

"It looks like I'm not the only one seeing Trump & his party preparing to steal the election"

But now after reading this article, and examining the intricacies & fragilities of the electoral process, my comment has become,

"How did we ever end-up with such a cockamamie, fragile, complicated, easily corruptible system?"

Prepare to be astonished!

 

[Helix]

It sucks that he can win the EC narrowly and that will probably be it, but she has to win by a large margin to prevent this shit.

 

[Chomsky]

It sucks that he can win the EC narrowly and that will probably be it, but she has to win by a large margin to prevent this shit.

Welcome to the American Electoral College, where tyranny of the minority rules!

 

[OrphanSlug]

The OP article scenario is plausible but very unlikely, he would need enough operatives in key states to throw the election results into a court fueled mess.

A more likely scenario is Trump wins a tight EC win were perhaps a state becomes a challenge point, say North Carolina and/or Georgia where especially the latter starts throwing out certain county results until the case plays out but handed to Trump. No matter which the popular vote ends up out of alignment with the EC.

But Trump would need the military, push comes to shove I am unsure he has that.

 

[Chomsky]

The OP article scenario is plausible but very unlikely, he would need enough operatives in key states to throw the election results into a court fueled mess.

There is no "one" scenario in the article that I can see. The article offers a palette of scenarios & processes.

A more likely scenario is Trump wins a tight EC win were perhaps a state becomes a challenge point, say North Carolina and/or Georgia where especially the latter starts throwing out certain county results until the case plays out but handed to Trump. No matter which the popular vote ends up out of alignment with the EC.

Yes, that's what I'm thinking and believe I see occurring in GA.

But a scenario like this still plays-out in the U.S. House, as the Speaker decides the Electors the House will or will not accept.

But Trump would need the military, push comes to shove I am unsure he has that.

There's no "need" for military. The military is not going to interfere with the Constitutional processes occurring in the Statehouses or House of Representatives.

Remember, these processes proposes are legal & Constitutional. This is how are system was designed. States run the elections, and Governors & Legislatures choose the Electors - in accord with the State Constitution & Legislation.

 

[eman623]

There is no "one" scenario in the article that I can see. The article offers a palette of scenarios & processes.

Yes, that's what I'm thinking and believe I see occurring in GA.

But a scenario like this still plays-out in the U.S. House, as the Speaker decides the Electors the House will or will not accept.



There's no "need" for military. The military is not going to interfere with the Constitutional processes occurring in the Statehouses or House of Representatives.

Remember, these processes proposes are legal & Constitutional. This is how are system was designed. States run the elections, and Governors & Legislatures choose the Electors - in accord with the State Constitution & Legislation.

Does the link offer any scenarios in which the VP refuses to accept the results and names herself the next president? That's about as likely to happen as anything else in that nutty fearmongering tripe..

 

[Slartibartfast]

Does the link offer any scenarios in which the VP refuses to accept the results and names herself the next president? That's about as likely to happen as anything else in that nutty fearmongering tripe..

The scenario you just named is pretty much zero chance of happening no matter what conspiracy fueled MAGA fantasy reality might come up with.

 

[verrip1]

Astonishing!!! Please stop astonishing me so much.

 

[Chomsky]

Does the link offer any scenarios in which the VP refuses to accept the results and names herself the next president? That's about as likely to happen as anything else in that nutty fearmongering tripe..

I didn't see that scenario. I believe Harris' position in the process is purely ceremonial.

However, who knows? I suppose anyone involved in the process can claim they are righting fraudulent results. Then, off to the courts!

BTW - My sig refers to Harris counting her votes!

 

[Chomsky]

Astonishing!!! Please stop astonishing me so much.

Haha!

If MAGA did one thing, it forced us to learn the Constitution and legislative & electoral processes!

 

[verrip1]

Haha!

If MAGA did one thing, it forced us to learn the Constitution and legislative & electoral processes!

You're astonishing me again!!!!!! And after I said 'please', too.

 

[Chomsky]

You're astonishing me again!!!!!! And after I said 'please', too.

"Permission is granted. Power is taken!"

 

[Athanasius68]

(Politico) The Very Real Scenario Where Trump Loses and Takes Power Anyway
--

--

I was originally thinking of commenting,

"It looks like I'm not the only one seeing Trump & his party preparing to steal the election"

But now after reading this article, and examining the intricacies & fragilities of the electoral process, my comment has become,

"How did we ever end-up with such a cockamamie, fragile, complicated, easily corruptible system?"

Prepare to be astonished!

"Fragile"?
"Easily corruptable?"

Did you even read the article? It would be simpler to juggle a dozen chainsaws while standing one legged on a balance beam.

And the thing is, even if a candidate were to pull this off, it all assumes that the 'president elect' becomes the 'president elect' upon the assent of Congress.
Yet the Constitution is clear-- the candidate with the whole majority of the electoral vote "shall be" the president.

 

[Along Came Jones]

"But to a person, election observers, elected leaders and some of Trump’s own allies agree on one operating premise: On election night, no matter what the results show, how many votes remain uncounted and how many advisers tell him otherwise, Donald Trump will declare himself the winner."

If this is the foregone conclusion, now is the time for the most read and most watched media to step up to deflate the electoral "Distrust" balloon. How? Beginning yesterday, publish articles and broadcast white papers educating the electorate on both the election process and the security of state elections. Reenforce the message with public service announcements throughout the day right up to the inauguration.

 

[Chomsky]

"Fragile"?
"Easily corruptable?"

Did you even read the article? It would be simpler to juggle a dozen chainsaws while standing one legged on a balance beam.

That the process is so easily thrown into chaos is *fragile*.

Watch GA.

And the thing is, even if a candidate were to pull this off, it all assumes that the 'president elect' becomes the 'president elect' upon the assent of Congress.
Yet the Constitution is clear-- the candidate with the whole majority of the electoral vote "shall be" the president.

The "assent of Congress" only means the elector slate Johnson & his Republican collages choose to accept.

If GA doesn't send electors, or Johnson claims the electors are disputed, he can put the election to a House state-by-state vote.

 

[Chomsky]

"But to a person, election observers, elected leaders and some of Trump’s own allies agree on one operating premise: On election night, no matter what the results show, how many votes remain uncounted and how many advisers tell him otherwise, Donald Trump will declare himself the winner."

If this is the foregone conclusion, now is the time for the most read and most watched media to step up to deflate the electoral "Distrust" balloon. How? Beginning yesterday, publish articles and broadcast white papers educating the electorate on both the election process and the security of state elections. Reenforce the message with public service announcements throughout the day right up to the inauguration.

This means little if the party controlling the U.S. House moves forward with it.

 

[Along Came Jones]

This means little if the party controlling the U.S. House moves forward with it.

Perhaps. Only because the education blitz will not happen. But if it did happen, pressure might be felt in the House to demonstrate fidelity to their state's elector selection. Or, either face a tough reelection for defiance or plan on retirement.

 

[Chomsky]

Perhaps. Only because the education blitz will not happen. But if it did happen, pressure might be felt in the House to demonstrate fidelity to their state's elector selection. Or, either face a tough reelection for defiance or plan on retirement.

I would be happy if only we'd require a civics class to graduate from high school.

It's pretty sad when naturalized immigrants-turned-new-citizens know more civics than the average "landed" American!

 

[Along Came Jones]

I would be happy if only we'd require a civics class to graduate from high school.

It's pretty sad when naturalized immigrants-turned-new-citizens know more civics than the average "landed" American!

This is the closest I can come to giving your comment a double "LIKE!"

 

[Chomsky]

This is the closest I can come to giving your comment a double "LIKE!"

Thank you!

 

[Somerville]

As I post, it seems few people have taken the time to read the Politico article. THE one point that could lead to some serious problems for VP Harris as she sits before Congress to certify the 2024 Presidential election - WHICH group of electors are to be counted?

comments from the Politico article
Already, polling shows that Republicans, at sharply higher rates than Democrats and independents, lack faith that the vote tally in the 2024 election will be accurate.

That partisan disparity is the backdrop for the next phase of the process: county and state proceedings to finalize the results of the election.

This process is one of the first checks on the accuracy of the election — and it’s decentralized by design, with each state setting its own procedures and deadlines, and county officials running initial counts. Once counties and states complete this process, governors send the certified results to Congress, indicating which candidate should receive their states’ Electoral College votes.

Here is the problem -- What if a Republican-majority state legislature disagrees with the governor of their state, as to whether or not the vote numbers are to be accepted?

With election officials having certified the results and courts unlikely to provide relief, Trump’s battle will quickly move to Republican-led state legislatures.
Republicans control both chambers in Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina and Wisconsin. Pennsylvania’s legislature is split, but both chambers are in play this November — and new members take their seats on Dec. 1, right in the middle of the transfer of power. All told, those states control 72 electoral votes, more than the margin of all but one election since 2000 — and almost certainly enough to tip the scales in 2024.

The Constitution empowers state legislatures to deliver the electoral votes for their state in whatever manner they choose.

This year, if Republican-led legislatures appoint alternate electors, then pro-Trump slates could move ahead to Congress alongside the pro-Harris slates approved by governors. (Five of the seven swing states have Democratic governors. And in a sixth state, Georgia, Republican Gov. Brian Kemp resisted Trump’s efforts to overturn the state’s results in 2020.)

That would be a direct challenge to the post-Jan. 6 effort intended to prevent this kind of constitutional clash. In 2022, Biden and Congress passed a law reforming the Electoral Count Act of 1887, intended to clarify that only governors — not legislatures — are empowered to send certified slates of electors to Congress, unless a court steps in to override the results. Harris has pledged that when she presides over the counting of presidential electors on Jan. 6, 2025, she will follow this law. But if any legislatures send her an alternate slate, there is an open constitutional question as to whether she must also offer it to Congress for consideration.

What happens if two groups of electors are sent to DC?

 

[Along Came Jones]

As I post, it seems few people have taken the time to read the Politico article. THE one point that could lead to some serious problems for VP Harris as she sits before Congress to certify the 2024 Presidential election - WHICH group of electors are to be counted?

Here is the problem -- What if a Republican-majority state legislature disagrees with the governor of their state, as to whether or not the vote numbers are to be accepted?

What happens if two groups of electors are sent to DC?

The Electoral Reform Act of 1922 makes governors the sole official responsible for submitting the identification of a state's presidential electors unless another official is otherwise identified by state law.

 

[Somerville]

The Electoral Reform Act of 1922 makes governors the sole official responsible for submitting the identification of a state's presidential electors unless another official is otherwise identified by state law.

You have the wrong date for the Electoral Reform Act - it was passed in 2022 NOT 1922

In 2022, Biden and Congress passed a law reforming the Electoral Count Act of 1887, intended to clarify that only governors — not legislatures — are empowered to send certified slates of electors to Congress, unless a court steps in to override the results. Harris has pledged that when she presides over the counting of presidential electors on Jan. 6, 2025, she will follow this law. But if any legislatures send her an alternate slate, there is an open constitutional question as to whether she must also offer it to Congress for consideration. What Congress would do with the slates backed by legislatures is equally uncertain, but their very existence would cast a cloud over the proceedings and, like everything else, fit neatly into a Trump pressure campaign.

The problem of certification of the election results will land in the House and the Senate. If the Dems hold on to the Senate and gain a majority in the House, the electors chosen by state governors will decide the election. IF the GOPers control one or both of the Congressional chambers, America will be looking at some serious shit.

 

[Along Came Jones]

You have the wrong date for the Electoral Reform Act - it was passed in 2022 NOT 1922



The problem of certification of the election results will land in the House and the Senate. If the Dems hold on to the Senate and gain a majority in the House, the electors chosen by state governors will decide the election. IF the GOPers control one or both of the Congressional chambers, America will be looking at some serious shit.

1922 vs 2022 explains why proofreaders are worth their weight in gold. Thanks for noting the typo.

How would GOPers controlling one or both of the Congressional chambers cause any distress? The Electoral Act of 2022 limits rather narrowly the basis by which Congress can reject a state's electoral votes. A problem which is possible but not probable is how Congress decides the election should Harris and Trump present an equal number of electoral votes.

 

[Bullseye]

(Politico) The Very Real Scenario Where Trump Loses and Takes Power Anyway
--

--

I was originally thinking of commenting,

"It looks like I'm not the only one seeing Trump & his party preparing to steal the election"

But now after reading this article, and examining the intricacies & fragilities of the electoral process, my comment has become,

"How did we ever end-up with such a cockamamie, fragile, complicated, easily corruptible system?"

Prepare to be astonished!

Quite frankly I'm astonished that this kind of thinking still exists.