Where will the Democrats file their lawsuits this time? (1 Viewer)

[Little-Acorn]

In 2000, it was mostly Florida and a few other states - places where their cries of "Unfair! Fraud! We wuz robbed!" were most likely to change the outcome of the election. It got so bad that Republicans had to countersue to stop the illegal recounts the Dems demanded. In 2004 the Dems used this ploy in Ohio and a few others. They've never succeeded in overruling an election yet, but hope springs eternal.

Place your bets, folks, place your bets. Where will the Democrats try it this time?

-------------------

NOTE: In 1960, Republicans strongly suspected that voting fraud took place in a number of counties in Illinois, where JFK beat Nixon by some 4,000 votes, giving him just enough electoral votes to win the Presidency. It was later revealed that more than twice that many dead people had "voted", mostly for Democrats. But the Republicans did NOT file lawsuits. They were reluctant to harm the "sanctity" of the election process, and so they let the result stand unchallenged.

Democrats have no such qualms, of course. The question is not WHETHER they will sue to overturn the results of the elections, but WHERE.

 

[FierceEnigma12z]

I couldn't tell you.What I can say is sometimes they come up with things beyond even their own understanding.I think they realize how absurd it is to say that Jeff Bush did something illegal to get his brother into office.Nobody would do that.If they really thought that, Dems would have investigated more and they would have found him guilty and he'd be inpeached sometimes in 2005 maybe.
Look, it's not our fault Florida had screwed up crap and this thing had to go to the supreme court.But come on we didn't rigg it or something.It's just as bad now as the dems who are saying that we payed off the judge at Saddams trial to sentence him to hanging just days before the election to get ahead in the polls.We aren't that friggin sneaky give me a break.The president made no deals with anyone.If you want to discuss being sneaky and money laundering, look up Hillary Clinton and her husbands administration.Stuff where actual RESEARCH is done isntead of baseless crap that is farse.

 

[KidRocks]

In 2000, it was mostly Florida and a few other states - places where their cries of "Unfair! Fraud! We wuz robbed!" were most likely to change the outcome of the election. It got so bad that Republicans had to countersue to stop the illegal recounts the Dems demanded. In 2004 the Dems used this ploy in Ohio and a few others. They've never succeeded in overruling an election yet, but hope springs eternal.

Place your bets, folks, place your bets. Where will the Democrats try it this time?

-------------------

NOTE: In 1960, Republicans strongly suspected that voting fraud took place in a number of counties in Illinois, where JFK beat Nixon by some 4,000 votes, giving him just enough electoral votes to win the Presidency. It was later revealed that more than twice that many dead people had "voted", mostly for Democrats. But the Republicans did NOT file lawsuits. They were reluctant to harm the "sanctity" of the election process, and so they let the result stand unchallenged.

Democrats have no such qualms, of course. The question is not WHETHER they will sue to overturn the results of the elections, but WHERE.

That will happen as sure as you dittoheads will blame the "media" for your losses. That, you can bank on!

 

[PeteEU]

Its usually the "looser" that would goto court, and since its the republicans who are gonna loose quite a bit, I am thinking they might be the first to goto court.