Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
3rd parties always do comparatively well in an election with two terrible candidates.
But if every Johnson voter and every Jill Stein voter in the swing states that went for Trump had voted for Hillary, she my have squeaked by Trump.
But compelling or coercing voters to vote for your candidate isn't very democratic, nor is rewriting the rules after an election to somehow shoehorn your preferred candidate into office.
Trump may well be a disaster, but that would be nothing compared to the America that many Democrats seem to want where a dictator who answers to no voters sits on the throne, propped up by their fellow ideologues, populist petitions, and a sycophantic party-loyal populace.
If Hillary supporters really cared about America, they would drop this petition/impeachment nonsense and start focusing on midterm elections to weaken the Republican hold on the Congress, and bolster their party to start grooming good candidates for president 2020.
But instead I suspect you will continue your game of, "NOT FAIR!" and lose all steam and we will be stuck with the hack that is Trump with a strong majority in both houses.
They say that Trump voters are uneducated and downright stupid, but If the tactics of the popular Left are anything to go by, I am not significantly impressed with them, either.
If this weren't so blindly partisan, it would be comical. So the justification for the petition, is inferring that foreign influence potentially swayed the election results. Those behind the petition expect U.S. citizens to ignore the content of the emails, only that they were purported made public by foreign sources. In other words, pay no attention to the DNC meddling in their own primary process to benefit the "chosen" candidate, while ignoring the will of the people, Russia allegedly leaked the emails that show the DNC, a domestic body, actually influenced results of their own primary, and that alleged influence is somehow worse that the DNC's actions.
If this weren't so blindly partisan, it would be comical. So the justification for the petition, is inferring that foreign influence potentially swayed the election results. Those behind the petition expect U.S. citizens to ignore the content of the emails, only that they were purported made public by foreign sources. In other words, pay no attention to the DNC meddling in their own primary process to benefit the "chosen" candidate, while ignoring the will of the people, Russia allegedly leaked the emails that show the DNC, a domestic body, actually influenced results of their own primary, and that alleged influence is somehow worse that the DNC's actions.
This.
Like I said before, how many damned elections is Trump gonna have to win this year?
If this weren't so blindly partisan, it would be comical. So the justification for the petition, is inferring that foreign influence potentially swayed the election results. Those behind the petition expect U.S. citizens to ignore the content of the emails, only that they were purported made public by foreign sources. In other words, pay no attention to the DNC meddling in their own primary process to benefit the "chosen" candidate, while ignoring the will of the people, Russia allegedly leaked the emails that show the DNC, a domestic body, actually influenced results of their own primary, and that alleged influence is somehow worse that the DNC's actions.
That would be the long and short of it.
Here's the Snopes version if anyone is interested:
While the world is paying attention to theatrical battles over President Trump’s executive orders and cabinet nominees, a largely unnoticed and potentially landmark case sits before the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. A petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to nullify the results of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election sits on the SCOTUS docket.
Petitioners argue that, in accordance with Article IV Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, it is the job of the federal government to keep U.S. territory safe from foreign invasion.
The Petitioners claim that the highest courts in Austria and Ukraine nullified elections after "cyber-terrorists" invaded their elections.
They also claim the 1st Circuit Appeals Court made 4 errors denying the Writ of Mandamus. The 4th point states:
Did the Appeals Court Err by Failing to Find that 17 U.S. Intelligence Agencies Under the Executive Branch of Government Concluded that Russia Invaded U.S. Cyber Territory in 2016 to Influence Election Outcomes?
Unlikely to happen but their efforts will still be persistent!
Their argument is quite simple.
The 12th Amendment provides for a smooth transition of power, but the transfer of power was invalid, since the Guaranty Clause (Article 4 Section 4) was violated. The Guaranty Clause states in part:
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion;
Their argument is predicated on a cyber-attack rising to the level of an "invasion." The Petitioners rely heavily on Title 18 Section 1030, which governs fraud and related activity involving computers. It is interesting to note that according to Petition, the Intelligence Community states the hacking began in 2015 (long before Trump emerged as the front-runner) and that the hacking also including e-mail accounts of members of the Republican National Committee, as well as the Democratic National Committee. The FBI also claims at least 12 States had their election databases hacked (I'm assuming those were voter registration databases).
The question before the Court is, "Does the Supreme Court have the power of judicial review to ensure elections meet with the standards set in the Constitution?"
You have to figure the Liberal Justices (Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Kagan) will vote yes, and so possibly will Kennedy and Roberts. It only takes the approval of four Justices to grant a Writ of Certiorari.
The Court will likely rule it does have judicial review over elections.
The relief sought in the Petition is to declare the election unconstitutional, rather than disqualifying any one candidate.
It's important to note that nowhere in the Petition do the Petitioners show how the election was harmed by the hacking.
I would guess the Court would rule the Election as constitutional, since both the Executive and Legislative Branches of government were aware of the cyber-intrusions prior to the Election, but failed or refused to take any action.
Myself personally, I would argue that the Election Day was the "Statute of Limitations", and that any action brought related to the hacking would have to have been filed before Election Day, instead of after the results of the election were known.
Quote:
Originally Posted by janellen
I thought Mircea was a she. She seems way too intelligent to be a he.
I'm a he, but thanks all the same.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
