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.
There is no precedent for annulling a presidential election. But that's what a precedent is, a first-time event that addresses an issue, that needs a solution.
If it is proven that the 2016 election was rigged or altered by hacking or other fraud, a lawsuit could be brought in a federal court, to demand that it be nullified. If the court found for the plaintiff and an appeals court upheld it, it would go to the U. S. Supreme Court. If the most-likely outcome of that occurred, which would be a 4-4 deadlock, the case would revert back to the decision of the Appeals Court. If the rule of our laws was followed, the election results and all laws and appointments that came from that falsely-elected president, would be voided.
A related issue about such a case in the Supreme Court, might be whether Justice Gorsuch would have to recuse himself, as his nomination depended on the voided results of the election. Things could become very complicated and drawn out over a long time.
This is a leap of fantasy for a myriad of reasons. First, the Federal courts have a well-developed "political question" doctrine wherein they refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of other branches. Even assuming the election could magically be "voided" that does not undo every Presidential action in the interim, much less the actions of coordinate branches of government.
The penalties for those that "rig" an election would presumably be severe. This is not Nicaragua or Honduras.
Who gives a flying ......what Robert Reich says? Seriously, the man masquerades as an economist...but in fact he is not!
Your post is a red herring. You must show us what you mean.
He was Rhodes Scholar studying Economics, Philosophy and Politics at Oxford University. He studied also at Yale, and is a professor at Harvard. His credentials are rock solid.
The man is extremely bright, and he explains issues very well. He has very good videos for anyone interested in learning about the issues of the day. He served as Secretary of Labor, at a time when that department was really concerned about the wellbeing of working people.
Your post is a red herring. You must show us what you mean.
He was Rhodes Scholar studying Economics, Philosophy and Politics at Oxford University. He studied also at Yale, and is a professor at Harvard. His credentials are rock solid.
The man is extremely bright, and he explains issues very well. He has very good videos for anyone interested in learning about the issues of the day. He served as Secretary of Labor, at a time when that department was really concerned about the wellbeing of working people.
Not a red herring....I didn't question his intelligence but the fact that many on the left and in the media consider him an economist. Fact is, he is not....and he never bothers to correct them. To the best of my knowledge he has NO degree in economics (and I've looked hard for evidence). His degree from Oxford was in Philosophy (really appropriate)! He also has a JD from Yale. His reputation among real economists is not impressive regardless of the fact that he served in the Clinton and Carter administrations.
To the best of my knowledge he has NO degree in economics (and I've looked hard for evidence). His degree from Oxford was in Philosophy (really appropriate)!
Reich studied Economics as well as Philosophy and Politics at Oxford. If you "looked hard for evidence" as you claimed, then you should have known this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Reich
Reich studied Economics as well as Philosophy and Politics at Oxford. If you "looked hard for evidence" as you claimed, then you should have known this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Reich
I was quite aware of his education at Oxford, however studying "PPE" per many economists,
is in itself not sufficient to be considered an "Economist." While it does encompass economics there is also an emphasis on philosophy (not just economic), political ideas and history. In my experience to be considered an economist would typically require a Phd.
According to Oxford University’s website, a PPE degree can lead to: “..banking and finance, politics, journalism and broadcasting, law, industry, teaching, social work, accountancy, business management, management consultancy, advertising and the many branches of the public services, including the Civil and Diplomatic Services and local government.” WOW!
You know, just because it's not in the Constitution doesn't mean it can't be done - as long as there's nothing forbidding it. Which there isn't.
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.
