US Election 2020 - Lame duck days

[CaptainOblivious]

Well, not perfectly because, you know, we don't have a federal system like the US... Or states rights, which Texas fought for in 1861 but seem to want to overturn in 2020.

Yeah, I really have only one amusing anecdote from WITS law school in the 80s...

This is SA band, The Helicopters.

And here's an interview with drummer, Nick Matzukis and lead singer, Bernard Binns.

Anyway, Nick was my 1st year law lecturer.

Pretty sure the American constitution lays out the jurisdictional differences between federal law and state law, thereby assuring that the constitution ultimately retains supremacy with respect to how state law or federal law is to be interpreted, which means that state supreme courts and SCOTUS will have vastly different priorities with respect to what constitutes a proper ruling. Which would be the point that Buka snagged himself on yesterday. So yes, not perfectly, but enough so that mutatis mutandis objections can easily be made to which no intelligible answer can be produced, even though conceivably there might be several such answers.

 

[greg0205]

Ah yes. But see. Once you ignore the Copium addicts it becomes a zany thread full of cool pictures and witty banter.

(I held out for as long as I could, but in the end I chose life)

That's pretty much why I'm here.

Sure, in the last four weeks we've seen profound reee-ing, but I'm hoping for a resumption of the regular reee-ing after the 20th.

 

[CaptainOblivious]

Well 49 court sessions have debunked the entirety of the allegations brought to them from Trump et al, thus far. A fact you ignore and will obfuscate.

Its not the msm. Its the courts, with conservative justices, appointed by Trump and other Republican presidents.

TIL refusing to address the evidence for a claim is a debunking of the claim.

 

[greg0205]

Pretty sure the American constitution lays out the jurisdictional differences between federal law and state law, thereby assuring that the constitution ultimately retains supremacy with respect to how state law or federal law is to be interpreted, which means that state supreme courts and SCOTUS will have vastly different priorities with respect to what constitutes a proper ruling. Which would be the point that Buka snagged himself on yesterday. So yes, not perfectly, but enough so that mutatis mutandis objections can easily be made to which no intelligible answer can be produced, even though conceivably there might be several such answers.

Yet here you've been, for more than four weeks now, hoping, nay praying, for the SC to supersede the constitution to crown your guy king.

Go figure.

 

[CaptainOblivious]

Yet here you've been, for more than four weeks now, hoping, nay praying, for the SC to supersede the constitution to crown your guy king.

Go figure.

Au contraire. I rather expect them to enforce the constitution as if it is a life and death matter for the future of the republic, because that's exactly what it is. And regardless of whether or not Biden or Trump won, I think the voting process in the US is in need of a revamp. Konfab is right, the USA should at least be able to get their elections done as competently as we do. A couple of states having their results voided would be exactly the right sort of kick in the pants to ensure that this becomes a serious priority. Smug comments on this thread aside, there's been no serious discounting of a constellation of dodgy behaviours by several election officials. And enough of this stupid whiny garbage about voter disenfranchisement regarding the implementation of voter-ID.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Hawley urges Trump to veto Covid bill absent stimulus checks

If Trump rejects it, a new round of aid could be delayed until after Biden is sworn in.

www.politico.com

Smart politics by Hawley. The direct payments were highly popular with the electorate.

He understands people are hurting from the covid-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns...the people need some financial relief!

Trump realised many of his working-class supporters are not as sold on the free market as many GOP establishment figures...hence his re-orientation of GOP economic orthodoxy was scary to many people.

Have long said Hawley is the closest GOP Senator who 'gets' what one might called 'Trumpism'...definitely someone to look out for as a future GOP presidential candidate.

Sounds like communism, Chris. Repent!

 

[buka001]

Pretty sure the American constitution lays out the jurisdictional differences between federal law and state law, thereby assuring that the constitution ultimately retains supremacy with respect to how state law or federal law is to be interpreted, which means that state supreme courts and SCOTUS will have vastly different priorities with respect to what constitutes a proper ruling. Which would be the point that Buka snagged himself on yesterday. So yes, not perfectly, but enough so that mutatis mutandis objections can easily be made to which no intelligible answer can be produced, even though conceivably there might be several such answers.

Tick tock

 

[greg0205]

Au contraire. I rather expect them to enforce the constitution as if it is a life and death matter for the future of the republic, because that's exactly what it is. And regardless of whether or not Biden or Trump won, I think the voting process in the US is in need of a revamp. Konfab is right, the USA should at least be able to get their elections done as competently as we do. A couple of states having their results voided would be exactly the right sort of kick in the pants to ensure that this becomes a serious priority. Smug comments on this thread aside, there's been no serious discounting of a constellation of dodgy behaviours by several election officials. And enough of this stupid whiny garbage about voter disenfranchisement regarding the implementation of voter-ID.

*Only* the states that flipped for Joe 'tho, amirite?

 

[buka001]

TIL refusing to address the evidence for a claim is a debunking of the claim.

TIL UNISA law guy doesn't understand law.

 

[CaptainOblivious]

TIL UNISA law guy doesn't understand law.

Right, I don't understand law, that's why I have no idea that you are conjecturing as to the content of the 49 rulings, and do not understand that many of them did not actually rule substantively on the merits of the cases before the court. I am sure you will proceed to demonstrate how mistaken I am while tabulating the substantive findings in each of the 49 cases.

 

[CaptainOblivious]

*Only* the states that flipped for Joe 'tho, amirite?

Well the suspicious synchronised suspension of vote counting in several states looks organised, so one should look to tie those facts together into a common narrative. At the very least, the public deserves a proper explanation for why the individuals involved in arranging for those breaks are attempting to hide what they did after the fact. But I certainly would not rule out multiple attempts by both sides to rig elections.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

The approval rating is essentially meaningless as he hasn't actually done anything.

And he still beats Trump. Amazing, ain't it?

 

[OrbitalDawn]

1. The rest of them definitely understand people are hurting from the lockdowns, they don't give a ****.
2. You correctly point out that it's a single Republican Senator who gives a ****, but carry on with your FOX news standpoint that it's the Democrats who don't care about the working class.

Curious.

Sorry to pop Chris' bubble, but Hawley is a garbage phoney like the rest of them.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318343089031958533

 

[buka001]

Right, I don't understand law, that's why I have no idea that you are conjecturing as to the content of the 44 rulings, and do not understand that many of them did not actually rule substantively on the merits of the cases before the court. I am sure you will proceed to demonstrate how mistaken I am while tabulating the substantive findings in each of the 44 cases.

50 cases.

49 ruled against Trump.

Do keep up.

Maybe those judges know a bit more about the law and why they could rule the way they did, than you?

Maybe the "substantive" merits you hoped for were without merit and that is why the learned Judges have ruled the way they have?

Your cognitive dissonance will of course fail to see this.

 

[greg0205]

Well the suspicious synchronised suspension of vote counting in several states looks organised, so one should look to tie those facts together into a common narrative. At the very least, the public deserves a proper explanation for why the individuals involved in arranging for those breaks are attempting to hide what they did after the fact. But I certainly would not rule out multiple attempts by both sides to rig elections.

Cope harder, CO.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336140018264514561

EDIT: Periodic reminder of how garbage Rafael really is...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318520859804553222

Ted Cruz Wants to Toss Out 7 Million People’s Votes. Appalling.

The ‘constitutionalist’ senator volunteers to help make the case at the Supreme Court.

thebulwark.com

Cruz—the strict constructionist—is eager to stand before the U.S. Supreme Court to argue that the Pennsylvania legislature had no power to allow universal mail-in voting, but does have the power to throw out every single vote cast in Pennsylvania and impose its own political will on the citizens of Pennsylvania, who chose Joe Biden for president by a nearly 82,000-vote margin over Donald Trump.

Also, let's recall the case they went with isn't arguing for a cert at the SC, so no oral arguments.

Guys, I think Lou Dobbs needs to take a mental health day...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336115345812238338

Also, you'd think that bringing a baby vampire into the world would chill Nosferatu out a bit, but his reee-ing can be heard from space.

Marc Elias approves:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336127557259943938

The reason Miller won't actually answer the frothing lunatic's question is that he knows there's nothing they can actually do about it. That's why he's vomiting up the same garbage that either doesn't get put forward in court or gets tossed almost immediately.

He thinks Trump's supporters are stupid, just like the CEO of Newsmax.

 

[CaptainOblivious]

50 cases.

49 ruled against Trump.

Do keep up.

Maybe those judges know a bit more about the law and why they could rule the way they did, than you?

Maybe the "substantive" merits you hoped for were without merit and that is why the learned Judges have ruled the way they have?

Your cognitive dissonance will of course fail to see this.

Lol, I like how you attempt to deflect while not substantiating your earlier claim, therefore failing to demonstrate any ignorance on my part.

 

[CaptainOblivious]

Sorry to pop Chris' bubble, but Hawley is a garbage phoney like the rest of them.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1318343089031958533

Lol. Yes, so phoney, being supportive of giving money to the people while being hostile to the idea of giving money to the state.

 

[greg0205]

Ted Cruz Wants to Toss Out 7 Million People’s Votes. Appalling.

The ‘constitutionalist’ senator volunteers to help make the case at the Supreme Court.

thebulwark.com

Also, let's recall the case they went with isn't arguing for a cert at the SC, so no oral arguments.


The reason Miller won't actually answer the frothing lunatic's question is that he knows there's nothing they can actually do about it. That's why he's vomiting up the same garbage that either doesn't get put forward in court or gets tossed almost immediately.

He thinks Trump's supporters are stupid, just like the CEO of Newsmax.

^ Pretty much all of this, but here's the thing... Trump's supporters *are* stupid.

They're chugging the Kool-Aid as if they were on a skateboard drinking delicious Cranberry Juice.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Farking hell mate, why don't you just decide based on the merits of the case?

Pray tell - what are the merits?

What possible standing and merit is there in Texas claiming Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania don't have the legal authority to determine how their own elections are handled?