Late votes in AZ are not mail in, they are early ballots dropped off at polling places on Election Day so expected to be a “red wave”. Most mail in ballots were counted before Election Day and were bluer.
The guy who gave us Citizens United?
How about Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett or Connick v. Thompson or Shelby County v. Holder or AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion?
I’ll agree he is the least offensive of the conservative justices but that is a pretty low bar.
It is a good decision based upon prior case law. If, as all English common law nations have it, and as over a century of accepted case law has it- corps have “personhood” then they have 1st Ad rights.
and that was Kennedy actually, altho Roberts concurred.
Although this is not a thead about Citizens United, which has been amply discussed elsewhere, and I don’t want to hijack the thread here, that is such a pile of unmitigated horse poop that I have to interject a comment from the real world.
First, although Kennedy wrote the opinion, Roberts was the one who engineered the framework of the case and arranged to have it re-argued in order to tremendously increase the scope of what otherwise could and should have been a very limited decision of no particular consequence, and turned it into a landmark case about political spending. Roberts was the one who infamously stated that he saw no basis for believing that money was a corrupting influence in politics, and created the ruling that will stand for generations as precedent for this delusional belief. In the process, he also violated one of the most important principles of Supreme Court rulings, that they should extend no further than necessary to resolve the matter at hand. He spectacularly did the exact opposite.
Second, those English common law nations of which you speak – and there are many whose legal and political systems are based on British common law – would consider your conclusion about corporate personhood and unconstrained political spending to be the height of absurdity. All these countries embrace the fundamental principle of free speech; in countries like Canada they are enshrined in the constitution. But there are important differences from the American approach. One is that “corporate personhood” is a limited concept mainly concerned with things like contractual rights, but more importantly, there is absolutely nothing in this notion that prevents the law from restricting the monetary political contributions of either corporations or actual persons alike, in order to avoid wealth from having an undue corrupting influence on politics, something from which the US has long suffered even before Citizens United. The idea that “money is speech” and that corporate meddling in elections is a constitutional right, to be exercised without limit, is a distinctly American delusion that Roberts helped promulgate.
I will acknowledge, though, that in some other respects – especially recently – Roberts has been one of the more thoughtful conservatives on the bench and many times the voice of reason. But each case has to be judged on its merits, and in this particular one, he was totally off the deep end to an extent that could be described as unprincipled and reckless.
And with that, I return you now to your regularly scheduled thread and don’t wish to participate in this hijack any further.
The AP now has the lead at 14,101. Is there a reason this race isn’t being called? Does it have to hit the .5% difference threshold?
They’ve already announced it’s going to be recounted, so everyone’s just waiting for that.
Note: “Invited by the trump administration”:
I’ve watched the Pompeo speech with the laughing. It reminds me of extreme nervous inappropriate laughter some people experience.
I was once at work talking with a woman about a very serious situation, where she was clearly in the wrong. As I spoke, she began laughing. I was pissed off, and overreacted, with, “WHAT’S SO FUCKING FUNNY?” and she immediately went from laughing to crying.
Speaking of elections having consequences, this article and map from the Washington Post is just absolutely brutal for Democrats. The state legislatures just elected last week will control the decennial redistricting of Congressional seats, and Republicans will fully control the process in 19 states. This includes most of the states (TX, FL, NC) expected to gain seats during the reapportionment of House seats based on the census. Democrats will only have full control in 8 states. The rest are split control or have independent commissions that control redistricting. Ironically Virginia, which would be full Democratic control, voted to adopt an independent commission this year.
This will have deep consequences. Republicans will be in excellent shape to take back the House in 2022 and hold it for many years to come. Moreover, they will redistrict their own state legislative districts to entrench their control and shut out opportunities for Democrats to grow their “farm team” who could ultimately help take back those Congressional seats.
Sounds like a no. How do I even search for that, without visiting Fox News?
Found some info at the New York Times
The more rational Murdoch-owned conservative papers are facing reality. Even Hannity is reluctantly facing reality, though he is still making fraud accusations.
I was assuming Georgia would call a winner, then recount if they needed to. Top election official just did a press conference where he announced the beginning of a “post-election audit”/recount… with no mention of calling the race. Damn.
Even with a recount, isn’t it 95% or more likely Joe Biden won Georgia? Or is there a lot of unknown still?
That is correct. Actually closer to 99%.
And…WHY?? Why not recount Oklahoma and Massachusetts while we’re at it? Total waste.
If/when they do a recount - in Georgia or anywhere else - how closely will the unfolding match the original count? By which I mean, will they count the votes in the same order as the first time and will they release partial results as they go along?
Or do they just scoop up all the votes with regard to chronological order of previous counting, count them all at once, and announce the total?
The latter way would sure be a lot easier on people at this point. We really don’t need to go through the ups and downs of “Trump is ahead! Biden is very close! Trump is in the lead but barely! Biden could still pull it out! Biden is slightly in the lead! Still X votes to count and they will probably favor Biden! But Trump has a chance!”…etc. I don’t think I can take much more of that.
Georgia’s Secretary of State (a Republican) is being hammered on all GOP sides for basically saying there was no fraud. There is no way he’d certify the results without an audit/recount. He’s giving himself maximum cover.
Good call. Just give us the final number.
Are there a lot of outstanding votes, still? I guess that is what I’m wondering.
Very very few. The final (first) tally will be a difference of about 11,000.
It’s like Trump wants to lose twice!