I will be praying that they will be allowed to take office. Scotus is likely to try to overturn the election.
ISTM SCOTUS needs a pretty big crack into which to stick their wedge and start pounding.
So the way to keep them out of it is to have Harris win solidly in the swing states she does win, such that the amount of claimed fraud or other irregularities by the Rs don’t pass the laugh test.
I’ll celebrate with a victory dinner of caramelized carrots
I’m going to laugh at ALL if the members here that laughed at me when I said I was going to vote for Harris and they told me my vote wouldn’t matter and I was a dumbass for doing that.
Somebody on these boards said that?
A few. Back when I said Harris would be my write in protest vote so I wouldn’t have to vote Biden or Trump. That started a whole discussion on protest votes. But NOW I have been show to be right well before all y’all decided to vote Harris.
So I won that thread if she wins.
Relief.
In the runup to 2016, I said there was no way in hell that a pig like Trump could become president. Maybe he only got in by cheating with help from the Russians, but even so - I was wrong.
Now, I’m again of the opinion that no one with an IQ of 3 digits and not either corrupt or senile would vote for Trump, but the memory of 2016 keeps me awake at night. I get to sleep by fantasizing about ways he might die before election day.
My favorite is a covey of pigeons trained to defecate on red caps that smothers him stepping out of his private jet. Second best is an alligator on the golf course that devours him when he hits a ball into the rough. I wonder if orange dye could be made to attract killer bees…
Oh. Back when Harris wasn’t the POTUS candidate.
I don’t think her being the candidate now means that it was a good idea to refuse to vote for Biden when he was the candidate. It was only a protest vote to write her in for POTUS then. It’s an effective vote to vote for her as POTUS now. Objections to protest votes remain just as valid as they were the first time.
Doesn’t matter. I was the first here to say I was going to vote for Harris and so if she wins then I win a lot of Dope Points
QED
Checkmate
If rash develops, discontinue use
You would win that game, for sure! 
(On a technicality, but that’s fine.)
I’ll be relieved and see it as a first step.
Legal theory aside, how much are we really voting for a particular person as opposed to simply “that party’s candidate”? I’ll exempt Trump himself from this as exceptional, but otherwise? Will Harris really be a different president if elected than Biden or Hillary Clinton would be?
You are aware that by definition half of the people will have an IQ under 3 digits aren’t you? And that many people with 3 digit IQ’s are corrupt?
I think the first thing will be my sphincter unclenching. Then I’ll probably have a beer to celebrate, which is weird, because I never drink alcohol. And when I do, it ain’t beer because I hate the taste.
Then I’ll probably head out to my driveway, and tell “suck it” to the rest of Kentucky, which will have voted red.
OR especially in this election, voting against a candidate rather than for the other candidate.
As (pre-trump) we are supposedly a nation of laws, not men people, and (pre-trump) each party has had a fairly stable collection of policy positions that both their president and all their congressmen were supposed to get behind and stay behind, I agree that in general the public should be voting for the party they favor and paying little attention to the personalities involved. Unless one of said personalities is batshit insane, droollingly senile, or both.
Making the election about the candidates as individual people is IMO the work of the press trying to sell more papers. Has been since the 1900s if not before. A battle of human interest stories will attract more readers / viewers than will the dry reality of dueling position papers and policy backgrounders.
But the latter is what any sane citizen wants from their government, whether or not they are bright enough to recognize that.
Rash has developed. Discontinue use of this argument.
According to your own report, you weren’t criticized for voting for Harris because she was/is Harris. You were criticized for making a protest vote instead of an effective one.
Nothing about a Harris win in 2024 would magically turn your protest vote in 2020 into an effective one.
Meh. During most of my voting life, there were people in both parties who disagreed with some of their own party’s positions and would vote with the other party on those issues. Sorting out which issues mattered most to the voter and which candidate could be most trusted to vote the desired way on those was in no way a matter of flat out going by the party label.
I’ll go a step further and say that I doubt there are a hell of a lot of people who genuinely agree with every party line on exactly every issue; and therefore that a candidate who’s absolutely going to fall in line on every detail is probably untrustworthy. This is somewhat less true with the POTUS, since these days the candidate is usually known before the platform’s solidified, and that candidate is going to have a lot of influence over what the platform is. (The current Republican platform looks as if Trump wrote it; capitalization and all. Trump is certainly untrustworthy, but not for saying he agrees with that platform.)
If you substituted “should” for “would” then you’d be right.
People with IQ’s under 3 digits shouldn’t vote for Trump either.
Unfortunately quite a lot of people with low, high, and intermediate IQ’s will do so.
TBH, I’m buying some extra groceries, the way I did in the early days of COVID, because I wouldn’t be surprised if these wackos sabotage the supply chain in one way or another.
No, I’m not stockpiling 5 years’ worth of food, nothing like that, but I am picking up extra cans of soup and the like every time I go to the grocery store.