They have to count the votes on January 6th. Not today. If the states don’t certify and send to Congress, I’m not sure what even a good VP could do in that situation.
Continue until it’s done. It would be a standoff.
The Electoral Count Act is the law that governs the process.
The law says when the count starts (1 PM January 6), but it doesn’t give a deadline to complete it. I think that’s an assumption people are making.
Here’s an opinion that concurs with me:
Of course, that’s just an opinion.
If some States don’t submit certified results, does a candidate still need 270 electoral votes to win, or just half+1 of the votes that were actually cast?
Also…if a State doesn’t submit “official” results, couldn’t Biden just appoint his own electors? In that case wouldn’t it be up to the House to decide which set of electors are legitimate? (This differs from Trump’s fake elector plan, since all States in 2020 did in fact submit certified results). Unfortunately that scenario would require a few Republicans to choose to respect the will of the voters, but only a few.
My understanding is that they need 270 votes. Not merely a majority of votes sent in.
Does it say that, specifically?
In Article 2 of the Constitution, it says a majority of the electors appointed, not of the electoral votes received.
A plain reading would say that means 270 but with SCOTUS as it is, I’m sure they’d say it means whatever they want it to mean.
No, it actually does not say that.
If the number of electors lawfully appointed by any State pursuant to a certificate of ascertainment of appointment of electors that is issued under section 5 is fewer than the number of electors to which the State is entitled under section 3, or if an objection the grounds for which are described in subsection (d)(2)(B)(ii)(I) has been sustained, the total number of electors appointed for the purpose of determining a majority of the whole number of electors appointed as required by the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution shall be reduced by the number of electors whom the State has failed to appoint or as to whom the objection was sustained.
This is quoted from the law governing how electoral counts are done.
So if they disqualify (or “sustain the objection” in the wording of the law) 70 electors then a candidate needs 200 to win. That is plainly put in the law.
Since bribery is legal now, just approach the electors and tell them "There is a million bucks in it for you if you don’t certify the election.
Easy peasy.
The electors themselves don’t certify the election. They just cast a ballot and there are laws about faithless electors. In most states, each party already have a slate of electors ready before the election. Our votes determine which slate. Or should - there were shenanigans attempted the last time on this one.
It’s up to each state to determine how to certify. Most go through their Secretaries of State and there’s some potential shenanigans there too.
I don’t think refusing to certify is the same as a faithless elector. They could refuse (I think) because they claim massive fraud, couldn’t they?
Again, electors do NOT certify the election.
They can refuse to cast their electoral vote out of concerns of legitimacy but that hurts their own party. Each party has a slate of electors. Which slate is chosen is based on the vote.
So, if you’re a potential MAGA elector, you’re not even chosen as an elector unless Trump wins anyway. And if he does win, why are you objecting to the election in that state?
The thing they tried in 2020 was claiming that “alternate” slates of electors were the actual ones. Dozens of those fake “alternate” electors have now been criminally charged.
Ah, thanks.
It’s one of the things Rudy Giuliani is in trouble for. Arizona has criminally charged him, among others, with scheming to set up those fake electors. They had similar operations going in the battleground states.
You guys are trippin’ for nothing. Kamala Harris is the current VP. VP’s get to decide which slate of electors go to congress so it’s all cool.
If Nevada, Georgia and Arizona don’t send in a slate of electors at all, because the state officials don’t certify anyone as the winner, and no one gets 270, what can Harris do?
There are 538 (potential) electors. Half of that is 269, so 270 needed to win. If 70 are disqualified, that would leave 468, with 235 needed to win.
Good point, my math was off. The law says that the total number of electors for the purpose of determining a majority of the whole is reduced, but it isn’t done the way I originally suggested.
The total number of electoral votes at that point becomes 505 (subtracting the 33 that are no longer counted), so Harris would only need 253 votes to win. As long as she gets that many she is declared the winner of the election.
Of course I don’t think it would not be that clean since you’re disenfranchising a lot of voters that way. Expect a lot of legal crap and chaos in that situation.
If my understanding of the Electoral College is accurate (Trump told me what’s what), the VP is the key to the whole deal. All she has to do is step up for American and declare herself president.
This is how it will come down (as far as I can see). In some battleground (BG) states, a few of the red counties will claim that because of reasons, the election boards will say they can’t certify the vote. The BG state’s SoS (Secretary of State)–or whoever is responsible for certifying the BG state’s results–tells these counties if they don’t turn in their results by deadline day, they will certify the result without them.
As a result, lawsuits ensue, claiming disenfranchisement of the non-responsive county voters, not just for President, but for all other federal, state, or county positions. This gets worse when the GOP Congressmen from the BG state throw themselves in the middle of the mess. The end result is the BG state sends no Electors to DC. Of course, if the vote count shows the BG state would go to Trump, the lawsuits get dropped and the election boards certify–they only refuse to certify if the state’s results would go to Harris. Get one or two BG states to withhold their votes for Harris, Trump wins. If not that, because the Democrats try to do something about it, the Supremes delay things until after the Jan 6 deadline, and it goes to the House, all perfectly in line with the Constitution.
Or something similar. The simple fact is that Trump has too much on the line to allow the voter’s decide the outcome. That’s not how Trump does business.