I was schooled in the "Election Day(Week) thread, that if it gets to the point that the House votes for the president, the vote goes by one Rep per state, NOT all Reps. And more states are red, therefore in that sense the House vote would be Repub-controlled.
Not too get TOO alarmist-- to imagine that trump could flip electors in 3 states this way is pretty outlandish, but as I say, the fact that things have gotten this far, especially considering how one-sided the win was, is batshit crazy.
I don’t he’s referring to having the House elect the President. I think Jas09 is referring to a debate over which elector slates to receive from those States, which would be with simple majority.
It’s really not outlandish at all. It is what they are actually doing, and it’s perfectly doable.
Not true. If it came to a contingent election then yes. But I’m talking about how the electors votes are counted. In that process the House needs a majority to select an alternate slate. And the Senate would have to agree. Because no matter what the PA and MI state houses do a slate of electors will be submitted by those states that are aligned with the popular vote results in those states and according to the law that slate has priority.
This is what people are concerned about. Yes, it seems ridiculous. A year ago, I couldn’t imagine there would be enough Republicans to go along with it and a SCOTUS that would agree to it.
But I can imagine it now. I still don’t think it’s likely, but it’s not outlandish anymore.
I’m glad you guys understand the political process better than I do. So, it sounds like there is a circuit breaker, even in the unlikely event trump convinces the legislators in the three states to each send alternate sets of electors. That makes me feel a little better, even if, in the event that scenario plays out, it’s still a colossal shit show.
There are actually a few circuit breakers.
To take one state ¶ as an example.
My understanding is that the current process will continue, leading to a certification of vote totals, first at the county then at the state level. The executive branch signs off on that and assigns electors to meet at the state capital on Dec 14. These will be Biden electors.
IF the state GOP decides to muck things up they will start by holding hearings (already scheduled for next week). Then they could try to pass legislation to halt the certification. I believe this would be subject to veto, and I highly doubt they even have the votes to do it much less override a veto. Then they could try to pass legislation appointing an alternate set of electors. That may also be subject to a veto, or maybe not - I couldn’t find anything definitive on that.
I don’t actually know what the process would be on Dec 14 in Harrisburg if the state house did manage to pass legislation awarding an alternate slate of electors. I believe it would mean that two sets of votes would be cast on that day, and both would be sent to the US Congress.
The final circuit breaker is the one I mentioned. If two sets of votes are sent to Congress, and one is aligned with the safe harbor provisions and the other isn’t, the one that is aligned is considered “conclusive” and has priority unless both houses agree that it is not “regularly certified” and “lawfully given”. Clearly the House will not intervene to disallow any Biden EVs.
I’ll qualify all of this again with the fact that it is extremely convoluted law, I’m not a lawyer, and there is likely plenty of room for nefarious legislatures and courts to contort themselves enough to go along with it. But I don’t see it happening.
Much more information is here (written before the election, in two parts) if you want details: How to Resolve a Contested Election, Part 1: The States and Their Electors | Lawfare
Do you mean that criticism is pretty loud?
Every transgression of democratic norms has been incremental. There’s no reason to believe that “let them have their day in court” won’t lead into “the courts have failed America and so we must have the legislatures seat nee electors.”
Assuming the Michigan Republican officials visiting with Trump today decide to appoint Republican electors, what could be done about that? Would they be in violation of any laws, either state or federal? Could the Republican electors, should they turn up on 12/14, be charged with anything?
ETA. I can’t imagine that they would show up, have a tour of the White House, tell Trump so sorry but you lost Michigan, and head back home.
And that’s what the conspirators are counting on: for us to be “good,” and “agreeable.” That makes taking over a lot easier.
Most of us are in denial. Sitting in the comforts of our home. Teleworking remotely. Concerned, disturbed by what we see on television but mostly with a detached sense of moral indignation, and not really even thinking of incivility in the name of stopping tyranny.
That’s the calculation that some of these people are making: that only some people will have the balls to come out and confront them, and that they can make an example of those who happen to violate the letter of the law in the process.
“Yeah, we’re stealing your election. Just what the fuck are you gonna do about it, punk.”
“Nothing, that’s what.”
If the Michigan Republicans intended to respect the will of people they wouldn’t even have bothered to go. They plan to effect a coup. Do not be in denial. That is their plan, and they are doing it.
What makes you think the bolded part is true? All it takes is for MI and PA’s legislatures to vote not to do that. They can change state law. They are in forty minutes from my typing this meeting to plan how to do it - with Donald Trump, who has no ethics or morals. My guess is the plan is to wait until the last minute so there isn’t time for the Biden camp to file a suit.
They can’t change the law without governors’ approval, but they could still send their own electors, which I think is their plan. It looks like the strategy now is to create two parallel slates of electors based on parallel interpretations of the constitution. This increases the chances of a contested election that would get sent to the Congress.
Right. That’s why I’m wondering if anything can be done about it. Could the Michigan attorney general order the Michigan state police to arrest them and charge them with violating state election law? After noon on 1/20/2021 could Biden’s AG order the US marshals to arrest them on charges of sedition? What about the Republican electors, if they show up on 12/14 to cast votes for Trump?
Biden has to become president first.
1/20/2021 will get here. At noon on that day Biden can legally issue orders to the US marshals, or the military if need be, to arrest any such people for sedition or treason. It will up to those people receiving the orders whether or not to recognize Biden as having authority to issue such orders. We’ll see where the loyalty of the people with the guns lies when that day arrives. I hope it’s not on the side of Trump.
Except Biden won’t do that. He’ll be nice and say there are more important things to focus on right now, like the pandemic, so let’s all just try to get along.
This from CNN:
Even as some Republicans are starting to speak out about President Trump’s attacks on the election results, a wide array of Republicans continue to back the President — and some are endorsing his long-shot strategy of winning in the Electoral College and subverting the will of voters in key battleground states.
It feels like this is happening. Trump is taking it all the way and no one who could stop it will do anything while no one who would stop it if they could can do anything and the rest of us are all just riding along heading toward the cliff in a big rickety bucket.
Asked if he’d be okay if state legislatures named electors that differed from the outcome of the vote counts in their states, [NC Rep. Richard] Hudson told CNN, “Yeah, that’s the constitutional process.”