Was 2020 election stolen or not?

[Flash]

Only the legislature of a State may choose it's electors.

Obviously the 2016 election was not valid because no state chose its electors; instead, those electors were chosen under the laws passed by each state--the same way they were all chosen in 2020 and every other year back to the 1820s.

What electoral votes?

The ones the insurrection wanted Congress to stop counting and the ones President Trump wanted VP Pence to reject.

 

[Flash]

Democracies have no constitution.

Name a democracy with no constitution.

That's a republic, not a democracy. City charters are a constitution. Democracies have no constitution.

It is a form of direct democracy.

 

[Flash]

I am not going to define 'reality' for you, dude. You have to do that yourself. Let's see if you can do it.

What electoral vote?

Definition of reality: Opposite of Into the Night's description of the electoral college operation.

 

[Into the Night]

Hey, Nutjob! If you weren't so fucking insane in your little magical world you'd recognize that you haven't posted a shred of evidence proving this:

RQAA

You are severely mentally ill, INT/IBDa/gfm. I hope you're under someone's care. If not, then you are a danger to society since a nutty fuckwad like you could explode at any minute and kill innocent people.

Psychoquackery.

Everything you post here and on your forum is being tracked. Once you cross the line, that's it for you. You are being watched so please take care.

By who? You? Meh.

 

[Into the Night]

The president is elected by the electoral vote. Those votes are apportioned among the states by the FEDERAL government according to a FEDERAL Census. The FEDERAL government collects the certified electoral votes from each state. Then they hold a final certification on 1-6 when they call out each state's total EV in alphabetical order.

At least seven State never chose electors.

 

[Into the Night]

Obviously the 2016 election was not valid because no state chose its electors;

All the States legislatures chose their electors in 2016.

instead, those electors were chosen under the laws passed by each state--the same way they were all chosen in 2020 and every other year back to the 1820s.

Only the legislature of each State may choose its electors.

The ones the insurrection wanted Congress to stop counting and the ones President Trump wanted VP Pence to reject.

What electoral votes?

 

[Into the Night]

Name a democracy with no constitution.

There are currently no democracies anywhere on Earth.

It is a form of direct democracy.

All democracies are 'direct' democracies. New England towns are not democracies. They are republics.

 

[Into the Night]

Definition of reality: Opposite of Into the Night's description of the electoral college operation.

Nope. Try again. Define 'reality'. 'Reality' isn't insults.

 

[Grokmaster]

The president is elected by the electoral vote. Those votes are apportioned among the states by the FEDERAL government according to a FEDERAL Census. The FEDERAL government collects the certified electoral votes from each state. Then they hold a final certification on 1-6 when they call out each state's total EV in alphabetical order.

ELECTION LAWS WITHIN THE STATES , REGARDING THE STANDARDFS FOR VERIFYING MAIL IN BALLOTS, WERE ILLEGALLY CHANGED BY THE EXECUTIVE BRANCHES WITHIN THE STATES, ALLOPWING MILLIONS OF UNVERIFIED , UNVETTED ,EVEN UN-REQUESTED MAIL IN BALLOTS, AN AUTHORITY ONLY THE LEGISLATURES THERE HAVE. PERIOD.

 

[Hawkeye10]

ELECTION LAWS WITHIN THE STATES , REGARDING THE STANDARDFS FOR VERIFYING MAIL IN BALLOTS, WERE ILLEGALLY CHANGED BY THE EXECUTIVE BRANCHES WITHIN THE STATES, ALLOPWING MILLIONS OF UNVERIFIED , UNVETTED ,EVEN UN-REQUESTED MAIL IN BALLOTS, AN AUTHORITY ONLY THE LEGISLATURES THERE HAVE. PERIOD.

That is the whole point guys like me make....The Constitution is already dead....the nation needs to start tracking with reality!

 

[Flash]

All the States legislatures chose their electors in 2016.

The same procedures were used in 2016 as in 2020. No state actually chooses the electors--slates of electors are chosen by political parties and the voters choose the slate to cast its electoral votes. This is by the power of the Constitution for states to appoint electors in the "...in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct...."

What electoral votes?

The electoral votes Trump wanted Pence to reject. The same ones the insurrection was yelling about with "Stop the Count."

Trump wanted Pence to stop nothing? What did the insurrection want Congress to stop counting?

 

[Flash]

There are currently no democracies anywhere on Earth.

Exactly. So it is equally true to say there are no democracies on earth which do not have a constitution.

 

[Flash]

Nope. Try again. Define 'reality'. 'Reality' isn't insults.

the world or the state of things as they actually exist.

For example, the document certifying the Georgia electoral votes and signed by the electors as established by the George legislature is reality.

"he Secretary of State shall also, upon receiving the certified returns for presidential electors, proceed to tabulate, compute, and canvass the votes cast for each slate of presidential electors and shall immediately lay them before the Governor.  Not later than 5:00 P.M. on the seventeenth day following the date on which such election was conducted, the Secretary of State shall certify the votes cast for all candidates described in subparagraph (a)(4)(A) of Code Section 21-2-497 and upon all questions voted for by the electors of more than one county and shall no later than that same time lay the returns for presidential electors before the Governor.  The Governor shall enumerate and ascertain the number of votes for each person so voted and shall certify the slates of presidential electors receiving the highest number of votes.  The Governor shall certify the slates of presidential electors no later than 5:00 P.M. on the eighteenth day following the date on which such election was conducted.  Notwithstanding the deadlines specified in this Code section, such times may be altered for just cause by an order of a judge of superior court of this state."

The Georgia law passed under its constitutional authority to appoint legislatures in the manner it determines.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Electors do not thwart the will of the people. Unless those faithless electors take away enough electoral votes from the popular vote winner to change the election results the will of the people (popular vote winner) still wins the electoral vote and the presidency.


And, that has never happened.



If you think that the founders wanted popular vote and majority rule your historical analysis is wrong. They made no provision for popular votes in the Constitution--that was implemented by the states. They said letting the people choose the president is like a blind man choosing colors.

You need to read Federalist #10 by the "father of the Constitution" to understand why he objected to majority rule and why he chose a republic rather than a democracy to prevent it.

1. We've done that dance, and I logically proved your statement to be inaccurate. What you believe in theory and suss out in myopic technicalities does not change the FACT that you have electoral votes that do not jibe with the popular vote, and subsequently supersede the will of the majority, which in effect contradicts the whole premise of "one man, one vote" system from local to federal. Your repeating yourself ad nausea won't magically change those facts.

2. Like it or not, the States did change the laws regarding a federal election. That's how it goes. The founders also subconsciously didn't count black folk as human beings, but it was understood as such and took numerous state and federal actions to change the laws across the nation.

The Federalist Papers, when all is said and done, do not always reflect the FINAL LAWS that hit the books, nor did they take into account subsequent amendments. Period. A matter of fact, a matter of history, your insipid stubbornness to the contrary non-withstanding.

Like I said, it's obvious you are NOT going to alter your convictions no matter what facts are put forth that question that counter such. As the saying goes, doing the same exact thing over and over while expecting a change in the outcome may lead to insanity. Which is why this country is in the political mess we are in today. You may have the last word.

 

[Flash]

1. We've done that dance, and I logically proved your statement to be inaccurate. What you believe in theory and suss out in myopic technicalities does not change the FACT that you have electoral votes that do not jibe with the popular vote, and subsequently supersede the will of the majority, which in effect contradicts the whole premise of "one man, one vote" system from local to federal. Your repeating yourself ad nausea won't magically change those facts.

I said nothing "in theory" but just stated historical fact. You did not prove any statement to be inaccurate but you misstate how the electoral college works in practice.

If you mean that in theory an elector who does not vote for the candidate winning the popular vote is "superseding the will of the majority" that point only applies to that single elector(s). The fact that all the other electoral votes from that state all voted for the popular vote winner means that state's electoral votes went to the winner of the vote (the plurality or majority).

If, for example, 37 electors vote for the winner of the popular vote and 1 does not, it is a real stretch to claim the will of the majority is being thwarted. Especially since none of those faith electors has ever changed the outcome of the presidential election.

Using your logic, if the popular vote winner won 46% of the popular vote the will of the majority is being thwarted because the majority actually voted against the winner.

Like it or not, the States did change the laws regarding a federal election. That's how it goes.

I'm not sure what you are referring to, but the Constitution gives the states power to make decisions administering elections although it also gives Congress the power to make laws for federal elections.

The Federalist Papers, when all is said and done, do not always reflect the FINAL LAWS that hit the books, nor did they take into account subsequent amendments. Period. A matter of fact, a matter of history, your insipid stubbornness to the contrary non-withstanding.

The Federalist Papers were not written until after the Constitution was completed. They were written to influence the states to ratify the new document. Very true the three authors all had very different views (especially Hamilton), but #10 is valuable in describing the purpose of government and the best kind of government to achieve those goals.

Like I said, it's obvious you are NOT going to alter your convictions no matter what facts are put forth that question that counter such. As the saying goes, doing the same exact thing over and over while expecting a change in the outcome may lead to insanity. Which is why this country is in the political mess we are in today. You may have the last word.

I never stated my opinions or convictions about the electoral college, I only described how it operates and the history of its operation.

It is simple fact that no faithless electors have ever affected the outcome of a presidential election.

 

[Taichiliberal]

I said nothing "in theory" but just stated historical fact. You did not prove any statement to be inaccurate but you misstate how the electoral college works in practice.

If you mean that in theory an elector who does not vote for the candidate winning the popular vote is "superseding the will of the majority" that point only applies to that single elector(s). The fact that all the other electoral votes from that state all voted for the popular vote winner means that state's electoral votes went to the winner of the vote (the plurality or majority).

If, for example, 37 electors vote for the winner of the popular vote and 1 does not, it is a real stretch to claim the will of the majority is being thwarted. Especially since none of those faith electors has ever changed the outcome of the presidential election.

Using your logic, if the popular vote winner won 46% of the popular vote the will of the majority is being thwarted because the majority actually voted against the winner.



I'm not sure what you are referring to, but the Constitution gives the states power to make decisions administering elections although it also gives Congress the power to make laws for federal elections.




The Federalist Papers were not written until after the Constitution was completed. They were written to influence the states to ratify the new document. Very true the three authors all had very different views (especially Hamilton), but #10 is valuable in describing the purpose of government and the best kind of government to achieve those goals.



I never stated my opinions or convictions about the electoral college, I only described how it operates and the history of its operation.

It is simple fact that no faithless electors have ever affected the outcome of a presidential election.

You don't even have the intellectual honesty/courage to cop to an opinion/stance. That way, you can never truly be wrong in your mindset, and thus repeat your disproved assertions ad nausea while ignoring the sheer contrary nature of them. Pity for you the objective reader sees your folly.

And what the Federalist Papers say and what was the final document are two different things...same with subsequent amendments. Pity those how rely on them to justify their particular beliefs can't accept that fundamental fact.

Now, you just keep parroting the SOS to the mirror for assuredness. The chronology of the posts shows your errors. Adios.

 

[Flash]

You don't even have the intellectual honesty/courage to cop to an opinion/stance. That way, you can never truly be wrong in your mindset, and thus repeat your disproved assertions ad nausea while ignoring the sheer contrary nature of them. Pity for you the objective reader sees your folly.

And what the Federalist Papers say and what was the final document are two different things...same with subsequent amendments. Pity those how rely on them to justify their particular beliefs can't accept that fundamental fact.

Now, you just keep parroting the SOS to the mirror for assuredness. The chronology of the posts shows your errors. Adios.

You obviously can't distinguish between fact and opinion. It is not an "opinion/stance" to state that any faithless electors never affected the outcome of a presidential election which was my original point. That involves no opinion on my part. If you disagree with that fact please show your proof.

The Federalist Papers were not written until after the Constitution was completed and was an analysis of its provisions. Obviously it did not include any amendments because they were not part of the original document (including the Bill of Rights). The founders did provide for the amending process which shows they were aware of the need for future changes. That includes the 12th which changed the way the electoral college functions.

 

[Into the Night]

See? Now others have to decide if your just a lowlife fucking liar since I've never denied the Constitution or if you are truly insane and believe your own bullshit....if not eat it after you play fingerpaint with it.

You deny the Constitution of the United States all the time, liar.

 

[Into the Night]

The governor of Georgia does not have authority to choose the electors. Only the legislature does.

Yes it does. See Article II of the Constitution of the United States.

Article II does not give any governor the authority to choose the electors for a State.

What an insane list of crazy things to say. Circular logic and crazy shit listed one after another.

The Constitution is not circular logic.

One of my favs is the constitution is the authority on the constitution.

The Constitution is the ONLY authoritative reference to what is in the Constitution.

That is akin to defending the bible by using the bible as an authority.

The Bible is the ONLY authoritative reference to what is in the Bible.

It makes no sense.

It makes perfect sense.

The Supremes function is interpreting it.

They do not have authority to interpret or change the Constitution. See Article III.

It also is constantly being interpreted by Congress.

They do not have authority to interpret or change the Constitution. See Article I.

 

[Into the Night]

The same procedures were used in 2016 as in 2020.

No, they weren't.

No state actually chooses the electors

Every State chooses electors, if they decide to actually choose them. They can also file 'contested', which is to effectively abstain.

slates of electors are chosen by political parties

Only the legislatures have the authority to choose the electors for a State.

and the voters choose the slate to cast its electoral votes.

Only the legislatures have the authority to choose the electors for a State.

This is by the power of the Constitution for states to appoint electors in the "...in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct...."

Which says that ONLY the legislatures can choose the electors for their State.

The electoral votes Trump wanted Pence to reject.

What electoral votes?

The same ones the insurrection was yelling about with "Stop the Count."

What electoral votes?

Trump wanted Pence to stop nothing? What did the insurrection want Congress to stop counting?

Congress was synthesizing electoral votes. So was Pence.