2024 USA Election: Wishin' and Hopin'

[Fitzcarraldo]

I would have to go ogle the details unless you can help: election results in November -is it just the President who requires certification from Congress -what about the Congressional Representatives and Senators? Could the outgoing members delay that certification on the basis their results were 'irregular' and in need of investigation? One of the weaknesses in this whole 'steal' thing is that it appears only the Presidential vote has been rigged, even though the ballot paper with the names of the Presidential candidates also has all the other offices being voted on -so why have all those offices not been challenged?

I yield back.

There is currently a Democratic majority in the Senate and a very slight Republican majority in the House. If the Republicans lose this majority in November, the scenario in the piece can't happen.

From the opinion piece:

What happens if, in the wake of the elections, the House’s election-denying Republicans find that they can retain their majority in the next Congress only by denying certification of Democratic candidates who have won by close margins, and do so?

It's a considerable "if."

[Stavros]

It is a bit obscure, but there is the possibility that on January 3rd when the new House convenes, the right of a member to be sworn in can be challenged. I think this has happened on a few occasions in the past with multi-member districts which I think no longer exist, and I also assume that at least until Trump arrived on the scene, challenging a member on the basis of a claim their election was 'fraudulent' or 'rigged' was never argued, as indeed it had not happened with Presidents, allowing for the Bush-Gore problem to be a procedural rather than a political one.

Thus-

"Any Member-elect may challenge the right of any other Member-elect to be sworn when the Speaker directs the Members-elect to rise to take
the oath of office.... The fact
that the challenging party has not himself been sworn is no bar to his
right to invoke this procedure. ... He must base his
challenge either on his own responsibility as a Member-elect or on
specified facts or documents. ...Such challenges
are generally directed at a single Member-elect, but in several
instances the challenge has been directed against an entire State
delegation. ...
The authority to challenge the right of a Member-elect to be sworn is
based on the Constitution, which designates the House as the sole
judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of Members. U.S.
Const. art. I, Sec. 5, cl. 1. Generally, see Election of Members."
House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House - Chapter 33. Oaths (govinfo.gov)

(I have edited out the references which are in the original link).

I guess at this stage it all depends on that new House and whether or not the Trumpits decide to make mischief as part of a broader campaign to rescue Trump from oblivion, assuming, as I do, that he loses again but they refuse to accept the loss. It is all speculation, but at the same time we are told these people are 'organizing' around the likelihood Trump loses and that they decide to go either 'nuclear' with their protest, or in Steve Bannon's term, 'Stalingrad Every Day'.

[Stavros]

The additional point being that if the GOP were to be the largest party on January 3rd, some, possibly enough new representatives would be foot soldiers for Trump who have no respect for the norms -after all, though Trump indicated in 2016 he might not respect the result, I don't think a lot of people thought he would do what he did in 2020, so the potential for a major disruption is at least there.

Meanwhile, from the aptly named 'war room' via a book on the 2022 mid-terms, this nugget, which underlines the extent to which Bannon has tried to learn from Lenin and Gramsci-

"The book goes on to recall an interview Steve Bannon did with Oath Keeper Dan Schultz on "War Room," in Feb. 2021, promoting the necessity of taking over a political party to be successful. Bannon understood that third parties don't work, Arnsdorf said.
“Essentially, what we have to do is, we conservatives have to take over one of the two major political parties. Our party is, the one we’ve been using, is the Republican Party. The problem is we’re not in control of it," Schultz told Bannon."
Trump’s anger and embarrassment after 2022 midterm failures revealed in new book (msn.com)

It has been a feature of British politics for some time, mostly in the form of Trotskyists -the 'pragmatists' who have abandoned a Proletarian Revolution for the Parliamentary Road to Socialism- who see the Labour Party as their best hope of giving the 'working class' a revolutionary form of leadership, it was certainly behind the Momentum leadership that promoted Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership of the party, I know because several of the Trotskyists who were in my constituency party in the 1980s were still there, not having changed their commitment or views in over 40 years. It was a lesser case with members of UKIP that immigrated to the Conservative Party and backed Boris Johnson as their Brexit champion.

And in both cases, failures, as in the US the TEA Party faction, and so on.

I don't think the average person supports extreme politics in most situations, though now and then they might opt for it, and then regret it. A disaster in Israel, possibly a disaster in the US for the Republicans.

[filghy2]

I would have to go ogle the details unless you can help

Was that a Freudian slip?

[filghy2]

The additional point being that if the GOP were to be the largest party on January 3rd, some, possibly enough new representatives would be foot soldiers for Trump who have no respect for the norms -after all, though Trump indicated in 2016 he might not respect the result, I don't think a lot of people thought he would do what he did in 2020, so the potential for a major disruption is at least there.

We should not forget that 63% of Republican Reps voted against certifying Biden's election the day after Trump incited his supporters to storm the Congress. The percentage willing to defy Trump's wishes would almost certainly be lower now.

I think the scenario to worry about most is that Republican-controlled states refuse to certify the results if Biden wins. In that case it could come down to a state-based vote of the HoR (contingent election). It's possible that Republicans could still control the majority of state delegations even if they lose their HoR majority.

But I'm sure Trump and his followers will be desperate enough to try anything if he loses again.

[Stavros]

But I'm sure Trump and his followers will be desperate enough to try anything if he loses again.

Stalingrad, Reichstag, 22 October 1922...if history repeats itself, and the first was tragedy and the second farce, what is the third?

I do a lot of ogling, especially on the internet. Oh the joys of retirement.

[blackchubby38]

Is it Biden who doesn't want the debates, or Trump? Depending on the dates, he might be on Tv the day after a 'difficult' day in Court. He talks loudly, but often ducks the heavy duty stuff.

Follow-up.

Major media organizations urge Biden and Trump to debate


abcnews.go.com/Politics/major-media-organizations-urge-biden-trump-debate/story?id=109169895

[Stavros]

Follow-up.

Major media organizations urge Biden and Trump to debate


abcnews.go.com/Politics/major-media-organizations-urge-biden-trump-debate/story?id=109169895

Will they have to take drugs tests first? In truth I cannot see any purpose to a debate, given that there is no debate, just two people speaking over each other trying to score points. Given that Trump doesn't believe in the democratic process anyway, and his backers are, as I write, concocting the means to secure the electoral college regardless of the popular vote, the tv debate is a waste of time and money. An hour of Trump whining about the world against him, Biden trying to convince people the economy is doing well, and so on.

Better to have them grilled on the detail, which I think Biden, as a seasoned politician can handle, whereas Trump when challenged -if they can find someone with really tough questions- reacts angrily and without reason. But as we know this already, maybe even this is not worth the effort.

Would you watch a tv debate between Biden and Trump?

Maybe Harris and the GOP VP nominee would make better tv?

[Stavros]

Get Ready to Rumble, America, Kari sees it

"“They’re going to come after us with everything. That’s why the next six months is going to be intense. And we need to strap on our — let’s see. What do we want to strap on?” Lake asked as some in the crowd chuckled.“We’re going to strap on our, our seat belt. We’re going to put on our helmet or your Kari Lake ball cap. We are going to put on the armor of God. And maybe strap on a Glock on the side of us just in case.”"
Kari Lake frantically urges supporters to 'strap on a Glock' (azcentral.com)

Good Glock and Good Night!

[Stavros]

"Addressing conservative LGBTQ+ supporters at the sold-out fundraiser, Melania Trump said money raised that night -- more than $1 million, according to organizers -- would go toward an effort to deploy resources to key swing states in educating voters about conservative LGBTQ+ causes and delivering pro-Trump messages among gay and lesbian communities, said Bill White, one of the co-hosts and a longtime friend of Donald Trump."
Melania Trump announces initiative to woo gay voters during fundraiser, organizer says - ABC News (go.com)

Hmmm..conserve what? I am under the impression a second Trump term would take away the rights of LGBTQ+ Americans. Or is this the first scene in a messy divorce?

I didn't hear from Dozing Don, 'I approve this message'.