Open Thread

I hope you guys like my fiction more than my non-fiction…because I’m definitely liking fiction more! Nearly done with Battles, the sequel to Secrets (last night I did a big bit on the final battle between the good guys and the bad guys; its quite exciting!) and I’m already way into Shadow Army, which takes our heroes six years after Battles and continues the story. Shadow Army came up because the Mrs invented the evil creatures in it…she just suddenly thought about them and before I knew it, I had 25,000 words down.

The Democrats and the MSM (but I repeat myself) are sticking to the 2016 script relentlessly. They are even now on “GOP insiders say Trump is looking for a graceful exit and a symbolic win”. Hey, who knows? Maybe they’re on to something this time…but I suspect they are just churning out what they are told to churn out by the DNC.

I’m thinking we need to ban political polling: just get rid of it. It doesn’t inform any more, if it ever did. It is now a mere tool to drive a Narrative and try to convince people that reality is different from what they can see right in front of them. If we did that, then the Experts would actually have to go out and see what’s happening before they could tell us what they think is going on. Now, they just refer to the polls and call it a day – and call you an idiot if you don’t respect the Holy Polls.

Trump’s White House speech as called a “peaceful protest in favor of law and order”…and as we know peaceful protests can’t spread the ‘Rona, it was all good. And it was also pretty amazing: mostly because of the number of “Blexit” people involved (Black Exit: black people leaving the Democrats. We’ll see how that comes out: there are some indicators that Trump will score pretty high in minority communities. But, unlike the Experts, I think I’ll wait for the votes to be cast and counted before deciding what will happen.

Joe says we voters “don’t deserve” to know his views on court packing. Which, of course, means we know: he’ll pack it in an instant if given the chance. But, it doesn’t poll well: it really is just a tiny minority of really butt hurt liberals upset that Trump got to appoint 3, so they want to appoint 4. Joking aside, it is a danger to the Republic because if they did pack it to a 7/6 liberal majority, that Court would rule any way the Democrats wanted at the moment. Better to avoid that by keeping Trump in the White House and Cocaine Mitch running the Senate. This issue is causing some heartburn for Democrats – in both the AZ and CO Senate races, the GOP incumbents scored pretty heavily in debate by getting both their Democrat opponents to refuse to answer the question. I just have to think that voters aren’t going to like this “you don’t deserve to know” attitude. Could make some tight races flip our way.

Seems like the kooks set up by the FBI in the “kidnap Whitmer” scheme have one thing in common: they don’t like Trump. No surprise: real 2A, Conservative militia types are law-abiding patriots. We will fight if our lives and liberty depend on it, but we’re not lunatics…you know, like liberals are. My view of this is that the FBI got wind of these losers and then egged them on until they broke a law…all so they could blame Trump. As far as that goes, it worked: to the end of time, liberals will assert that MAGA-hatted Trumpsters plotted to kidnap Whitmer.

36 thoughts on “Open Thread

  1. Cluster October 11, 2020 / 9:36 am

    A couple thoughts this morning ….

    1. I am tired of being called a racist by people who insist on having their own Congressional Caucus, their own Chamber of Commerce’s, their own TV channel and their own exclusive award shows.

    2. The “ruling experts” will not be happy until they have feminized every single one of us.

    The experts say the best public health practices have collided with several of the social demands men in many cultures are pressured to follow to assert their masculinity: displaying strength instead of weakness, showing a willingness to take risks, hiding their fear, appearing to be in control.

    Men’s resistance to showing weakness — and their tendency to take risks — was demonstrated by scientists long before Covid-19. Studies have shown men are less likely than women to wear seatbelts and helmets, or to get flu shots. They’re more likely to speed or drive drunk. They are less likely to seek out medical care…

    “To admit you’re threatened is to appear weak, so you have to have this bravado,” said Peter Glick, a professor of social sciences at Lawrence University. If you wear a mask, he said, “the underlying message is: ‘I’m afraid of catching this disease.’”…

    This is not a new problem for those who work in public health messaging. Stacey Hust, an associate professor of communication at Washington State University, said prevention campaigns around sexual assault often try to appeal to masculine ideals, making better behaviors “worthy of the alpha male.”

    Those damn men just won’t listen to the “experts”. I would much rather die as a free man then live as a government statistic

    • Amazona October 11, 2020 / 10:37 am

      It’s not just this. I mentioned a couple of days ago that I once tested as “masculine” on some test because I valued competency as a characteristic. I may have also indicated that taking some risks is necessary for advancement or some such other radically and toxically masculine personality trait. While that kind of rating is intrinsically insulting to women, telling us we have to be weak and silly and fluttery and base everything on emotion to be “real women” at the same time it did associate things like competence with men.

      (Side note: I thought of this when I read of some focus groups where some opinions of Mike Pence in the debate were negative because “he didn’t show emotion” or seemed “cold”. I’m guessing those were from the kinds of women preferred by that study I mentioned. Or Democrats. In any case, people who value feels more than thinks.)

      Personally, I see these efforts by Glick and his kind as efforts by Pajama Boys and other incels to set themselves up as the ideal of maleness and then drag others into that sad category. What they are really doing is creating another division, this time between real men and girly-men, and then trying to widen the divide.

      Are there any Hollywood movie stars, or even TV stars who fit the feminine mold of “man” promoted by these academics? I can’t think of any. (And no, George Takei was never a star.) Even when a gay man has had a lead role, like Matt Bomer in “White Collar” he has traditionally masculine characteristics. Are there any CHARACTERS in entertainment, other than a couple of NPR puppets, who reject the classic characteristics of manhood? I can’t think of any.

      So don’t fret, Cluster. They will try, and they will fail. We will still admire manly and masculine men, and when the chips are down—-here comes a bear, or that guy has a gun, or the gutters need cleaning—-Pajama Boys are not going to be the go-go “guys”. They will be massaging their cuticles and watching The View.

      • Cluster October 11, 2020 / 11:06 am

        Personally, I see these efforts by Glick and his kind as efforts by Pajama Boys and other incels to set themselves up as the ideal of maleness and then drag others into that sad category.

        The men on the Left are apologetically male and I think that is a result of our current cancel culture. The role of the Father has been systematically diminished over the last 3 or 4 decades and this is the result. An entire generation of young men who have no idea what real masculinity is. And of course, governments can not impose their will on strong independent men, therefore they must be extinguished.

      • Amazona October 11, 2020 / 7:32 pm

        I remembered a couple of un-PC cartoons that fit into our comments about the efforts of the Left to feminize America. It occurred to me that Trump’s unabashed masculinity must be one of the things they can’t stand about him and these jokes came to mind.

        Obama to Trump: Trump, how do you sleep at night knowing people hate you?
        Trump: Naked with a supermodel, and that’s Mr. President to you

        Lib press: What does it mean with all these women coming forward saying they have had sex with the president?
        Sarah Sanders: It means the president is the man you wish you were.

  2. Cluster October 11, 2020 / 10:26 am

    “I am a family medicine physician who has treated many COVID patients, both in hospital and in the outpatient setting. I am requesting that the Commission reverse its decision and hold an in-person debate,” wrote Pittsburg Dr. Joseph Dougherty. “Based on science, data, and epidemiology, the debate can, and should, be held safely in person and it is essential to do so.”

    Joe Biden could never hold up in a townhall debate with Trump. Too much stimuli for a man with pre dementia. The Democrats know that and so does the debate commission, therefore it will happen. It has nothing to do with Covid

    Also just watching the Muslim MN bitch on TV right now. She’s an embarrassment ….

  3. Cluster October 11, 2020 / 10:30 am

    And Democrats are still killing Trump supporters which hurts the media narrative therefore it won’t be reported. Instead, white supremacy is the real problem.

    Antifa and BLM thugs showed up to a “Patriot Rally” in Denver to counter-protest the “fascists” and a Trump supporter is now dead, The Denver Post is reporting …… Police are calling into question the account of a staff member for The Denver Post who reported seeing a man from the Patriot Rally spraying mace at a man from the BLM-Antifa riot. The reporter said the BLM-Antifa man then pulled out a gun and shot the rallygoer.

    • Amazona October 11, 2020 / 10:41 am

      Keep in mind the Denver Post is a Liberal rag. Witnesses say the shooter had his gun out before he was maced.

  4. Amazona October 11, 2020 / 11:05 am

    “GOP insiders say Trump is looking for a graceful exit and a symbolic win”.

    Huh? What the hell is a “symbolic win” and can anyone point to a single syllable said by Trump that could let anyone even reasonably speculate that he wants to quit fighting?

    This man is so dedicated and so energized, the last thing he would want to do would be to “exit” before his job is finished, or at least before his term is over.

    And just what does it take to be considered “a GOP insider” anyway?

    The Democrat Party has become a fascinating amalgam of stupidity, delusion and ignorance, fed by blind irrational hatred. Dan Rather, in a race with Joe Biden for the room with a window at the dementia care facility, tweeted Can we at least recognize that “Court Packing” at all levels of the judiciary has been the Republican playbook for decades? Asking for Merrick Garland.

    When you are so stupid you don’t even realize that what you say brands you as a moron, you fit right in with the Agenda Media and the rest of the Democrat Party.

    But this does lead me to a comment on what I think is the single biggest and potentially fatal mistake of the Right when it comes to the Supreme Court. That is, its abysmal failure to explain what it means to be a conservative Justice.

    Right now, all Dems and too many Republicans see the makeup of the Court as being similar to the makeup of one of the houses of Congress—the majority gets to make the rules. So we have people who really should know better explaining that it is important to have “balance” on the Court, and we have every pundit on either side blathering on about gaining votes on one side or the other.

    It’s a little late now, unless someone manages to get it into the hearings this week, to explain that “balance” on the Court means balancing justices who will rule based not on personal feelings or ideology or agenda but solely on the content and meaning of the Constitution, “balanced” by people who see the role of justices as the power to impose political and personal agendas through Court rulings.

    And we on the Right contribute to this. Why would or should there be passionate appeals for pro-life people to support the confirmation of Barrett? Her opinion on the sanctity of life is very important in many ways and in many arenas, but NOT when it comes to ruling on Roe. Yet we have people ostensibly on “our” side actively feeding the mania that Barrett will base her ruling, if one is called for, on her pro-life beliefs.

    Barrett is clear that her personal beliefs and opinions and agendas should play no role in her decisions, but we on the Right insist on blindsiding her with passionate public claims that her personal beliefs WILL guide her.

    Until we can figure out where and how messaging is screwed up, as well as our own contributions to the screw-ups, we will be on defense forever, and what’s more we will be defending things we shouldn’t have to defend.

    Back when Roberts was nominated, a late night talk show host in Denver asked people to call in to say of his stance on abortion mattered to them. Caller after caller said yes, it did, either because they were pro-life or pro-abortion. I was driving but I finally pulled over and called in, and when it was my turn and I was asked the question I said “no”. I was the only person who said that. The host asked why, and I said that if the nominee was going to let his personal beliefs and agenda influence his votes one way or another he should not be on the Court, and if he believes that as well then his personal stance on abortion shouldn’t matter.

    The host’s response was “BINGO!” and then he went on to explain my answer and why it was right. Sadly, that’s probably the last time I ever heard a media host do that.

    Just as Trump had to debate both Biden and the “moderator” we, on the Right, have to fight the left and ourselves.

    • Cluster October 11, 2020 / 11:15 am

      Just as Trump had to debate both Biden and the “moderator” we, on the Right, have to fight the left and ourselves.

      That’s exactly right. We have to shatter the established paradigms of politics. R vs D is an antiquated position and we can’t let the media continue to promote that by categorizing people and thought, as they do with the “GOP insiders” comment. Mitt Romney is no more of a conservative than I am a black man but yet Romney is often held up as a “GOP insider” and to the millions of mouth breathers out there, that’s all they need to know. We have a lot of work left to do.

      • Amazona October 11, 2020 / 12:38 pm

        One of my never-ending lectures is the need to step away from Identity Politics (which includes, to some degree, party affiliation) and discuss and define actual political structures, how they work, what they do and don’t do, and which provides the best blueprint for governing the nation.

        Then and only then, if some sort of identity is desired, it would be based on the choices made of which kind of government is preferred—–one with a federal government restricted as to size, scope and power with most authority left to the states or to the people and with the 10th Amendment as its center pole would define itself as “Conservative”. The alternative, a massively powerful Central Authority with most power reserved to elites at the top and with little power left to the states or to citizens and with the philosophy that the Constitution, including the 10th Amendment, is merely advice but not binding on the government, would be identified as Leftist and people who choose this form of government would be Liberals.

        But the thing is, the GOP, as divided and unfocused as it is, still has the power through its money and access to intellectual firepower like that of Cruz and the battlers in the House and Senate to put together a coherent and powerful message defining and describing the party’s official philosophy (even if some squishies don’t adhere to it) and even to figure out a way to get it out to the public. I think even a single strong and focused person could put together a plan and present it to the party leaders and probably have it implemented. It’s just that no one has a plan.

        Even the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution started with one or two strong voices laying out templates and ideas that the others could listen to and adopt.

  5. Cluster October 12, 2020 / 8:18 am

    Things are going well in NY:

    Supporters of Heshy Tischler chanted ‘No Heshy, No Peace’ as they gathered outside the home of Jacob Kornbluh, a Jewish Insider reporter who was allegedly chased, assaulted and screamed at by a crowd incited by Tischler in NYC last week. Some of last night’s protesters danced in the street while at least one waved a Trump flag and another demanded to ‘defund de Blasio’, with few of them wearing masks or social distancing. One group of people surrounded the entrance to Kornbluh’s apartment building but were kept at bay by cops. It is the latest flashpoint in a row over lockdown rules between Orthodox Jews and city authorities after New York governor Andrew Cuomo announced he was partially shutting down the Borough Park neighborhood to stem a second wave of Covid-19.

  6. Cluster October 12, 2020 / 8:28 am

    Meanwhile in Portland (and this was YESTERDAY)

    In what organizers called an ‘Indigenous Peoples Day of Rage’, the two statues were torn down in the space of 10 minutes with Roosevelt’s horseback statue, and Lincoln’s toppled by protesters who toppled the monuments and defaced the plinths in Portland before smashing windows at the city’s Historical Society. Lincoln was condemned by protesters for the hangings of 38 Native American warriors who were executed on Lincoln’s orders after an uprising in 1862 – although he reprieved hundreds of others. Theodore Roosevelt also made an enemy of Native Americans, once saying that ‘I don’t go so far as to think that the only good Indians are dead Indians, but I believe nine out of 10 are.’

    • Amazona October 12, 2020 / 11:31 am

      The only relevant word in that whole screed was “rage”.

      This doesn’t sound like an organized anarchist political statement as much as a massive temper tantrum by a bunch of frustrated giant babies who feel incoherently furious at being—to put it bluntly—irrelevant and useless human beings. They know they have no real value other than the most basic identity of being human and therefore children of God, no significant place in the world—they have no real education, no job skills, no functioning intellect, no social skills, no qualifications for anything but being part of a seething mass of mindless emotional clay easily molded into whatever form their masters find useful. Fed simplistic platitudes that let them pretend they represent something meaningful and they are quite easily manipulated into hysteria and violence.

      They represent hatred looking for a reason to exist, and the foolish silly conviction that destroying what was made by their betters will provide that is all they have.

  7. Cluster October 12, 2020 / 8:55 am

    So Chuck U Schumer was just on MSNBC and surprisingly was asked a tough question about Democrats intent to end filibuster, pack court, etc. to which Schumer replied that “everything is on the table but we will not discuss anything until after the election”.

    With such a dishonest and fascist position like this, if Democrats win they will face the brunt of an armed insurrection and led by me possible. I will not live in that type of country.

  8. Cluster October 12, 2020 / 9:03 am

    And in Phoenix hahahahahaha

    “Not a lot of fanfare out here,” FOX10 reporter Nicole Garcia said, standing in front of the Heard Museum in Phoenix. “There’s really not much to see. I’ll step out of the way, but it’s kinda boring out here. So, it’s not your typical presidential campaign event, we don’t see people rallying outside, we don’t see signs or really much of what’s going on.”

    No one showed up … because not many people care but according to the Biden campaign this was by design

    “I’m told by one of the Biden staffers, local staffers, is that they kind of kept the details about the visit, as far as the timing and the exact locations—they didn’t really want to give that out to the public because they want to keep the crowds to a minimum,” Garcia said. “They realize we are in pandemic and they don’t want a crowd of more than 50 people at any of their events.”

    • Amazona October 12, 2020 / 9:41 am

      they don’t want a crowd of more than 50 people at any of their events.”

      Well, they are certainly effective. What an interesting strategy—campaign to empty parking lots and don’t tell anyone what you will do if elected.

  9. Amazona October 12, 2020 / 9:58 am

    You may remember that a year or so ago I posted an email correspondence between the head of a Denver TV news department and myself when I pointed out a deceptive comment made on one of the station’s news casts. The “news” story was about some reaction to “Donald Trump’s new immigration law” and I pointed out that it was not a new law, it was not Donald Trump’s law, and he had simply instructed ICE to follow the existing law. The response was that the head of the news department “preferred” his own “interpretation”.

    That news department head is in the news himself these days.

    “9News” is the NBC affiliate that hired the “security guard” who shot the unarmed man to death in Denver the other day. It turns out the “guard” was not licensed and could not legally work as a security guard. In addition——

    “…at least one well-known field reporter for 9News — Kyle Clark — is identified by a BLM/Antifa website as being “one of us” in a Twitter comment saying the 9News reporter didn’t need security because they would protect him “Kyle is one of us.”

    Yes, that is the same Kyle Clark who admitted to me that he preferred to run with his “interpretation” of an event rather than with the proved facts.

    Michelle Malkin tweetedL What people outside Colorado need to understand is @9news is chock full of left-wing journos who’ve been smearing conservative patriots in my state all year. It stinks to high heaven that the bogus “security” guy’s views just happen to align w/station’s Antifa simps’ views.

    The rot runs deep in the Agenda Media

    • Cluster October 12, 2020 / 10:31 am

      Yes it does. Our current media is nothing more than propaganda and needs to be reformed. Like I said the other day, there is a leftist cancer in this country and it needs to be removed either at the ballot box or by armed confrontation

      • Retired Spook October 12, 2020 / 10:40 am

        Our current media is nothing more than propaganda

        Not just “propaganda,” THE PROPAGANDA ARM of the Democrat Party.

  10. Retired Spook October 12, 2020 / 10:36 am

    Who knew Jake Tapper was such a Constitutional scholar?

    On Saturday, Biden once again dodged questions about court-packing, instead claiming that, “It’s not constitutional what they’re doing.”

    Tapper confronted Kate Bedingfield, Biden’s deputy campaign manager, Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union” over exactly what unconstitutional actions Republicans have taken. It did not end well for Bedingfield.

    Tapper asked, “[Biden] said it’s not constitutional, what they’re doing. How is it not constitutional what they’re doing?”

    Bedingfield claimed in response that Biden’s comments are referring to polls that show the majority of Americans want the winner of the election to fill the Supreme Court vacancy.

    “His point is that the people have an opportunity to weigh in on this constitutional process through their vote,” Bedingfield said. “And we are now in the midst of the election. Millions of people have already cast their votes. And you see that the vast majority of people say that they want the person who wins the election on November 3 to nominate the justice to take this seat.”

    Tapper fired back, “That’s a poll. That’s not the Constitution.”

    Good for Jake.

    • Cluster October 12, 2020 / 1:33 pm

      Fantastic for Jake. I wish he would be more consistent but at least he called her out for that

    • casper3031 October 13, 2020 / 12:29 am

      Tapper is right. Confirming a Justice is 100% constitutional. So is expanding the Supreme Court.

      • Retired Spook October 13, 2020 / 9:22 am

        Just because something is constitutional doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.

      • Amazona October 13, 2020 / 10:02 am

        Casper, why would anyone want to “expand the Supreme Court”?

        What would be the reason to do so?

      • Retired Spook October 13, 2020 / 12:34 pm

        What would be the reason to do so?

        Probably something to do with making the court more accountable to the people.

      • Amazona October 13, 2020 / 2:08 pm

        I’m waiting to see if Casper is going to answer my question, of if he just thought it darling to dart in, toss in a non sequitur and then scurry off again.

      • Retired Spook October 14, 2020 / 12:20 pm

        It appears Casper has left the building.

      • Amazona October 16, 2020 / 10:18 pm

        Of course he has. because the only answer is to do an end run around the restrictions on government put in place by the Constitution by essentially removing the judiciary as the third branch of government and erasing checks and balances. By making the judiciary another arm of the legislative body citizens are stripped of the protections of a true judicial branch.

    • Amazona October 13, 2020 / 10:04 am

      BTW, the Constitution says the president SHALL nominate. Not “may” but “shall”. In legal terms that means it is not optional. It is his specifically assigned duty and obligation.

  11. Retired Spook October 12, 2020 / 11:07 am

    I wish everyone who puts together slide shows of political memes would make them so individual memes could be copied. Got a bunch of great ones this morning including one picturing Joe Biden that says:

    The Democrats are trying to impeach a President for trying to expose a crime, and then elect the person who committed the crime.

  12. dbschmidt October 12, 2020 / 4:58 pm

    One thing that really gets me is none of these folks (including CongressCritters) seem to know the three branches of government and what each one does and/or is responsible for. The idea I got from that peeve and the rioters in general is to first nail them with Federal charges where possible but as a condition of their release make it mandatory for them to take and pass the US citizenship test. Don’t care how long you are in the pokey–no getting out until you pass the exam.

  13. Cluster October 12, 2020 / 5:47 pm

    Jon Bon Jovi wants us all to know that he’s not being political with his latest song. Here’s the lyrics

    America’s on fire / There’s protests in the street / Her conscience has been looted / And her soul is under siege / Another mother’s crying, as history repeats / I can’t breathe. Damn those 8 long minutes / Lying face down in cuffs on the ground / Bystanders pleaded for mercy / As one one cop shoved a kid in the crowd / When did a judge and a jury / Become a badge and a knee / On these streets

    Um. Jon. If you’re trying not to be political then why do these lyrics repeat the false narrative? Asking for a friend.

    • Amazona October 13, 2020 / 2:10 pm

      I am so tired of these intellectually lightweight celebs trying to sound all deep and significant and relevant, when all they can do is parrot mindless themes spoon fed to them by the Agenda Media.

  14. Retired Spook October 13, 2020 / 12:08 pm

    It’s going to be interesting to see how much impact events like this have on the election. IIRC, Trump got around 8% of the black vote in 2016. I’m going to be surprised if he doesn’t at least double that this time around.

    I saw a report a few days ago that Trump is polling in the low 40’s among Hispanics. In 2016 he won 29% of the Hispanic vote. I think the only way Trump doesn’t win is if Democrats cheat on a massive scale never seen before. In the past cheating on the part of Democrats was always swept under the rug. Cheating — what cheating? No evidence of any significant cheating.
    Knowing that Republicans were gentlemen and wouldn’t really complain. I wouldn’t count on that this time.

    • Amazona October 13, 2020 / 2:47 pm

      I speculate, or rather, hope, that the GOP has its own army of lawyers ready to pounce on every major Dem majority to recount—that is, examine—every single mail-in vote.

      They want mail-in votes? Then they can live with the reality of having them carefully examined, challenged and probably often discarded, due to lack of post marks, lack of matching signatures, lack of ability to prove the voter is alive and still living in that precinct, etc.

      Remember, states must officially certify their vote counts by certain dates, set by statute. In New York that date is December 1: In California it is December; Texas December 3; Wisconsin December 1; Washington December 3; Oregon December 3.

      State governments have till Dec. 3, 2020, to certify their results. Under federal law, any dispute over the election results must be resolved by Dec. 8.

      Per federal law, since 1936, electors in each state are required to cast their ballots “on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December next following their appointment.” In this election, that will be Dec. 14.

      That all leads to the confusion surrounding the Electoral Vote Act of 1887.

      Consider, for a minute, Pennsylvania. Imagine the race is tight as the votes come in on the night of November 3. Polling-site problems are concentrated in urban areas, which see long lines—exactly like what happened in the state in June, when hundreds of thousands of primary votes, mostly from Philadelphia, took weeks to come in. Trump is ahead early, and stays ahead for the first few days, though new ballots coming in by mail slowly chip away at that lead. Allegations of misconduct and fraud fly around, until what seems like a final result arrives a week or two in, after election officials have invalidated tens of thousands of ballots—more than enough to make up the margin of victory for Trump or Biden. Lawyers for both sides dig in and head to court, but even with expedited proceedings, days tick away while they’re fighting in front of judges. December 14 comes with no resolution. Pennsylvania’s Republican-led legislature steps in and exercises its constitutional right to pick its own electors—a list of reliable Trump supporters. The Democratic governor objects, though it’s not clear he has the constitutional standing to do so, and assembles his own list of electors. Both report their lists to Congress. Because the Democrats control the House and Republicans control the Senate, each chamber approves the electors who favor its majority party’s candidate.

      Now there’s a stalemate. If Pennsylvania’s electoral votes can’t be counted, does that mean that being picked as president requires the same 270 electoral votes as normal, or merely 260 (a majority of the total without Pennsylvania)?

      The experts don’t even agree on whether there’s a clear answer. In other words, the future of the nation is once again supposed to be decided “the experts”.

      In a September 9 article in The Atlantic, Edward-Isaac Dovere explained that “the law requires electors to be chosen for the Electoral College, the constitutionally established body that elects the president, in no more than 41 days after Election Day.” The report states that there might be “massive delays” in vote counting due to a number of factors — because of late-arriving absentee ballots, disagreements over which of those ballots are valid, among other possible reasons — and this could mean that the country misses that date without clear results in every state.

      The report states, if the act is simply put, whoever is ahead on December 14 gets the electors and, with them, the presidency.

      And here we go, headed to the SCOTUS, because the Dems would reject the concept of following the law as it is written, and would insist that some spin or interpretation be put upon it.

      They will insist that the inauguration not be held until this is resolved and that would put the choice of the president in the hands of the House or, failing a decision there, the presidency in the hands of the current Leader of the House.

      And here, I think, lies the real panic about confirming Amy Comey Barrett—the knowledge that the outcome of the election might devolve upon a decision of the Court, and a Court which leans toward deciding based on what the laws actually SAY rather than on some parsing of the words to arrive at a different conclusion would not bode well for them if the election were to come down to which states actually have legitimate Electors able to vote for the president.

      (And this is why Cruz insisted that we have to have 9 Justices installed before the election.)

  15. Amazona October 16, 2020 / 10:19 pm

    Of course he has. because the only answer is to do an end run around the restrictions on government put in place by the Constitution by essentially removing the judiciary as the third branch of government and erasing checks and balances. By making the judiciary another arm of the legislative body citizens are stripped of the protections of a true judicial branch.

Comments are closed.