However, this would cause the Abe Lincoln stone golem in the basement Crypt to awaken and slaughter them all. Not many people know that.
7 Likes
I would so watch that show.
4 Likes
And afterwards, the Lincoln golem could serve as President. Mind you, it’s only a giant bust, but surely it would make a mighty fine Head of State?
8 Likes
Ooh, that would be quite the dramatic twist. Especially since the Senate Master at Arms and the House Master at Arms are father and son!
2 Likes
The Trumpists are hoping that their Jefferson Davis bone golem will defeat it.
Going by D&D rules, the Lincoln stone golem would probably win
7 Likes
1 Like
6 Likes
The coup attemptors’ argument is that the choice has already devolved to the House and Senate because of states whose elections can’t be trusted. (Their words, not mine.) And so, they are mounting a campaign to contest the election, wrest the vote from the electoral college, place it in the House, where a majority of Republican-led states will hand the Presidency back to Trump.
Let’s hope they continue to fail, or else all of this (look around your room and out the window) goes away.
2 Likes
I kind of think McConnell’s public declaration on the Senate floor that Biden/Harris won, was as much a shot across the bow aimed at anyone in his caucus even thinking about pulling shenanigans like this, as it was a congratulation to Biden. Yes, Cruz is the classic loose cannon in the Republican ranks, but he also knows Mitch can make his life hell in the Senate, no matter who’s in power.
3 Likes
Ted Cruz can’t challenge the electoral votes for president but not vice president; they’re the same votes. The moment debate stops, even if somehow the result is the election getting thrown to congress (which I find very implausible even now), the House elects a president at the same time as the senate elects a vice president. I can’t imagine the House doing anything other than immediately voting Biden in as president, while there’s a lot that could happen to hold up the senate. Is there a scenario I’m missing where the Senate could do that?
FWIW Mike Pence is reportedly planning to leave for a foreign trip after confirming President-elect Joe Biden’s win on Jan. 6.
4 Likes
While I didn’t include it in my quote, the 12th amendment explicitly states that the right of choice devolves upon them when no candidate receives an outright majority of the electoral vote.
Claiming that the right to choose would devolve upon the house because of fraud is a completely separate argument from what is being made in the initial post, and has as much backing from the 12th amendment as claiming that the right has devolved upon the house because Ted Cruz had a dream saying so. Regardless of what hypothetical arguments the gop makes, there’s no path where the reported scenario ends with a Trump or Pence presidency. If the electoral-vote counting passes the deadline, the speaker of the house automatically becomes president. The article being cited seems to miss the fact that, by its own logic, the senate would declare that there was no electoral college winner (a completely novel and clearly untenable reading of the 12th amendment) only after the cutoff date that would make Pelosi president.
5 Likes
That’s how it’s supposed to work. But a vocal minority is trying to throw out some slates of electors before they are even counted.
1 Like
Right, but that’s a completely different issue, and doesn’t change the fact that the scenario proposed by the columnist doesn’t actually work, either legally or practically
3 Likes
In this scenario, each state delegation gets one vote.
However, the 12th amendment explicitly states that this only happens if no candidate has received a majority of electoral votes. It gets tossed to the senate if the house doesn’t come to a decision by inauguration when “right to choose devolves upon them.” But the right to choose doesn’t devolve upon them unless and until it’s determined that no candidate receives an electoral majority. The house would just finish counting the electoral votes, and declare Biden the winner
3 Likes
This isn’t quite Originalist, but at least by the early 1800s, health experts in the US were recommending that people drink beer, a very healthy beverage, instead of the large quantities of whiskey that Americans were drinking. Your liver will thank you.
1 Like
Captain Conspiracy says: It’s obvious why people insist on keeping you anxious***. VP Mike Pence has long been in the pockets of The Tobacco Lobby** and this isn’t JUST a plot to make you drink more or a plot by Ativan Inc, it’s a plot by Big Tobacco to get you to go with the traditional American tension reducer, smoking.
** Seriously, he’s been on record at least as recently as 2001.
*** Ok, it really is mostly about keeping you anxious, because anxious defensive liberals are ineffective liberals, and anxious conservatives will follow their Fearless Leader who knows what they need.
1 Like
It’s not completely different because the Electoral Count Act describes how the electoral votes are to be counted and any grievances addressed, which is the currently accepted interpretation of how to implement the 12th amendment. What these freaks are trying to do is game that act, rather than game the 12th, if Congress allows them to. Fortunately, they are in the minority so far and so they’ll have to get through a lot of other senators and machinations in order to do their dirty work.
This is exactly where the electoral count act comes in. Before that majority is determined, not after.
Originally they weren’t. I haven’t followed the patches as they realized that making the head loser, or someone from a different party, the VP was a bad idea. I don’t know if they fixed that, or if it’s still a lurking rake in the grass, like when the Pres and VP are from the same state. In any sane reality, that trivia wouldn’t matter.
While Acting President Pelosi is possible, it’s like Discworld Dwarven Bread – there’s always an alternative to try first.
I suspect that this is all more FUD generated by the Republicans as their usual tactic.
3 Likes
Do the objections actually have to have substance? “We don’t like that result” should not count as a valid objection. One would expect that somebody who objects to a state election return would explain exactly why they thought the result was problematic, with suitable evidence in support of their claim. Failing that, the debate should take a lot less than two hours.
4 Likes
