Displaying 1 - 10 of 394 Forum Posts1 2 3 4 5 Next
  • Dec 01, 2020 12:55 PM
    Last: 11hr

    The Electoral College meets in the various states to cast their ballots that will officially declare President-elect Biden the winner of the 2020 Presidential election, but that isn't the final word. That lies with Congress, who will come together for a joint session on January 6, 2021 to officially certify the Electoral College vote. The occasion is typically a quiet formality, but if these past four years have taught us anything it's that quiet formalities aren't in President Trump's DNA.

    Here's what happens when the House and Senate meet to certify the election: The two houses meet in the House chamber on January 6, 2021, three days after the 117th Congress is sworn in. If one Congressperson and one Senator join forces to dispute a single (or dozens) of electors then the two houses must retreat to their chambers to debate for no more than two hours where the challenged electors will be voted on separately in each chamber.

    If the two chambers disagree then that's when things could get tricky. It's never happened since the passage of the 1887 law called the Electoral Count Act which established our current system for certifying Presidential elections, but the vast majority of Constitutional scholars are confident the matter then goes back to governors in the disputed states the power to certify the electors, which would almost certainly benefit the Democrats.

    Ok. All the "worst case scenario" stuff is now out in the open.

    Here's why it's extremely unlikely that Congress will overrule the Electoral College: In short - the math simply isn't on Republican's side. Sure, one Senator can join forces with a House Republican to force each chamber to go into debate, but that is almost certainly going to be more about theatrics than anything else.

    Republicans will only be swearing in 51 Senators to Democrats 48 due to a runoff election in Georgia (Senator Kelly Loeffler, who is also facing a runoff, will still be sworn in because she is currently filling in for former Senator Johnny Isaacson, whose term ends in January 2023).

    Add in the fact that Republican Senators Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Mitt Romney, Ben Sasse, and Bill Cassidy have all publicly called Joe Biden the President-elect and you can see that any effort to swing the Electoral College vote Trump's way is far more about theatrics than anything else.

  • Nov 28, 2020 12:24 AM
    Last: 2d
    J.K.Logic Wrote: So in keeping with that, he is doing exactly what his personality would, which is fight to the bitter end with every maneuver he can. Legit or not. Then if he loses, which in this case he will, he will never admit he lost. He'll feel some sort of moral victory for sowing more seeds of doubt in the system itself, with his massive support base, which is basically half the country.

    I agree. These lawsuits are more about throwing everything at the wall and seeing if anything sticks than anything else.

    These countless lawsuits have got me thinking about what might have happened if the election came down to one state like it did in 2000. I think we'd be having a very different discussion if that were the case.

  • Nov 18, 2020 03:36 PM
    Last: 2d

    I don't think there's any scenario where the election result is overturned, but what's so dangerous about President Trump's behavior since the election was called for Joe Biden is his ability to get tens of millions of people to believe that the election was rigged against him. That fundamental trampling of democratic norms has the potential to have a lasting impact.

    If half the country thinks that the only way they can lose is if an election was stolen then we are in a very dangerous place as a country.

  • Nov 03, 2020 12:24 PM
    Last: 28d

    A record shattering 100,298,838 Americans voted before election day this year. That is a truly mind boggling number that foretells a massive and likely unprecedented turnout in the 2020 Presidential election.

    To put this number in perspective, the total number of early votes in the 2016 Presidential election was slightly over 47 million, which means 2020 has seen more than double the amount of early votes than the previous Presidential election.

    So what should we make of this? Is it that people on both sides of the political divide are fired up and ready to take part in their civic duty this year or are we on the precipice of a wave election in the likes we haven't seen since Ronald Reagan in 1984?

    I vowed to never again predict anything in politics after being horribly wrong in 2016, but then again I can't think of any way this amount of early voting helps President Trump. That doesn't mean it's a certainty that Biden wins because, as we know, the election is actually decided in the various "swing states" that are considerably more purple than reliably Democratic or Republican states. So a Trump victory is very much possible, but the stars will have to once again perfectly align for that to happen.

    Regardless of the outcome, record breaking voting can only be a good thing. That means the American people are taking this election seriously and we should be happy about that no matter what happens in this election.

  • Oct 13, 2020 01:08 PM
    Last: 1mo

    An extra $5 per week for the average senior is almost laughable. That wouldn't get you a gallon of milk in half of the country.

    My hope is that Congress eventually gets its act together and figures out a better way to automatically raise monthly benefits to better help our seniors keep up with ever rising costs of goods and services. I'm not optimistic any legislation passing before 2021 benefits start to get handed out, but hopefully the next Congress makes it a priority because the status quo simply isn't working.

  • Oct 21, 2020 01:39 PM
    Last: 1mo

    Joe Biden and Donald Trump will debate for the final time before a limited audience at Belmont University in Nashville, TN. The debate gives Donald Trump one last chance to draw some support away from Joe Biden, who is the clear frontrunner with less than two weeks to go before election day.

    For the first time in history, the microphones of the candidate not speaking will be muted during their opening two minute response to a question. After each candidate has used up their two minutes, both microphones will be turned on and the candidates will have the opportunity to engage each other for the remainder of each fifteen minute segment. The Trump campaign strongly criticized the move, but had little recourse other than to boycott the debate, which doesn't appear will happen.

    The debate is Trump's final opportunity to directly engage Biden and don't be surprised if Trump gets personal fast. The only problem is that's what Trump did in the first debate and he was widely panned from all sides of the aisle over his performance. He came across as a bully and Biden's lead in the polls only rose higher after it was over, so if I were Biden I'd let Trump be Trump because it only seems to help Biden more. I'm not saying Biden should just roll over and let Trump walk all over him, but one of Biden's main appeals to many moderate and swing voters is his temperament and congeniality.

    Whatever happens, it is sure to be an interesting final matchup between the two candidates. It's the final time the candidates will have the chance to speak to tens of millions of Americans at the same time before election day, so they better make the best of it.

  • Sep 30, 2020 12:31 AM
    Last: 1mo

    I think this is a great idea. It will allow both candidates to say their piece before, hopefully, engaging in a back and forth for the remainder of a segment.

    What will be interesting is if Trump still interrupts Biden. With him being close enough to Biden, I imagine you'd still be able to hear whatever Trump was saying even if it sounded muffled or muted. It would certainly sound weird and I can't imagine it will win him any new votes, but that's never really stopped him from doing something odd before.

  • Oct 08, 2020 01:13 PM
    Last: 1mo

    Donald Trump announced that he will not be participating in the second Presidential debate with Joe Biden after the Commission on Presidential Debates announced it will be held virtually due to the growing COVID-19 outbreak in and around the White House. Trump, recently out of the hospital due to complications from the illness, has yet to produce any evidence that he has tested negative. Dozens of other high ranking White House and Administration officials who have come into close contact with Donald Trump have also tested positive in recent days. If Trump refuses to participate then the Commission said there will be no debate.

    Trump's campaign manager later said that they are willing to push the debates back by one week, but the campaigns have no say in when, where, or how a debate will be held. That is up to the Commission on Presidential Debates, whose chief Frank Fahrenkopf said they did not consult either campaign and instead relied on guidance from the Cleveland Clinic. He went on to say “the ball’s in [Trump's] court. It’s his call. We have to take it the way it comes.”

    After over three-and-a-half years of the Trump Administration, I can't help but to take Trump's boycott threat with a grain of salt. He needs this debate a heck of a lot more than Biden and he knows it. I think he's more upset that he can't force the Commission to bend to his will than anything else. He's not used to anyone telling him no. So, I think there's a better than 50-50 chance he participates in the second debate.

    I'm interested to hear what other people think about the Commission's decision to hold the second debate virtually. Do you agree with their decision, or do you think Donald Trump has a valid excuse to be upset and threaten to boycott?

  • Oct 05, 2020 04:27 PM
    Last: 2mo

    Senator Harris and Vice President Pence will face off in Salt Lake City for their first and only debate on Wednesday, October 7. The debate was already expected to be one of the most important Vice Presidential debates in history, but now takes on an even greater importance after the hospitalization of Donald Trump due to complications from COVID-19.

    Vice Presidential debates are typically a "check the box" affair during a normal election cycle, but it's entirely possible that either of the two people on that stage could become our next President if something were to happen to their boss. Both Joe Biden and Donald Trump are well into their 70's and, if Trump's recent hospitalization hasn't already made it abundantly clear, anything can happen when someone of that age falls ill. That alone makes this Vice Presidential debate one of the most consequential in history because we very well may be watching a future President on that stage.

    I certainly expect their to be far fewer fireworks than we witnessed during the first debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, but I wouldn't be surprised if it still gets somewhat heated.

    One thing Kamala Harris has going for her is that she has a lot of recent practice with debates after participating in a number of them in the Democratic primary. I wouldn't count Pence down and out though. He is a savvy politician who, unlike his boss, knows how to stick to his talking points.

    Who's planning on watching the debate between Harris and Pence? If you are, what do you hope to see the candidates discuss?

  • Oct 02, 2020 02:22 PM
    Last: 2mo

    Wow. That was fast. Donald Trump is now at Walter Reid hospital for "the next few days."