They’re decided by an electoral college selected by the party. We’ve seen state governments assert the right of the state legislature to usurp the popular vote by citing Rehnquist’s decision in Bush v Gore. And while you’d like to think this remains a decision in popular hands, Idk how current composition of the SCOTUS will respond if presented with an opportunity to overturn another general election victory by the Democrats.
Who wins when not enough people per state vote for Harris?
In theory, its the Big Scary Cheeto (or, assuming another Demolition Ranch subscriber gets within 400 feet of the former Prez, JD “Couchfucker” Vance).
But if all you care about is Not-Trump, why are you in a thread talking about Harris’s policy? Why take offense at anyone asking? You know who you’re voting for, regardless of what she says, so why are you in here pretending that you care?
I am not pretending that I care that people don’t vote for Harris.
Then you think you’d care about the nine people who will ultimately decide this election. You’d think that would lead to more calls of “Pack the Court”, “Fight illegal felony disenfranchisement laws”, and “Support universal mail-in voting”, rather than “Fuck you for asking what anyone supports”.
Instead, I’m seeing someone who is willing to waltz blindly into another Bush v Gore SCOTUS sponsored upset while screaming “Fascist!” at the Naderites.
Why don’t you care about that?
The difference between caring about this election and caring about democracy is in wanting your team to win this round and wanting general participation in democratic institutions after November.
Who do you think wins if people don’t vote for Harris?
American elections aren’t decided by the popular vote, so its anyone’s guess.
They are decided by the per-state popular vote, as I am sure you know.
Who wins when not enough people per state vote for Harris?
They’re decided by an electoral college selected by the party. We’ve seen state governments assert the right of the state legislature to usurp the popular vote by citing Rehnquist’s decision in Bush v Gore. And while you’d like to think this remains a decision in popular hands, Idk how current composition of the SCOTUS will respond if presented with an opportunity to overturn another general election victory by the Democrats.
In theory, its the Big Scary Cheeto (or, assuming another Demolition Ranch subscriber gets within 400 feet of the former Prez, JD “Couchfucker” Vance).
But if all you care about is Not-Trump, why are you in a thread talking about Harris’s policy? Why take offense at anyone asking? You know who you’re voting for, regardless of what she says, so why are you in here pretending that you care?
I am not pretending that I care that people don’t vote for Harris.
I fucking care because I don’t want a fucking genocidal dictator. Why don’t you care about that?
Then you think you’d care about the nine people who will ultimately decide this election. You’d think that would lead to more calls of “Pack the Court”, “Fight illegal felony disenfranchisement laws”, and “Support universal mail-in voting”, rather than “Fuck you for asking what anyone supports”.
Instead, I’m seeing someone who is willing to waltz blindly into another Bush v Gore SCOTUS sponsored upset while screaming “Fascist!” at the Naderites.
The difference between caring about this election and caring about democracy is in wanting your team to win this round and wanting general participation in democratic institutions after November.
It’s not “my team.”
Again, I want to stop the genocidal dictator. Apparently you do not. Why?
Netanyahu is going to be President regardless of who wins the US Presidency in November.
So the genocides of queer people and Latinos Trump is planning don’t matter. Why don’t they matter?