Was 2020 election stolen or not?

[Flash]

As for your response....good for CO. However, given that in my life time there has been more than one occasion where the national tally of the electoral vote is not in sync with the popular vote. Like it or not, people either want the electoral vote to do what is was intended to do)reflect the majority vote of the state) or not exist. A matter of fact, a matter of history.

I did not include your entire post because I was only addressing the point about faithless electors and the popular vote. Although there have been occasions that the electoral vote was not in sync with the popular vote, it was not because of faithless electors. All (except a few) electors voted for the candidate who won a plurality of popular votes (majority is not needed) in their states.

I disagree that the electoral college was intended to reflect a majority of popular votes of that state since there has never been anything in the Constitution giving the people the power to vote on the candidates. The founders did not want a popular vote and specifically rejected it at the constitutional convention.

However, in practice, the electoral votes of the states do go to the popular vote winner and the national popular vote winner receives the majority of electoral votes. The exceptions were 2000, 2016, 1824, and 1888, and 1876. In two of those examples no candidate won a majority of electoral votes.

 

[Flash]

Nonsense statement. Try English. It works better.

OK. Try this English. The states of AZ and GA certified the electoral votes as correct. They were contested but that did not override the certified results.

Congress does not have authority to certify the election for the electoral college members.

They count the electoral votes and declare the winner. See 12th amendment and the Electoral Count Act.

The National Archive does not certify electoral college members either.

It shows the official results and the winner. AZ and GA both casts all its electoral votes for Biden who won the presidency.

Only the legislature of a State has the authority to choose it's electoral college members.

They don't choose its electoral college members. They make the law describing how those members are selected and that law is followed during the election process. It would violate state law for the state to try to appoint those electors after they have already been selected according to state law.

Face it Into the Night. Biden won the election fair and square. It is over. Trump will not be "reinstated" and there was no voter fraud because you cannot present any evidence. It did not disappear because it never existed.

As I told the Democrats who claimed Russia stole the election from Hillary-"Get Over It."

 

[Taichiliberal]

It never was. See the Constitution of the United States. States don't even need to hold elections for President.

Different States have different ways for the legislature to choose it's electors. Not a one size fits all, dude.

Nope. The electoral vote is not the popular vote.

True. So?

Not the purpose of the electoral college. See the federalist papers and the Constitution of the United States.

Presentism fallacy. The Constitution is not canceled because it's old. You are simply refusing to recognize the Constitution of the United States nor the constitution of any State. You WANT an oligarchy.

No such edict. See the Constitution of the United States.

PBS can't make the evidence go away either. Neither can you.

I have already listed some of the evidence. Anyone can go look for it. RQAA.

They do not have authority to certify electors or an election.

No. A coup by the Democrats is so far successful. How long will it remain in force I wonder?

There was no election. There is nothing to postpone.

There was no need to make special accommodations for anything. If people can go grocery shopping with masks, people can certainly go out and vote.

Part of the election fraud, dude. You can't just change the law like that without constitutional amendments.

Nope. Election fraud.

Counting the same fake ballots changes nothing.

Psychoquackery. You can't make the evidence just disappear, dude.

There was no 2020 election.

They do not have authority to certify State elections for the electors. See the Constitution of the United States.

They should. Installing Biden and supporting the coup is treason.

Congress does not certify elections for the electoral college. They do not have authority to.

1. A primer for your education: https://act.represent.us/sign/electoral-college

2. But all states have to send an electoral rep for the Presidential vote...and those reps were to represent the people of their state.

3. So you have a broken system, because We the People are NOT electing the President...a select few with a gray area autonomy are. Which is why Dump had his "people" check to see if he fairly lost the popular vote, and stated for the record that he ran for the electoral vote, NOT the popular vote.

4. See #3

5. For your education: The Troubling Reason the Electoral College Exists https://time.com/4558510/electoral-college-history-slavery/

6. Nonsense, I advocate no such things. Look up how and why AMENDMENTS came about. The debate over the electoral college WHICH CAME INTO EXISTENCE AFTER THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN falls into the aforementioned category.

7.True, but here's why it exists https://theunitedstatesconstitution.blogspot.com/2006/11/is-one-person-one-vote-constitutional.html

8. No one is buying your bluff and bluster. I provided proof of what I say....you can't beyond parroting the long debunked gospel according to Cheeto Jeezus.

9. You've already parroted long debunked rhetoric, as the chronology of the posts shows. Only the man in your mirror is buying your guff.

10. Once again, you display ignorance of the system. A lesson from your boys at Fox News https://www.foxnews.com/politics/how-congress-certifies-electoral-college-results-what-to-know

11. Please explain to the reading audience your personal definition of a coup that incorporates willing compliance and acknowledgement by the opposition? See #10

12. Sheer idiotic denial based on insipid stubbornness and intellectual dishonesty. See #1 - #11

13. A moronic comparison of grocery shopping to getting federal documents to prove identity. Do you even know what it takes to get various types of ID? Ever here of BUDGETS? FIXED INCOMES? All you are doing is just ignoring the reality of what it takes for many seniors and/or hard working people who do not have the leisure time or transportation to meet the guidelines/deadlines of red state voter suppression tactics.

14. Please get educated, as ALL LAWS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BY AMENDMENTS AND/OR SCOTUS RULINGS.

15. More silly parroting by you that cant factually or honestly refute facts presented here and in the previous post.

16. See #15

17. See #15

18. See #15

19. See #10

20. Sheer stupidity courtesy of the Cheeto Jeezus bible.

21. See #10

22. Sheer stupidity courtesy of the Cheeto Jeezus bible.

23. See #10

 

[Taichiliberal]

Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Here's the completion of my quote for the reading audience, "....as it was originially enacted to insure equal representation from early post colonial states that had a sparse WHITE population (not superceded by native folk or slaves or a combination of both). The dubiousness of using this antiquated system is what stuck in Cheeto Jeezus' craw, because his ego couldn't stand the fact that the true "one man, one vote" edict in American DIDN'T WANT HIM."



As for your response....good for CO. However, given that in my life time there has been more than one occasion where the national tally of the electoral vote is not in sync with the popular vote. Like it or not, people either want the electoral vote to do what is was intended to do)reflect the majority vote of the state) or not exist. A matter of fact, a matter of history.

The President is not elected by popular vote. It's really very simple.

Only the very simple perform your intellectualy myopia to try and bolster their overall point. Once more for the intellectually impotent: https://theunitedstatesconstitution.blogspot.com/2006/11/is-one-person-one-vote-constitutional.html

https://act.represent.us/sign/electoral-college

 

[Taichiliberal]

Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
As for your response....good for CO. However, given that in my life time there has been more than one occasion where the national tally of the electoral vote is not in sync with the popular vote. Like it or not, people either want the electoral vote to do what is was intended to do)reflect the majority vote of the state) or not exist. A matter of fact, a matter of history.

I did not include your entire post because I was only addressing the point about faithless electors and the popular vote. Although there have been occasions that the electoral vote was not in sync with the popular vote, it was not because of faithless electors. All (except a few) electors voted for the candidate who won a plurality of popular votes (majority is not needed) in their states.

I disagree that the electoral college was intended to reflect a majority of popular votes of that state since there has never been anything in the Constitution giving the people the power to vote on the candidates. The founders did not want a popular vote and specifically rejected it at the constitutional convention.

However, in practice, the electoral votes of the states do go to the popular vote winner and the national popular vote winner receives the majority of electoral votes. The exceptions were 2000, 2016, 1824, and 1888, and 1876. In two of those examples no candidate won a majority of electoral votes.

It's not a question of "faith", as we are talking about personal political choices that supercede the popular vote in a state. And your 1st paragraph summation is just not true, as we saw in 2016 and in some previous elections. Hence the controversy.

A incorrect evaluation that relies on revisionism rather that reality. FYI: https://time.com/4558510/electoral-college-history-slavery/

https://theunitedstatesconstitution.blogspot.com/2006/11/is-one-person-one-vote-constitutional.html

Excuse me.....Cheeto Jeezus won by ELECTORAL vote....he LOST the popular vote. Same with Bush. THAT is the point of contention I and others are discussing.

 

[Flash]

It's not a question of "faith", as we are talking about personal political choices that supercede the popular vote in a state. And your 1st paragraph summation is just not true, as we saw in 2016 and in some previous elections. Hence the controversy.

A incorrect evaluation that relies on revisionism rather that reality. FYI: https://time.com/4558510/electoral-college-history-slavery/

https://theunitedstatesconstitution.blogspot.com/2006/11/is-one-person-one-vote-constitutional.html

Excuse me.....Cheeto Jeezus won by ELECTORAL vote....he LOST the popular vote. Same with Bush. THAT is the point of contention I and others are discussing.

If I understand what you are saying is that some electors did not vote for the candidate winning the popular vote in their state thus giving Trump and Bush the win. Is that correct?

If so, you are not understanding what occurred. All the electors voted for the candidate winning the popular vote in their state (with a few exceptions). Trump did not win because electors in states won by Hillary voted for Trump instead.

Personal political choices did not supersede the popular vote in any state. The controversy is not about electors not voting for the candidate winning their state, it is about the fact that all the electors can vote for the popular vote winner in their state and still the popular vote winner nation-wide does not win the electoral vote.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
It's not a question of "faith", as we are talking about personal political choices that supercede the popular vote in a state. And your 1st paragraph summation is just not true, as we saw in 2016 and in some previous elections. Hence the controversy.

A incorrect evaluation that relies on revisionism rather that reality. FYI: https://time.com/4558510/electoral-c...story-slavery/

https://theunitedstatesconstitution....itutional.html

Excuse me.....Cheeto Jeezus won by ELECTORAL vote....he LOST the popular vote. Same with Bush. THAT is the point of contention I and others are discussing.

If I understand what you are saying is that some electors did not vote for the candidate winning the popular vote in their state thus giving Trump and Bush the win. Is that correct?

If so, you are not understanding what occurred. All the electors voted for the candidate winning the popular vote in their state (with a few exceptions). Trump did not win because electors in states won by Hillary voted for Trump instead.

Personal political choices did not supersede the popular vote in any state. The controversy is not about electors not voting for the candidate winning their state, it is about the fact that all the electors can vote for the popular vote winner in their state and still the popular vote winner nation-wide does not win the electoral vote.

1. Correct.

2. You're not making sense. The tally at the end of the day shows Trump winning the electoral college vote...and that by law put him in the White House. He was pissed that people pointed out he lost the popular vote, and had his people search for voter fraud or anything that would flip those results. He found nothing of the sort. this is part of the debate as to why the electoral system should be eliminated https://ronconte.com/2016/11/17/electoral-college-vs-popular-vote-which-states-lose-out/

3. Incorrect. Please note: https://dqydj.com/how-many-faithless-electors-2016/

 

[Flash]

1. Correct.

2. You're not making sense. The tally at the end of the day shows Trump winning the electoral college vote...and that by law put him in the White House. He was pissed that people pointed out he lost the popular vote, and had his people search for voter fraud or anything that would flip those results. He found nothing of the sort. this is part of the debate as to why the electoral system should be eliminated https://ronconte.com/2016/11/17/electoral-college-vs-popular-vote-which-states-lose-out/

3. Incorrect. Please note: https://dqydj.com/how-many-faithless-electors-2016/

The faithless electors in 2016 did not give Trump the presidency. Trump had 304 electoral votes and Hillary 224. He won by 77 electoral votes. The 5 electoral votes that did not vote for Clinton did not give Trump the victory.

You are making the mistaken assumption that electors who did not vote for the popular vote winner in their state caused Trump to win. Not so. Even in those 5 faithless electors who did not vote for Clinton had voted for her Trump would have still won by 72 electoral votes.

Faithless electors have never affected the election results even in those elections in which the popular vote winner did not win the electoral college.

So, if those who want to get rid of the electoral college think election results don't come out right because some electors don't vote as they should, they don't understand how the system works.

 

[Stone]

The faithless electors in 2016 did not give Trump the presidency. Trump had 304 electoral votes and Hillary 224. He won by 77 electoral votes. The 5 electoral votes that did not vote for Clinton did not give Trump the victory.

You are making the mistaken assumption that electors who did not vote for the popular vote winner in their state caused Trump to win. Not so. Even in those 5 faithless electors who did not vote for Clinton had voted for her Trump would have still won by 72 electoral votes.

Faithless electors have never affected the election results even in those elections in which the popular vote winner did not win the electoral college.

So, if those who want to get rid of the electoral college think election results don't come out right because some electors don't vote as they should, they don't understand how the system works.

Bravo. Outstanding job of laying out the facts, the facts,...and nothing but the facts.

 

[Into the Night]

OK. Try this English. The states of AZ and GA certified the electoral votes as correct.

The never did.

They were contested but that did not override the certified results.

Nothing to override. Nonsense assumption.

They count the electoral votes and declare the winner.

AZ does not certify electoral college designations from other States. Congress cannot assign electoral college members either.

See 12th amendment and the Electoral Count Act.

Congress cannot choose electoral college members.
The 12th amendment doesn't change that.

It shows the official results and the winner.

Congress cannot choose electoral college members from for any State.

AZ and GA both casts all its electoral votes for Biden who won the presidency.

No, they didn't. They filed contested.

They don't choose its electoral college members.

Yes they do. See Article II.

They make the law describing how those members are selected and that law is followed during the election process.

They cannot change what they are responsible for.

It would violate state law for the state to try to appoint those electors after they have already been selected according to state law.

No, it wouldn't. The legislature, and ONLY the legislature is allowed to choose the electors, even if they use an election as an advisory.

Face it Into the Night. Biden won the election fair and square.

No, he didn't. There was no election.

It is over.

It never happened.

Trump will not be "reinstated"

That remains to be seen.

and there was no voter fraud

Yes there was. There was also election fraud...the bigger problem.

because you cannot present any evidence.

I already have. RQAA.

It did not disappear because it never existed.

It still exists. You can't wish it away.

As I told the Democrats who claimed Russia stole the election from Hillary-"Get Over It."

Russia wanted Hillary, Putin even said so.
Russia wanted Biden too. He even said so.

 

[Into the Night]

1. A primer for your education: https://act.represent.us/sign/electoral-college

False authority fallacy. The Constitution of the United States, and ONLY the Constitution of the United States is the authoritative reference of the Constitution of the United States.

2. But all states have to send an electoral rep for the Presidential vote...and those reps were to represent the people of their state.

No. See the Constitution of the United States.

3. So you have a broken system, because We the People are NOT electing the President...a select few with a gray area autonomy are. Which is why Dump had his "people" check to see if he fairly lost the popular vote, and stated for the record that he ran for the electoral vote, NOT the popular vote.

The Constitution isn't 'broken'. The President is not elected by popular vote.

5. For your education: The Troubling Reason the Electoral College Exists https://time.com/4558510/electoral-college-history-slavery/

False authority fallacy. Time Magazine is not the authoritative reference of the Constitution of the United States.

6. Nonsense, I advocate no such things. Look up how and why AMENDMENTS came about. The debate over the electoral college WHICH CAME INTO EXISTENCE AFTER THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN falls into the aforementioned category.

You don't recognize the Constitution of the United States nor any State constitution.

7.True, but here's why it exists https://theunitedstatesconstitution.blogspot.com/2006/11/is-one-person-one-vote-constitutional.html

False authority fallacy. A blog is not the authoritative reference of the Constitution of the United States.

8. No one is buying your bluff and bluster. I provided proof of what I say....you can't beyond parroting the long debunked gospel according to Cheeto Jeezus.
9. You've already parroted long debunked rhetoric, as the chronology of the posts shows. Only the man in your mirror is buying your guff.

Insult fallacies.

10. Once again, you display ignorance of the system. A lesson from your boys at Fox News https://www.foxnews.com/politics/how-congress-certifies-electoral-college-results-what-to-know

False authority fallacy. Fox News is not the authoritative reference of the Constitution of the United States. Congress is not authorized to choose the electors for any State, only the electors for the District of Columbia.

11. Please explain to the reading audience your personal definition of a coup that incorporates willing compliance and acknowledgement by the opposition? See #10

Already did. RQAA.

12. Sheer idiotic denial based on insipid stubbornness and intellectual dishonesty. See #1 - #11
13. A moronic comparison of grocery shopping to getting federal documents to prove identity. Do you even know what it takes to get various types of ID? Ever here of BUDGETS? FIXED INCOMES? All you are doing is just ignoring the reality of what it takes for many seniors and/or hard working people who do not have the leisure time or transportation to meet the guidelines/deadlines of red state voter suppression tactics.

Insult fallacies. Bigotry. What voter suppression tactics? It's not that hard to get ID.

14. Please get educated, as ALL LAWS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BY AMENDMENTS AND/OR SCOTUS RULINGS.

SCOTUS does not have authority to change the Constitution of the United States.

15. More silly parroting by you that cant factually or honestly refute facts presented here and in the previous post.

Insult fallacies. Assumption of victory fallacy. Buzzword fallacies. Vacuous argument fallacy. Attempted proof by void. Attempted proof by Holy Link.

 

[Into the Night]

Only the very simple perform your intellectualy myopia to try and bolster their overall point. Once more for the intellectually impotent: https://theunitedstatesconstitution.blogspot.com/2006/11/is-one-person-one-vote-constitutional.html

https://act.represent.us/sign/electoral-college

False authority fallacies. No argument presented.

 

[Into the Night]

It's not a question of "faith", as we are talking about personal political choices that supercede the popular vote in a state. And your 1st paragraph summation is just not true, as we saw in 2016 and in some previous elections. Hence the controversy.

A incorrect evaluation that relies on revisionism rather that reality. FYI: https://time.com/4558510/electoral-college-history-slavery/

https://theunitedstatesconstitution.blogspot.com/2006/11/is-one-person-one-vote-constitutional.html

Excuse me.....Cheeto Jeezus won by ELECTORAL vote....he LOST the popular vote. Same with Bush. THAT is the point of contention I and others are discussing.

The President is not elected by popular vote.

 

[Into the Night]

If I understand what you are saying is that some electors did not vote for the candidate winning the popular vote in their state thus giving Trump and Bush the win. Is that correct?

If so, you are not understanding what occurred. All the electors voted for the candidate winning the popular vote in their state (with a few exceptions). Trump did not win because electors in states won by Hillary voted for Trump instead.

Personal political choices did not supersede the popular vote in any state. The controversy is not about electors not voting for the candidate winning their state, it is about the fact that all the electors can vote for the popular vote winner in their state and still the popular vote winner nation-wide does not win the electoral vote.

The President it not elected by popular vote.
You have now locked yourself in another paradox (paradox D). First you say that no elector ever deviated from his pledged vote that affected an election, now you say they did. Which is it, dude?

 

[Into the Night]

I did not include your entire post because I was only addressing the point about faithless electors and the popular vote. Although there have been occasions that the electoral vote was not in sync with the popular vote, it was not because of faithless electors. All (except a few) electors voted for the candidate who won a plurality of popular votes (majority is not needed) in their states.

I disagree that the electoral college was intended to reflect a majority of popular votes of that state since there has never been anything in the Constitution giving the people the power to vote on the candidates. The founders did not want a popular vote and specifically rejected it at the constitutional convention.

However, in practice, the electoral votes of the states do go to the popular vote winner and the national popular vote winner receives the majority of electoral votes. The exceptions were 2000, 2016, 1824, and 1888, and 1876. In two of those examples no candidate won a majority of electoral votes.

The President is not elected by popular vote.

 

[Into the Night]

1. Correct.

2. You're not making sense. The tally at the end of the day shows Trump winning the electoral college vote...and that by law put him in the White House. He was pissed that people pointed out he lost the popular vote, and had his people search for voter fraud or anything that would flip those results. He found nothing of the sort. this is part of the debate as to why the electoral system should be eliminated https://ronconte.com/2016/11/17/electoral-college-vs-popular-vote-which-states-lose-out/

3. Incorrect. Please note: https://dqydj.com/how-many-faithless-electors-2016/

The president is not elected by popular vote.

 

[Into the Night]

The faithless electors in 2016 did not give Trump the presidency. Trump had 304 electoral votes and Hillary 224. He won by 77 electoral votes. The 5 electoral votes that did not vote for Clinton did not give Trump the victory.

You are making the mistaken assumption that electors who did not vote for the popular vote winner in their state caused Trump to win. Not so. Even in those 5 faithless electors who did not vote for Clinton had voted for her Trump would have still won by 72 electoral votes.

Faithless electors have never affected the election results even in those elections in which the popular vote winner did not win the electoral college.

So, if those who want to get rid of the electoral college think election results don't come out right because some electors don't vote as they should, they don't understand how the system works.

Paradox D. Which is it, dude?

 

[Flash]

Flash: "The states of AZ and GA certified the electoral votes as correct.

Into the Night: "The never did."

Sure they did. See this document certifying the Georgia electoral vote signed by all the electors.

STATE OF GEORGIA PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL COLLEGE CERTIFICATE OF VOTE

We, the undersigned, being the duly elected and qualified Electors of President and Vice President of the United States of America from the State of Georgia as set forth in the attached Certificate of Ascertainment, and hereinafter referred to in this Certificate as the 2020 Georgia Electors, do hereby certify the following: (A) That the undersigned 2020 Georgia Electors convened and organized at the State Capitol, in the City ofAtlanta, County of Fulton, Georgia at 12:00 noon on the 14th Day of December 2020, to perform their duties as Electors of President and Vice President as set forth in the laws ofthe United States of America and the State of Georgia. (B) That Stacey Abrams presided and Sachin Varghese served as Secretary for the meeting. (C) That the undersigned 2020 Georgia Electors proceeded to vote by individual ballot, and voted first for President and then for Vice President by distinct ballots, resulting in the two distinct lists set forth below. (D) That the undersigned 2020 Georgia Electors cast each of their respective ballots for President of the United States of America as follows: Name of Persons Voted For Number of Votes Joseph R. Biden of the State of Delaware Sixteen (16) (E) That the undersigned 2020 Georgia Electors cast each of their respective ballots for Vice President of the United States of America as follows: Name of Persons Voted For Number of Votes Kamala D. Harris of the State of California Sixteen (16) Witness the hands and seals of the undersigned as the duly elected and qualified Electors of the President and Vice President of the United States of America from the State of Georgia, this 14th day of December 2020.

Signature of electors goes here: (see document: https://www.archives.gov/files/electoral-college/2020/vote-georgia.pdf)

The objections to the electoral vote in AZ were defeated January 6 with only 6 Republican senators supporting the objections.

The objections to the GA vote were never considered because they were not co-signed by a senator.

 

[Flash]

The President it not elected by popular vote.
You have now locked yourself in another paradox (paradox D). First you say that no elector ever deviated from his pledged vote that affected an election, now you say they did. Which is it, dude?

Nope. Now I understand why you claim I say things I never said. You do not read carefully.

Nowhere in that post does it say that a faithless elector ever affected an election outcome. Here is the post again. There is no contradiction:

"If I understand what you are saying is that some electors did not vote for the candidate winning the popular vote in their state thus giving Trump and Bush the win. Is that correct?

If so, you are not understanding what occurred. All the electors voted for the candidate winning the popular vote in their state (with a few exceptions). Trump did not win because electors in states won by Hillary voted for Trump instead.

Personal political choices did not supersede the popular vote in any state. The controversy is not about electors not voting for the candidate winning their state, it is about the fact that all the electors can vote for the popular vote winner in their state and still the popular vote winner nation-wide does not win the electoral vote."

 

[Flash]

Paradox D. Which is it, dude?

There is no paradox. RQAA. See post #539. But read it more carefully this time. My point to Tachliberal is that no faithless electoral votes ever affected the outcome of an election.