Republican Senate leaders have suddenly expressed some openness to changing the law that Donald Trump tried to use to steal a second term in office, leading to two obvious questions: Huh? Why?
Meet Lucy. Lucy owns a football! Full name? Lucy Ethics.
No mention is made by Susan Collins whether WH general counsel was consulted regarding the âconfusionâ that contributed to 1/6/2021. Go fish, Mitch.
Schumer doesnât seem interested without movement on Democratsâ larger voting rights priorities. He told Axios, âIf youâre going to rig the game and say, âOh, weâll count the rigged game accurately,â what good is that?â
âWhat good is it to certify the election if I donât get to cast my vote in the first place?â Warnock said Wednesday, calling for Republicans to stop filibustering Democratsâ broader voting rights packages.
EXACTLY!!!
Let me guess, the Villages in Florida becomes the next electoral college?
Itâs worth a shot. The business of challenging electors is a minefield that needs to be changed. An easy revision is to acknowledge only the electors designated by the voters of a particular state. In the face of any question regarding those electors, the Stateâs electoral votes will be counted towards the candidate who won the majority of votes.
The republicans are inclined to alter the law because they control more governorships, meaning it will make it easier to for them to subvert elections.
Yeah, it seems like all they are doing is trying to act like they want to do something to fix the electoral system without doing anything substantial. The ECA does need some updating to make sure Republicans canât subvert an election result, and maybe itâs worth it to push a bill on it that fixes the problems, but not at the expense of voting rights reforms that makes sure the votes reported to Congress are actually the will of the people and not based on Republican cheating.
They are running the same game as BIF vs BBB. Pull it apart, pass something minimal and then donât pass the rest. Any line on Manchin and Sinema doing that again?
My question is, does the fact that Kamala Harris will be the VP next time around have anything to do with Moscow Mitch wanting to change the law?
Itâll surprise nobody here that, if the republicans are suddenly all on board with a given thing, Iâm gonna dig through the details to figure out where the poison pill isâŚ
Lemme guess, theyâre willing to make it purely ceremonial for the counting, so that Congress is forced to take clearly illegitimate results from a Texas or Florida which overruled a clear result and sent in a false set of electors.
Sounds just like McConnell calculus.
Yes. Otherwise itâs an unwinnable three-card monte scam, as Schumer effectively said. Our folks arenât that goddamn dumb.
âMitch McConnell, John Thune Open To Changing Electoral Count Act.â
Joe Manchin (whispering to McConnell from the cloakroom while trying to keep a straight face):
âNow say you âsupport the framework in principalâ but youâre âworried about its effects on inflationâ.â
(Cracks up with Thune)
It only takes 1 to mess it up.
beware of Greeks bearing giftsâŚ
Republican Senate leaders have suddenly expressed some openness to changing the law that Donald Trump tried to use to steal a second term in office, leading to two obvious questions: Huh? Why?
Son: Dad, whyâd you name me Odysseus? Heâs from Greek mythology.
Dad: Well son, you broke through the trojan wall.
Iâm going to bigly assume that the Republicans that are open to reforming, or clarifying the ECA is that they are afraid that weâll be successful with VP Harris doing what Pence wouldnât do.
Or itâs a waste of time, and they want to look like theyâre actually for something.
Or they think that they have enough control of more state legislatures that would work for the party.
How would that work? All the GOP senators and Sinema vote for it, whereupon Biden signs it because nothing matters any more?