2020 Election: Predictions, Results and Reactions

[yovargas]

I found that 21 page legal document surprisingly entertaining to read. Such a thorough, detailed accounting of the many ways their suit is a buncha bullshit.

[N.E. Brigand]

And the other two judges on the panel were also appointed by Republicans. Yet that did not stop Jenna Ellis (explicitly on behalf of herself and Giuliani) to tweet: "The activist judicial machinery in Pennsylvania continues to cover the allegations of massive fraud. ... ON TO SCOTUS."

The appeal to the Third Circuit was mandatory. The Supreme Court, of course, does not have to grant certiorari. It would be almost unheard of for them to review a decision rejecting leave to amend (which is what this really comes down to, although the panel also goes on to excoriate the claims that the campaign tried to make).

Ellis's comment about "massive fraud" today comes despite the appeals court's decision saying explicitly, "The Campaign never alleges that any ballot was fraudulent or cast by an illegal voter."

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Yes, I was going to say that, and then decided to leave it out.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Milwaukee County presidential recount wraps up with Biden adding to his margin over Trump

Not exactly the result the Trump campaign were looking for when they paid 3 million dollars for the recount!

[N.E. Brigand]

Interesting statistics:

In 2016, Republicans won 47 more seats than Democrats in the House of Representatives.
But Republicans did so averaging just 1.1% better than Democrats nationally in House races.

In 2020, Democrats won between 8 and 12 seats* more than Republican in the House of Representatives.
But Democrats did so averageing 2.5% better than Republicans nationally in House races.

And back in 2012, Republicans won 33 more seats than Democrats in the House of Representatives.
But Republicans did so averaging 1% worse than Democrats nationally in House races.

Gerrymandering in the past decade has pretty consistently favored Republicans, giving them an advantage even when they're less popular.
And it is likely to continue to do so for the next decade.


*Four seats in 2020 have yet to be decided. Two of those races are currently separated by less than 20 votes each. There have only been three House races in the past 100 years decided by 20 or fewer votes.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Republicans finally found a judge wacky enough to go along with them, though this won't stand for long.

Pennsylvania Slams Judge’s ‘Overreach’ in Certification Ruling

Here is the opinion written by crazy the crazy judge. Pennsylvania law requires that she actually support her order (which was already appealed to the state Supreme Court) with an actual opinion, so this is what she came up with. It is a wonderful advertisement for ending the practice of electing state judges. yov, I suspect that you will not find it as easy to read as the other opinion I posted.

http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/set ... -10777.pdf

The tl;dr version is that she has issued an emergency injunction stopping Pennsylvania from certifying the election that they already certified, on grounds that are both completely nonsensical, and not consistent with actual Pennsylvania law.

The state supreme court will make short shrift of this.

[Frelga]

Meanwhile in Georgia, the GOP is trying to walk the tightrope of telling their supporters to vote in the election they are also trying to convince them is corrupt and rigged.

Thread starts here.

https://twitter.com/ryanobles/status/13 ... 22624?s=19

On the ground in Georgia today in support of the GOP Candidates in the #GASen runoff- ⁦@GOPChairwoman⁩ Ronna McDaniel.
McDaniel speaking to a crowd in Marietta. Neither of the two Republicans candidates are here with her.
She promises “I’m gonna be in your state so much.”

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Speaking of Pennsylvania crazy, this was posted by Pennsylvania state senator Doug Mastriano today.

Pennsylvania crazy.jpg (38.88 KiB) Viewed 2643 times

The problem, of course, is that those numbers — 1,823,148 mail ballots sent and 1,462,403 returned — are from the June 2 primary election, not from the November 3, general election. They are literally posting false information (which they know is false) in order to rile people up.

x-posted with Frelga. We can only hope that it blows up in their faces! I know that there are active campaigns among the far right promoting a boycott of the runoffs. I don't know how effective they will be. It's not often that I am hopeful that a far right promoted boycott is effective!

[yovargas]

(couple x-posts; my post is about the Pennsylvania Court decision V-man linked to a couple posts up)

That one was indeed a bit of a slog and I ended up only skimming most of it, but the legal argument there is more interesting or at least worth pondering than the other stuff I've seen. At least on the face of it, there are argument that the Pennsylvania lays out specific ways in which absentee voting is allowed (which seems factually correct) and that the general allowance of mail-in voting it goes beyond those specifically allowed ways (which also seems factually correct) doesn't sound totally baseless to me. In this case, the argument that they may have gone outside of their constitution's allowable voting methods is something I would be interested in hearing arguments for and against.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I'll post the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision (once they reach it) so you can see just how contrary to Pennsylvania law that argument actually is.

[yovargas]

I'll be interested to hear it. Do you know if any lower courts or whatever (not totally sure how that would work) have already ruled on the matter?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

One of the arguments that I am sure that they will make is that the state Constitution (as cited in that opinion) allows for the legislature to provide a manner of voting to allow people "who, on the occurrence of any election, are unable to attend at their proper polling places because of illness or physical disability." That's exactly what the legislature did, because people were unable to safely attend polling places because of a little illness called "Covid-19."

Another argument that I am sure that the state high court will make is that the time to contest this law was before the election (the act was actually passed in 2019), not after the election when your preferred candidate lost.

Plus, again, the certification of the presidential election has already happened, and she is not trying to order that undone, just blocking any further certification. Which would actually serve to block the certification of the victory of the GOP representative bringing the action!

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in another case that the state can count mail-in ballots that had superficial defects, overturning one of the two "wins" that Trump had had. So it is pretty clear where it falls on the issue of the validity of mail-in ballots.

[River]

Hopefully there're enough sane and courageous people in the PA Legislature to put a muzzle on that guy. They sound like the nutcases that think Ohio was stolen from Kerry in 2004.

x-posted with Frelga. We can only hope that it blows up in their faces! I know that there are active campaigns among the far right promoting a boycott of the runoffs. I don't know how effective they will be. It's not often that I am hopeful that a far right promoted boycott is effective!

If Jan. 5 reciprocates Nov. 3, only a handful of these suggestible types staying home will be enough to tip the election to Warnock and Ossoff. Which is exactly what the Governor and SoS of Georgia are afraid of, which is probably why they're all but begging the RNC and Trump Campaign to STFU about non-existent fraud.

[N.E. Brigand]

Meanwhile in Georgia, the GOP is trying to walk the tightrope of telling their supporters to vote in the election they are also trying to convince them is corrupt and rigged.
Thread starts here.
https://twitter.com/ryanobles/status/13 ... 22624?s=19

On the ground in Georgia today in support of the GOP Candidates in the #GASen runoff- ⁦@GOPChairwoman⁩ Ronna McDaniel.
McDaniel speaking to a crowd in Marietta. Neither of the two Republicans candidates are here with her.
She promises “I’m gonna be in your state so much.”

Oh boy. Republican voter to McDaniel: "Why should we vote in this election when we know it's already decided?"

Although if someone was interested enough in the Senate race to come to a rally that doesn't even feature the candidates, are they really not going to vote?

[Frelga]

Well, they were not there for a factual and logical discussion.

[N.E. Brigand]

One of the arguments that I am sure that they will make is that the state Constitution (as cited in that opinion) allows for the legislature to provide a manner of voting to allow people "who, on the occurrence of any election, are unable to attend at their proper polling places because of illness or physical disability." That's exactly what the legislature did, because people were unable to safely attend polling places because of a little illness called "Covid-19."

Another argument that I am sure that the state high court will make is that the time to contest this law was before the election (the act was actually passed in 2019), not after the election when your preferred candidate lost.

Plus, again, the certification of the presidential election has already happened, and she is not trying to order that undone, just blocking any further certification. Which would actually serve to block the certification of the victory of the GOP representative bringing the action!

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in another case that the state can count mail-in ballots that had superficial defects, overturning one of the two "wins" that Trump had had. So it is pretty clear where it falls on the issue of the validity of mail-in ballots.

And here you go, from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's Twitter account, which links to the per curiam decision, one justice's concurrence, and two justices' (including the chief justice's) combined concurrence and dissent. They all agree that it was far too late to change the rules this way and thus they overturn the lower court's decision. The dissenters say that if this had been brought prior to the election, they might have ruled otherwise.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

From the concurrence:

Having delayed this suit until two elections were conducted under Act 77’s new, no-excuse mail-in voting system, Petitioners—several of whom participated in primary elections under this system without complaint—play a dangerous game at the expense of every Pennsylvania voter. Petitioners waived their opportunity to challenge Act 77 before the election, choosing instead to “lay by and gamble upon receiving a favorable decision of the electorate.” Toney v. White, 488 F.2d 310, 314 (5th Cir. 1973) (en banc). Unsatisfied with the results of that wager, they would now flip over the table, scattering to the shadows the votes of millions of Pennsylvanians. It is not our role to lend legitimacy to such transparent and untimely efforts to subvert the will of Pennsylvania voters.12

Courts should not decide elections when the will of the voters is clear

[RoseMorninStar]

From the concurrence:

Having delayed this suit until two elections were conducted under Act 77’s new, no-excuse mail-in voting system, Petitioners—several of whom participated in primary elections under this system without complaint—play a dangerous game at the expense of every Pennsylvania voter. Petitioners waived their opportunity to challenge Act 77 before the election, choosing instead to “lay by and gamble upon receiving a favorable decision of the electorate.” Toney v. White, 488 F.2d 310, 314 (5th Cir. 1973) (en banc). Unsatisfied with the results of that wager, they would now flip over the table, scattering to the shadows the votes of millions of Pennsylvanians. It is not our role to lend legitimacy to such transparent and untimely efforts to subvert the will of Pennsylvania voters.12

Courts should not decide elections when the will of the voters is clear

That pretty much sums up everything that's happened with team Trump since the election.

[Frelga]

Thanks to V, I know what "dismissed with prejudice" means, but it still sounds so thrilling!

(OT but Pratchett basically wrote Snuff for the extended Pride and Extreme Prejudice joke)

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Also worth noting, about the law that the GOP congressman and two failed GOP candidates tried to get thrown out after it was used twice:

Reminder about Act 77—PA's 2019 voting reform bill that created no-excuse mail-in voting & the process for Pennsylvanians to apply for & receive mail ballots.

8/9 of bill's cosponsors were Republicans
Passed the Republican-led House 138-61
Passed the Republican-led Senate 35-14