Someone wants to use the 14th Amendment to fix the 2024 election for Dems.

[Marener]

They were changed on the fly right before the election, and then you don't have standing according to the courts.

How do you fight it if the courts won't hear it due to standing?

You don't reward rule breaking and cheating.

You’re changing your story. Define “right before the election”.

To have standing, all Trump had to do was have someone in the state file with them.

Theres nothing preventing Trump from suing before the election other than his own incompetence. Lots of other lawsuits from competent legal teams were successful.

If you could prove cheating occurred, you would have. But you said it’s too hard so you just want the courts to change the outcome to what you wanted. Sounds like a coup to me.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Funny, because Trump was calling for a court mandated coup in 2020 but that is okay with all you morons.

Youre right. Trump’s attempt was an actual court mandated coup. This is just a ballot access question.

I don’t support the guys position but your flaming hypocrisy is astounding. You need some self awareness, moron.

Should we bring up the birther’s attempt to make a court mandated coup in 2012?

You drama queens are comical…Are you sure Trump wasn’t hoping for a stay on election results pending an investigation into voter fraud? Could it be that simple or is there just not enough theatrics in such simplicity?

 

[Marener]

You drama queens are comical…Are you sure Trump wasn’t hoping for a stay on election results pending an investigation into voter fraud? Could it be that simple or is there just not enough theatrics in such simplicity?

Unlike you, I read the lawsuits. So yeah, I’m sure.

Trump and his cronies asked for tens of millions of votes to be eliminated and for the courts to name him the winner.

 

[martybegan]

You’re changing your story. Define “right before the election”.

To have standing, all Trump had to do was have someone in the state file with them.

Theres nothing preventing Trump from suing before the election other than his own incompetence. Lots of other lawsuits from competent legal teams were successful.

If you could prove cheating occurred, you would have. But you said it’s too hard so you just want the courts to change the outcome to what you wanted. Sounds like a coup to me.

Anything within a few months. Do you know how long courts take to do things?

No, because before the election you can't show any harm..... It's a circular argument intended to ignore the issue.

Not a coup, just like Jan 6th wasn't a coup.

This idiots plan abusing the 14th amendment WOULD be a coup.

 

[Faun]

They were changed on the fly right before the election, and then you don't have standing according to the courts.

How do you fight it if the courts won't hear it due to standing?

You don't reward rule breaking and cheating.

Even worse. You don't disenfranchise millions of voters who followed the rules.

 

[Faun]

You drama queens are comical…Are you sure Trump wasn’t hoping for a stay on election results pending an investigation into voter fraud? Could it be that simple or is there just not enough theatrics in such simplicity?

Fraud was investigated. Twice. They didn't find any.

 

[martybegan]

Even worse. You don't disenfranchise millions of voters who followed the rules.

By rewarding those who did break the rules to get the result they wanted.

Sorry, but no.

 

[Faun]

Anything within a few months. Do you know how long courts take to do things?

No, because before the election you can't show any harm..... It's a circular argument intended to ignore the issue.

Not a coup, just like Jan 6th wasn't a coup.

This idiots plan abusing the 14th amendment WOULD be a coup.

Nonsense. a) courts can be asked to expedite, such as Trump did on election day to remedy a problem in PA where observers were not allowed near election workers; b) if laws were being violated, courts would have no qualms fixing that.

 

[Faun]

By rewarding those who did break the rules to get the result they wanted.

Sorry, but no.

Who broke the rules?

 

[elektra]

That’s not true at all.

Gore asked for a small amount of overseas ballots who arrived after the deadline to be thrown out. Technically that’s what the law would require. After public blowback, he changed his mind and dropped the suit.

A hand recount had different outcomes depending on what standards were used to count the ballots.

Dates? I thought dates don't matter?

What about signatures, Gore's lawyers also tried to throw out the military's vote through signature matching as well.

Either way, whichever side either of us is taking, we are both arguing that this voting system needs to be uniform, fair, and accurate. It is bullshit that either side has an argument over the elections.

I would also argue, the lawyers love this, more work for them.

 

[Marener]

Anything within a few months. Do you know how long courts take to do things?

No, because before the election you can't show any harm..... It's a circular argument intended to ignore the issue.

Not a coup, just like Jan 6th wasn't a coup.

This idiots plan abusing the 14th amendment WOULD be a coup.

You simply don’t know what you’re talking about. Plenty of lawsuits were filed and adjudicated before the election. People have standing by demonstrating imminent harm as well as actual harm.

You are just repeating the lies you’ve been told.

Having the courts change the outcome of the election takes the power from the citizens and grants it to the Republican Party. Thats a coup.

 

[Marener]

Dates? I thought dates don't matter?

What about signatures, Gore's lawyers also tried to throw out the military's vote through signature matching as well.

Either way, whichever side either of us is taking, we are both arguing that this voting system needs to be uniform, fair, and accurate. It is bullshit that either side has an argument over the elections.

I would also argue, the lawyers love this, more work for them.

Of course dates matter. Let’s see a source for Gore trying to throw out votes for signature matching.

 

[martybegan]

Nonsense. a) courts can be asked to expedite, such as Trump did on election day to remedy a problem in PA where observers were not allowed near election workers; b) if laws were being violated, courts would have no qualms fixing that.

Bullshit. The system won't override the system.

 

[martybegan]

Who broke the rules?

Whoever extended mail voting without changing the law first, and whoever cheated.

 

[martybegan]

You simply don’t know what you’re talking about. Plenty of lawsuits were filed and adjudicated before the election. People have standing by demonstrating imminent harm as well as actual harm.

You are just repeating the lies you’ve been told.

Having the courts change the outcome of the election takes the power from the citizens and grants it to the Republican Party. Thats a coup.

Ignored and dismissed, not settled.

Having the courts ignore any evidence of fraud or shenanigans is the coup.

 

[Marener]

Ignored and dismissed, not settled.

Having the courts ignore any evidence of fraud or shenanigans is the coup.

None were ignored. Some were dismissed. Others were adjudicated and ruled against Trump. The fact remains he had every opportunity to challenge them before people voted.

You didn’t present evidence or fraud because it was too hard, which you acknowledged.

Eliminating legitimate voter‘s ballots after the election because they voted for the opponent is no better than stuffing the ballot box. Both are coups.

 

[martybegan]

None were ignored. Some were dismissed. Others were adjudicated and ruled against Trump. The fact remains he had every opportunity to challenge them before people voted.

You didn’t present evidence or fraud because it was too hard, which you acknowledged.

Eliminating legitimate voter‘s ballots after the election because they voted for the opponent is no better than stuffing the ballot box. Both are coups.

Ignored, dismissed, gotten rid of. SSDD.

Harder, not "too hard", especially when like most fraudsters they hide what they are doing.

 

[elektra]

Of course dates matter. Let’s see a source for Gore trying to throw out votes for signature matching.

Source? Where did I ask for sources from you? I will be nice this time.

FLA. DEM: COUNT MILITARY VOTES – ATT’Y GENERAL SAYS FORGET TECHNICALITIES

Florida’s attorney general yesterday broke with his own candidate – Democrat Al Gore – and said overseas military ballots should be counted in the presidential election, even if t…

nypost.com

canvassing-board head Robert Lee said most of the military ballots rejected there did not have witnessed signatures

Hypocrisy on display Gore's lawyers want every vote counted except overseas ballots

The hypocrisy of Al Gore's army of lawyers was never more fully revealed than when it came to counting overseas absentee ballots. All the talk about the tragedy and injustice of disenfranchising vo…

www.goupstate.com

They were armed with directions from Gore's legal team about how to challenge the overseas ballots on grounds of incorrect postmarks or misplaced signatures

 

[Marener]

Ignored, dismissed, gotten rid of. SSDD.

Harder, not "too hard", especially when like most fraudsters they hide what they are doing.

You’re just making excuses to justify the coup, which is the outcome you wanted.

It was “too hard” meaning you (the royal you, referring to Trump and Republicans) didn't even really try. You didn’t try because you had no evidence, just feelings.

And because of your feelings, you justify disenfranchising millions of voters to get what you want.

 

[martybegan]

You’re just making excuses to justify the coup, which is the outcome you wanted.

It was “too hard” meaning you (the royal you, referring to Trump and Republicans) didn't even really try. You didn’t try because you had no evidence, just feelings.

And because of your feelings, you justify disenfranchising millions of voters to get what you want.

And you are excusing anything that got you the result you wanted.

And you will encourage and support trying it again.

The case in Connecticut shows its possible. Once that is shown, any denials lose the certainty you pretend to claim.