Mr. Blue Sky
Still P***** at Yoko
Offline
Not far-fetched.. Not even a little bit.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
He is not going to lose the election.
(mod edit) JOE has nothing to run on. He is senile. And the LAST thing he wants is to run on the record of his eight years with Obama because today we are seeing the SAME results with the economy.
This lockdown is just reminding us how bad it was under Obama.
On Election Night, (mod edit) JOE will make that call to President Trump around 9:30 after discovering he has lost his own home state. He'll be reading his concession from a pad his handlers wrote for him.
you won’t hear from the Limbaugh sycophant.
Unless that clown comes back as a zombie account (again) he gots da ban hammer
Not far-fetched.. Not even a little bit.
The worst case, however, is not that Trump rejects the election outcome. The worst case is that he uses his power to prevent a decisive outcome against him. If Trump sheds all restraint, and if his Republican allies play the parts he assigns them, he could obstruct the emergence of a legally unambiguous victory for Biden in the Electoral College and then in Congress. He could prevent the formation of consensus about whether there is any outcome at all. He could seize on that uncertainty to hold on to power.
Trump’s state and national legal teams are already laying the groundwork for postelection maneuvers that would circumvent the results of the vote count in battleground states. Ambiguities in the Constitution and logic bombs in the Electoral Count Act make it possible to extend the dispute all the way to Inauguration Day, which would bring the nation to a precipice. The Twentieth Amendment is crystal clear that the president’s term in office “shall end” at noon on January 20, but two men could show up to be sworn in. One of them would arrive with all the tools and power of the presidency already in hand.
“We are not prepared for this at all,” Julian Zelizer, a Princeton professor of history and public affairs, told me. “We talk about it, some worry about it, and we imagine what it would be. But few people have actual answers to what happens if the machinery of democracy is used to prevent a legitimate resolution to the election.”