Will the general election cancel, and Presidential succession happen in the Fall?

  • Thread starter Thread starter esieffe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

esieffe

Guest
With primaries being postponed here and there, and the length of time it will take to have a medically sound and available treatment /vaccine, what are the odd that a Presidential election will have to wait? This might mean the presidential “succession ladder” might take over. Speaker of the house, etc.
It isn’t hysteria, it’s math. Your thoughts?
 
Last edited:
We’re probably still going to have the election. The conventions might be cancelled and the candidates chosen through some sort of virtual convention process, but it seems pretty clear that it’s likely to be Biden vs. incumbent Trump at this point. Unless the Cuomo for President movement gains momentum, but I doubt it will, given that Cuomo is up to his neck in COVID cases at this point.
 
If the election takes place, and it could very well, even though I have doubts, there will be a carload of lawsuits from the losers, blaming the fairness of elections taking place during a global pandemic where certain jurisdictions are under orders to stay home.
 
There will be a carload of whatever the Democrats can find to throw at Trumpy if they lose.
Just like they’ve been doing since day 1.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
There will be a carload of whatever the Democrats can find to throw at Trumpy if he loses.
Just like they’ve been doing since day 1.
Click to expand...
I guess you were not around when the forum was discussing Obama’s grade school? Trump has not been held to account for many of the things he did as an adult – I won’t give you the laundry list but I can.

As to the election, who would a loser sue? The board of election for letting the balloting proceed? That sounds like a loser to me.
 
I’m not sure how that will work out, but I’m very sure that Our Lord would shake his head at the divisive, politically-oriented political comments we are seeing here on this site.
 
I mistyped, I was in a hurry. I have now corrected the post, nevertheless I think it is clear what I meant and not planning to argue it with anyone.
God Bless

P.S. No, I was not around when “the forum was discussing Obama” and probably would have ignored 90 percent of it if I had been.
 
Last edited:
It’s too far away for me to work myself into a snit over.
 
Catfinger77 said:
I’m very sure that Our Lord would shake his head at the divisive, politically-oriented political comments we are seeing here on this site.
Click to expand...
And in the world at large. It is very tiresome regardless of what side one supports.
I realize that for some people it is an intellectual exercise, like Monday-morning quarterbacking the football game, but too many get overly emotionally wrapped up in politics.
 
Nepperhan said:
As to the election, who would a loser sue? The board of election for letting the balloting proceed? That sounds like a loser to me.
Click to expand...
So many “thought we’d never see’s” have come and gone. My guess is they would sue what ever state election official that certifies the state’s results. State secretary of State. The primaries in how many states have been postponed? Of course, such cases could be thrown out as an “act of God…”

Here at the end of March, the primary epicenter of New York is said not to be near it’s peak. How long will states that are still low on the official count such as West Virginia and Kentucky take before they peak? The election won’t be canceled but will it be stalled? If so, what will happen then?

Election officials doing their due diligence might need to start thinking about that, if not the US congress. If the 1918 pandemic had happened in 1920 we might already know. If we had thought more about these type of things, i.e. pandemics years ago, we might have been better prepared this time.

I don’t blame Donald Trump or Barack Obama. But when this is over, I hope we can bring something positive out of this experience. When was the strategic oil reserve created? How about a strategic medical reserve? The Boy Scouts [I took the motto seriously] Be prepared takes on unique meaning right now.
 
esieffe said:
The primaries in how many states have been postponed? Of course, such cases could be thrown out as an “act of God…”
Click to expand...
Yes and no. Mostly no. Cancelling a primary is elective – it is not in any way mandatory. In the same vein, primaries are not mandatory. So could a loser sue and say the primary or the election should have been cancelled due to the pandemic? I think not.
 
esieffe said:
If the election takes place, and it could very well, even though I have doubts, there will be a carload of lawsuits from the losers, blaming the fairness of elections taking place during a global pandemic where certain jurisdictions are under orders to stay home.
Click to expand...
hawk, esq.

That just doesn’t matter.

I’m one of the handful of people that actually read the legal opinions in the 2000 fiasco. A few things to note:
  1. The Constitution doesn’t even call for a a presidential election. Rather, it calls for states to send electors. While most states were having elections by the early 1800s, some legislatures continued to appoint the electors directly.
  2. For an interesting twist, it is the legislature, not the state government or law, in which this is invested. If a state legislature decided to appoint the electors, and the governor tried to veto, my guess is that the legislature’s choice prevails.
  3. As a consequence, the USSC sent one of the cases back to the Florida SC, with instructions that if it had ruled on the basis of state law, it was upheld, but if federal, overruled, as the issue was state law.
  4. Most of us were taught in high school civics that nowhere does the Constitution grant power to the states. This is simply wrong, as, at a minimum,
    a) unrestrained authority to choose electors,
    b) the repeal of prohibition granted granted carte blanche to the stats to regulate alcohol–even in ways that would otherwise violate the commerce clause or equal protection
  5. Congress, not the courts, has the jurisdiction to count the electoral votes and handle disputes (there have been cases in which competing delegations of electors were sent).
So, once Congress counts the winner, it’s over. No room for the courts. There can be some court wrangling before the electoral college meets, but the USSC in 2000 deferred to the law, rather than making the choice (although it did issue nine separate options!)

While I’m at it,
6. The operative vote in Bush v. Gore was not 5-4, as widely reported, but 7-2. There were two votes. 7-2 found that Florida could not do what Gore wanted (basically, that the rules couldn’t be changed after the fact). 5-4 was the vote to stop the counting, with 2 justices from the 7 wanting to allow it to continue. The order to stop was not a declaration of victory, but rather noting a deadline something like 26 hours away for states to make their submissions for a “safe harbor” position under which their delegates couldn’t be challenged. It was a recognition that it wasn’t conceivable that rules could be put in place for yet another count, the count conducted, and judicial review concluded by that deadline. The 4 said that the state was entitle to try. (disclosure: I would have been one of the 7 that joined the 4).

So, anyway, the election isn’t really a thing, and electors can be appointed in any event.
 
Last edited:
The democrats haven’t even finished with their primaries yet so who knows.

By November, we will be through the fire so at this point I don’t see why would
not have an eection. Howeve r, considering the democrats behavior over the
past 4 years, I am sure they have several plans they are working on so who
knows what they have up their sleeve. They probably have another impeachment planned for July or August!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top