About the emergent GOP theory that the VP has unilateral power to reject state electors
-
wrote on 6 Jan 2021, 12:04 last edited by jon-nyc 1 Jun 2021, 12:09
Lots of people have asked how the GOP squares this with Federalism.
But how do they square this with originalism? Do they think the founders meant to give one man veto power over whether to accept state electors but just didn’t word it all that clearly? Keep in mind that back then VP wasn’t even its own office to be sought, it was the loser of the presidential race. But they gave him veto power over state-chosen electors? That’s what South Carolina and Virginia etc. thought they were ratifying?
What do they make of the fact that the framers themselves never behaved like they had this power? Both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were sitting Vice Presidents when they themselves were on the ballot for President, after all.
I’m beginning to think this theory is a little ad hoc...
-
wrote on 6 Jan 2021, 12:12 last edited by
The idea that a single man who by definition is not expected to be objective could have the power to overturn a Presidential election doesn't exactly make much sense.
.
Whether it's actually the case or not, it's an absolutely ludicrous concept. -
The idea that a single man who by definition is not expected to be objective could have the power to overturn a Presidential election doesn't exactly make much sense.
.
Whether it's actually the case or not, it's an absolutely ludicrous concept.wrote on 6 Jan 2021, 12:58 last edited by@doctor-phibes said in About the emergent GOP theory that the VP has unilateral power to reject state electors:
The idea that a single man who by definition is not expected to be objective could have the power to overturn a Presidential election doesn't exactly make much sense.
.
Whether it's actually the case or not, it's an absolutely ludicrous concept.If I read things correctly, Pence is tasked with handing over results. The VP does not have the power to change those results. At best, he could sit on them for a day or three.
-
@doctor-phibes said in About the emergent GOP theory that the VP has unilateral power to reject state electors:
The idea that a single man who by definition is not expected to be objective could have the power to overturn a Presidential election doesn't exactly make much sense.
.
Whether it's actually the case or not, it's an absolutely ludicrous concept.If I read things correctly, Pence is tasked with handing over results. The VP does not have the power to change those results. At best, he could sit on them for a day or three.
wrote on 6 Jan 2021, 13:32 last edited by@jolly said in About the emergent GOP theory that the VP has unilateral power to reject state electors:
@doctor-phibes said in About the emergent GOP theory that the VP has unilateral power to reject state electors:
The idea that a single man who by definition is not expected to be objective could have the power to overturn a Presidential election doesn't exactly make much sense.
.
Whether it's actually the case or not, it's an absolutely ludicrous concept.If I read things correctly, Pence is tasked with handing over results. The VP does not have the power to change those results. At best, he could sit on them for a day or three.
Somebody needs to tell President Trump.
-
wrote on 6 Jan 2021, 13:51 last edited by
Well, Trump’s Trump.
But Cruz and Hawley know better.
-
wrote on 6 Jan 2021, 13:56 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in About the emergent GOP theory that the VP has unilateral power to reject state electors:
But Cruz and Hawley know better.
They should yet they don’t act like it.
Cowards destroying the GOP
Worse than treason : No amount of rationalizing can change the fact that the majority of the Republican Party is advocating for the overthrow of an American election. -
wrote on 6 Jan 2021, 15:15 last edited by
It's a crooked election.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
wrote on 6 Jan 2021, 16:04 last edited by
Treason, sedition, end of democracy.
The only thing I am curious about is what is the next level of rhetoric? I am not creative enough to know what else can be imagined to scare sheep.
-
wrote on 6 Jan 2021, 16:09 last edited by
@jolly said in About the emergent GOP theory that the VP has unilateral power to reject state electors:
It's a crooked election.
You and one or two others here keep saying that. I really doubt it.
-
@jon-nyc said in About the emergent GOP theory that the VP has unilateral power to reject state electors:
But Cruz and Hawley know better.
They should yet they don’t act like it.
Cowards destroying the GOP
Worse than treason : No amount of rationalizing can change the fact that the majority of the Republican Party is advocating for the overthrow of an American election.wrote on 6 Jan 2021, 16:14 last edited by@axtremus said in About the emergent GOP theory that the VP has unilateral power to reject state electors:
@jon-nyc said in About the emergent GOP theory that the VP has unilateral power to reject state electors:
But Cruz and Hawley know better.
They should yet they don’t act like it.
Cowards destroying the GOP
Worse than treason : No amount of rationalizing can change the fact that the majority of the Republican Party is advocating for the overthrow of an American election.You misspelt crooked.
-
Treason, sedition, end of democracy.
The only thing I am curious about is what is the next level of rhetoric? I am not creative enough to know what else can be imagined to scare sheep.
wrote on 6 Jan 2021, 16:31 last edited by@loki said in About the emergent GOP theory that the VP has unilateral power to reject state electors:
Treason, sedition, end of democracy.
The only thing I am curious about is what is the next level of rhetoric? I am not creative enough to know what else can be imagined to scare sheep.
It’s sort of implied but you forgot ‘rigged election’.
