Biden vs Trump 2020 - vote now and discuss!
Comments
-
Biden
i'm not a big fan of the political theatre that is CNN editorializing, but jake tapper did a great piece called "Thank you President Trump". he started with actual trump accomplishments, but then went on to thank trump for letting partisan treasonous (my word) republicans who have shown the world who they are, that they put party over country, and were willing to go to any lengths to retain power in the WH, by signing on to trump's last attempt at subverting democracy.Merkin Baller said:https://twitter.com/johnastoehr/status/1337466677374545920?s=21
“Suicide bombers” is the best description I’ve heard to date for the house republicans & anyone else backing Trump’s efforts to overthrow the election. Does anyone really expect these people to move forward and work in good faith with the Biden administration?
126 of them. unreal.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
BidenAbout to make $3k+ off of this election. This is the best betting market to take advantage of irrational bettors.0
-
BidenElectoral College vote: State by state
https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/14/politics/2020-electoral-college-vote-tracker/index.html
Falling down,...not staying down0 -
BidenOh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win
0 -
BidenStephen Miller says "alternate slate of electors" will choose trump and be sent to congress. these people should be charged with treason, seriously.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0
-
That article saved the best line for last:mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win
"[Biden's] victory was certified last month after a partial state recount verified and even extended his lead over Trump."0 -
Biden
4-3. Frightening.mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley0 -
Agreed, if there's no repercussions for these actions, there's nothing stopping these people (or others) from doing it again.HughFreakingDillon said:Stephen Miller says "alternate slate of electors" will choose trump and be sent to congress. these people should be charged with treason, seriously.0 -
Biden
how is that frightening? the burden to prove a case is worthy of looking at is substantially less than the burden to prove the case itself. highly unlikely the case would have gone 4-3.OnWis97 said:
4-3. Frightening.mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-winYour boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
Biden
Yes, maybe. Whether some of the practices are legal in the state are a relevant argument. The question is really about the relief being sought. Did the 3 dissenters believe that 220k votes should be disqualified for following the process put forth by the state's election board? We don't know. You could rule the practices as unconstitutional in the state but provide no relief, simply mandating a change for the next election.OnWis97 said:
4-3. Frightening.mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win0 -
Biden
The merits of this case were reviewed. It wasn't thrown out for lack of standing. I read that arguments were heard Saturday.HughFreakingDillon said:
how is that frightening? the burden to prove a case is worthy of looking at is substantially less than the burden to prove the case itself. highly unlikely the case would have gone 4-3.OnWis97 said:
4-3. Frightening.mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win0 -
Bidenmrussel1 said:
The merits of this case were reviewed. It wasn't thrown out for lack of standing. I read that arguments were heard Saturday.HughFreakingDillon said:
how is that frightening? the burden to prove a case is worthy of looking at is substantially less than the burden to prove the case itself. highly unlikely the case would have gone 4-3.OnWis97 said:
4-3. Frightening.mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win
I guess I should have read closer...I viewed it as "the case" and apparently it was "whether we'll hear the case."
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley0 -
Biden
No you were right. It was heard.OnWis97 said:mrussel1 said:
The merits of this case were reviewed. It wasn't thrown out for lack of standing. I read that arguments were heard Saturday.HughFreakingDillon said:
how is that frightening? the burden to prove a case is worthy of looking at is substantially less than the burden to prove the case itself. highly unlikely the case would have gone 4-3.OnWis97 said:
4-3. Frightening.mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win
I guess I should have read closer...I viewed it as "the case" and apparently it was "whether we'll hear the case."0 -
Biden
And Wisconsin has officially voted for Biden in the EC. It's done and done.OnWis97 said:mrussel1 said:
The merits of this case were reviewed. It wasn't thrown out for lack of standing. I read that arguments were heard Saturday.HughFreakingDillon said:
how is that frightening? the burden to prove a case is worthy of looking at is substantially less than the burden to prove the case itself. highly unlikely the case would have gone 4-3.OnWis97 said:
4-3. Frightening.mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win
I guess I should have read closer...I viewed it as "the case" and apparently it was "whether we'll hear the case."0 -
As I understand it, this was a fun side note from SCOTUS' ruling on Texas' lawsuit Friday night.OnWis97 said:mrussel1 said:
The merits of this case were reviewed. It wasn't thrown out for lack of standing. I read that arguments were heard Saturday.HughFreakingDillon said:
how is that frightening? the burden to prove a case is worthy of looking at is substantially less than the burden to prove the case itself. highly unlikely the case would have gone 4-3.OnWis97 said:
4-3. Frightening.mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win
I guess I should have read closer...I viewed it as "the case" and apparently it was "whether we'll hear the case."
7 judges refused to hear the case based on standing alone. 2 said they would have heard it, but would have dismissed it, which I believe is more a statement to the merits of the case (or lack thereof) as opposed to the standing.
(If I have this wrong, feel free to correct, I'm far from an expert in these things)0 -
Bidenmrussel1 said:
And Wisconsin has officially voted for Biden in the EC. It's done and done.OnWis97 said:mrussel1 said:
The merits of this case were reviewed. It wasn't thrown out for lack of standing. I read that arguments were heard Saturday.HughFreakingDillon said:
how is that frightening? the burden to prove a case is worthy of looking at is substantially less than the burden to prove the case itself. highly unlikely the case would have gone 4-3.OnWis97 said:
4-3. Frightening.mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win
I guess I should have read closer...I viewed it as "the case" and apparently it was "whether we'll hear the case."That I knew. Though I've seen mixed messages. Sometimes I hear we know THAT the electors are voting today but not WHO they vote for until the January 6 meetings.It's kind of hard to deny that this is the most archaic convoluted mess of a way for an election to go down, even if the norms do hold up. But I miss the days when we didn't follow it so closely because we didn't need to.1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley0 -
BidenSo Trump is set to lose again today, huh? So much losing!www.myspace.com0
-
Biden
that's just it. when did anyone ever pay attention to the EC vote except hardcore political nerds?OnWis97 said:mrussel1 said:
And Wisconsin has officially voted for Biden in the EC. It's done and done.OnWis97 said:mrussel1 said:
The merits of this case were reviewed. It wasn't thrown out for lack of standing. I read that arguments were heard Saturday.HughFreakingDillon said:
how is that frightening? the burden to prove a case is worthy of looking at is substantially less than the burden to prove the case itself. highly unlikely the case would have gone 4-3.OnWis97 said:
4-3. Frightening.mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win
I guess I should have read closer...I viewed it as "the case" and apparently it was "whether we'll hear the case."That I knew. Though I've seen mixed messages. Sometimes I hear we know THAT the electors are voting today but not WHO they vote for until the January 6 meetings.It's kind of hard to deny that this is the most archaic convoluted mess of a way for an election to go down, even if the norms do hold up. But I miss the days when we didn't follow it so closely because we didn't need to.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
Biden
Yes, that's right for the US SCOTUS. But to be super accurate, the two dissenting judges only said they would deny injunctive relief. That's basically saying they would not have stopped any processes for the EC. That usually means the case was unlikely to succeed in the eyes of the judges. The two justices feel that any case where they have original jurisdiction (State vs a state) should be heard.Merkin Baller said:
As I understand it, this was a fun side note from SCOTUS' ruling on Texas' lawsuit Friday night.OnWis97 said:mrussel1 said:
The merits of this case were reviewed. It wasn't thrown out for lack of standing. I read that arguments were heard Saturday.HughFreakingDillon said:
how is that frightening? the burden to prove a case is worthy of looking at is substantially less than the burden to prove the case itself. highly unlikely the case would have gone 4-3.OnWis97 said:
4-3. Frightening.mrussel1 said:Oh look! Another delicious loss for Trump!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/530107-wisconsin-supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-overturn-biden-win
I guess I should have read closer...I viewed it as "the case" and apparently it was "whether we'll hear the case."
7 judges refused to hear the case based on standing alone. 2 said they would have heard it, but would have dismissed it, which I believe is more a statement to the merits of the case (or lack thereof) as opposed to the standing.
(If I have this wrong, feel free to correct, I'm far from an expert in these things)
The ruling today was from WI supreme court.0 -
Merkin Baller said:
Agreed, if there's no repercussions for these actions, there's nothing stopping these people (or others) from doing it again.HughFreakingDillon said:Stephen Miller says "alternate slate of electors" will choose trump and be sent to congress. these people should be charged with treason, seriously.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 278 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help







