It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Will the Supreme Court decide our next president?

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2020 @ 10:54 PM
link   
So Chris Wallace brought up Amy Coney Barrett during the debate in regards to Trump using the Supreme Court in his favor. There has been a lot of talk in my area regarding the election coming down to a Supreme Court decision but I don't believe that's the way this works.

Doesn't the 12th amendment state that if a president hasn't been decided by a certain time that the House of Representatives will hold a vote to determine the winner? If that's the case, the democrats have put together a solid plan to take the presidency. Using a document that they don't even honor...our Constitution.

Can some of you Constitutional scholars correct me if I'm wrong or perhaps explain your interpretation of the 12th amendment as it could pertain to this election?




posted on Sep, 29 2020 @ 11:08 PM
link   
This next election is going to be a mess. What they should do is have absentee ballots and do a second day of in person voting in the country this time because of covid. They could do the third and fourth, that would help with social distancing and help with the counting of the votes. There should be a neutral police officer in every voting place watching to see if everything is being honest. Keep the honest honest. That extra day would help a lot, but I think it would take an act of congress to declare a two day election like that.



posted on Sep, 29 2020 @ 11:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
This next election is going to be a mess. What they should do is have absentee ballots and do a second day of in person voting in the country this time because of covid. They could do the third and fourth, that would help with social distancing and help with the counting of the votes. There should be a neutral police officer in every voting place watching to see if everything is being honest. Keep the honest honest. That extra day would help a lot, but I think it would take an act of congress to declare a two day election like that.


I don't see why elections have to be a one day affair, especially during a pandemic. Most people work Tuesdays and many don't have time to wait in line. Yeah, there's absentee voting but if they're so worried about fraud make elections a week long process



posted on Sep, 29 2020 @ 11:19 PM
link   
a reply to: bigsnowman
well for ONE, THIS ISNT A PANDEMIC.

How many dead ad dying in the streets...read a book



posted on Sep, 30 2020 @ 02:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Anathros

Yes.

-MM



posted on Sep, 30 2020 @ 08:55 AM
link   
I appreciate the replies but many seem to be missing the point. The democrats seem to be shooting for a 269-269 electoral tie. In which case, Congress appears to decide who the president will be under the 12th amendment.

Depending on how the electoral process plays out, they only need to keep counting ballots in swing states to guarantee that tie. Correct?



posted on Sep, 30 2020 @ 09:02 AM
link   
It really seems like each and every discarded/found/improper ballot will be contested individually and decided by the courts. If it goes all the way up to the Supremes then okay.



posted on Sep, 30 2020 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Anathros
I appreciate the replies but many seem to be missing the point. The democrats seem to be shooting for a 269-269 electoral tie. In which case, Congress appears to decide who the president will be under the 12th amendment.

Depending on how the electoral process plays out, they only need to keep counting ballots in swing states to guarantee that tie. Correct?


Why would they aim for a tie in the E.C. when acquiring just one more elector would get them a win. Seems like a rather remote scenario to game plan for IMHO. I'm sure the Democrats are pleased that they have the House in their back pocket as a contingency, but I'm skeptical they are actively pursuing a tie rather than winning the election outright.



posted on Sep, 30 2020 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: SleeperHasAwakened

originally posted by: Anathros
I appreciate the replies but many seem to be missing the point. The democrats seem to be shooting for a 269-269 electoral tie. In which case, Congress appears to decide who the president will be under the 12th amendment.

Depending on how the electoral process plays out, they only need to keep counting ballots in swing states to guarantee that tie. Correct?


Why would they aim for a tie in the E.C. when acquiring just one more elector would get them a win. Seems like a rather remote scenario to game plan for IMHO. I'm sure the Democrats are pleased that they have the House in their back pocket as a contingency, but I'm skeptical they are actively pursuing a tie rather than winning the election outright.


Because winning (fraud) the election outright won't have the same optics as winning the election using the Constitution as a shield when the history books are written.



posted on Sep, 30 2020 @ 06:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigsnowman

originally posted by: rickymouse
This next election is going to be a mess. What they should do is have absentee ballots and do a second day of in person voting in the country this time because of covid. They could do the third and fourth, that would help with social distancing and help with the counting of the votes. There should be a neutral police officer in every voting place watching to see if everything is being honest. Keep the honest honest. That extra day would help a lot, but I think it would take an act of congress to declare a two day election like that.


I don't see why elections have to be a one day affair, especially during a pandemic. Most people work Tuesdays and many don't have time to wait in line. Yeah, there's absentee voting but if they're so worried about fraud make elections a week long process


This here has always been my biggest problem with the stupid election schedule. Holding elections on a Tuesday during the hours working people are either working or traveling to/from work is a joke. Sure, I can take a partial day off work and lose money, but my family's income is already down 40% as a direct result of the pandemic response. That's mainly due to reduced work hours for my wife because of e-learning, partially due to inventory shortages because of months of idled factories reducing my income.
Skipping part of a work day right now means skipping meals.

Why the favoritism toward retired people and the unemployed?

Have to figure out when early voting happens. Since many of us are either working or managing stupid &#^#ing e-learning most of our waking hours, I hope there's a wide enough schedule to get an early voting vote in.



posted on Sep, 30 2020 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Do most states have early in-person voting?. Illinois I always vote three or four days before the actual election in person.




top topics



 
6

log in

join