Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
No supreme court majority, (Original Post) Mendocino Nov 2016 OP
At least with a 4-4 court, they can't easily pull another "Florida 2000" BlueStreak Nov 2016 #1
Like instant replay, Mendocino Nov 2016 #2
So, by law what exactly happens if an entire state's election results are called into question? Crash2Parties Nov 2016 #3
In 2000, Bush v. Gore, I believe SCOTUS overturned a lower court ruling... Princess Turandot Nov 2016 #4
Q: do they have to appoint Comrade Trumpski? Crash2Parties Nov 2016 #5
It's not they want 4-4, Mendocino Nov 2016 #6

Crash2Parties

(6,017 posts)
3. So, by law what exactly happens if an entire state's election results are called into question?
Thu Nov 3, 2016, 02:17 AM
Nov 2016

What if Trump gets a little help from Putin? More specifically, Putin's hackers. They won't need to actually break in and change votes (although some states systems have security weak enough that it could be done). All they have to do is either,

A.)Trigger a massive DDOS attack so that American segments of the Internet are unusable Tuesday night and counties cannot update to their central state office.
or,
B.)Simply break into enough systems, and make it obvious they did so. No need to do anything else, just provide Trump with enough that he can call the election results into question.

Or both. Do 'B' and use 'A' as a diversion.

Princess Turandot

(4,787 posts)
4. In 2000, Bush v. Gore, I believe SCOTUS overturned a lower court ruling...
Thu Nov 3, 2016, 03:38 AM
Nov 2016

ordering the recount to go forward. With a 4-4 tie with the current court, the lower court ruling would have been upheld.

They obviously don't want a Dem SCOTUS appointment. But the 4-4 tie has gone against the conservatives more often than not this year, esp. in the various cases brought against Republican Secs of State on voting changes.

Crash2Parties

(6,017 posts)
5. Q: do they have to appoint Comrade Trumpski?
Thu Nov 3, 2016, 01:13 PM
Nov 2016

Or are there arcane rules about a group they can choose from, as happens if no one garnered 270 electorals?

Mendocino

(7,504 posts)
6. It's not they want 4-4,
Thu Nov 3, 2016, 01:37 PM
Nov 2016

but that they wanted no risk of an Obama appointee, even a moderate one. By putting it off for however long and the RW tendency to circumvent congress by relying on a right leaning court, it works to their advantage. They didn't want a left friendly court in case of another election stalemate.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»No supreme court majority...