the trump election lawsuit thread of dominance

[TwiceHorn 31987]

12 hours ago, Texaspython said:

That Jones Day ship sailed years ago. They rep a lot of the right wing shit bags in Texas. Tom Hicks, the Bushes, etc.. 

Representing moneyed interests or political interests in non-political matters is one thing.  

Representing highly political figures in highly political matters with broad implications for America's institutions is another kettle of fish, entirely.

[SubliminalHorn 6995]

10 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's a fairly serious case, but I'm not sure where the end game is.

We all know that the end game is. Nullify the vote. Throw it to the House. Trump wins. Civil war. 

[TwiceHorn 31987]

2 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

We all know that the end game is. Nullify the vote. Throw it to the House. Trump wins. Civil war. 

Well, that lawsuit is not going far toward that end game.  At all.

Hence the question.

Just more bullshit in the channel I guess.

[burntorangebongos 10809]

So, do you think this pathetic challenge is going to get very far? This is the path on which they want to advance their claim? 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13707]

Just now, burntorangebongos said:

So, do you think this pathetic challenge is going to get very far? This is the path on which they want to advance their claim? 

That will only make trump supporters believe that much more that the fix is in. They believe that the military votes at least 90% for trump. And you can’t convince them otherwise.

[burntorangebongos 10809]

Who cares about the Trumpers, what they think doesn't matter.  I'm talking about what the sane jurors will think once they see this. They are human so it might make them biased because this is despicable. The very reason that absentee voting was invented was for the military soldiers away on duty.  I don't know but I would think this challenge would poison the well against them. 

[TwiceHorn 31987]

15 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

Who cares about the Trumpers, what they think doesn't matter.  I'm talking about what the sane jurors will think once they see this. They are human so it might make them biased because this is despicable. The very reason that absentee voting was invented was for the military soldiers away on duty.  I don't know but I would think this challenge would poison the well against them. 

Almost none of this is subject to trial by jury.  Most every one of these cases present questions of law and statutory interpretation that do not require a jury trial.

I can't find a Nevada case that challenges any particular group of NV votes.  Is this just a Trumpco talking point?

[Texaspython 231]

52 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Representing moneyed interests or political interests in non-political matters is one thing.  

Representing highly political figures in highly political matters with broad implications for America's institutions is another kettle of fish, entirely.

Good point.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

32 minutes ago, Texaspython said:

Good point.

But you are right that Jones Day has been readily identified to one degree or another with the GOP.  Usually in much lower-profile ways.  And they apparently repped Trump a lot pre-presidency in some of his more sane litigation (those that don't require loading the channel with bullshit). Kasowitz Benson seems to be his preferred law firm for yelling and smearing shit.

Kind of like Perkins Coie has been pretty readily identified with the Democratic Party.  But probably no one would have really noticed but for their involvement with the Steele Dossier.

Edited November 10, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Woodrow Call 494]

From The Daily Show. Did I hear an echo in the room?

[Nice Guy Eddie 13707]

Outside of the fact that Trump wants to overturn PA regardless of the law, what is their main tactic?

Isn't PA's law that votes can arrive post-election day as long as they were postmarked by election day?  Is PA following their laws, or was this a special provision that their governor/state lege allowed this year only because of COVID19?

Obviously some states do NOT allow this. I believe that some (most?) states stop accepting mail-in ballots, outside of military, as of 7pm on Election Day. 

Is there even a low chance that the feds will find a way to toss ballots that arrived after Election Day? Do we even know the vote count if those ballots were not counted?

[Horndog 2293]

I can see the Trump campaign filing a bankruptcy case, trying to consolidate all of the lawsuits before the bankruptcy judge, and claiming that the automatic stay prevents the states from certifying the results. 

[Texaspython 231]

20 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

But you are right that Jones Day has been readily identified to one degree or another with the GOP.  Usually in much lower-profile ways.  And they apparently repped Trump a lot pre-presidency in some of his more sane litigation (those that don't require loading the channel with bullshit). Kasowitz Benson seems to be his preferred law firm for yelling and smearing shit.

Kind of like Perkins Coie has been pretty readily identified with the Democratic Party.  But probably no one would have really noticed but for their involvement with the Steele Dossier.

Yeah and that just makes sense. I’ve dealt with them on a couple of things over the years and found them to be exceedingly easy to work with.

[ConferenceRoom 6210]

2 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Outside of the fact that Trump wants to overturn PA regardless of the law, what is their main tactic?

Isn't PA's law that votes can arrive post-election day as long as they were postmarked by election day?  Is PA following their laws, or was this a special provision that their governor/state lege allowed this year only because of COVID19?

Obviously some states do NOT allow this. I believe that some (most?) states stop accepting mail-in ballots, outside of military, as of 7pm on Election Day. 

Is there even a low chance that the feds will find a way to toss ballots that arrived after Election Day? Do we even know the vote count if those ballots were not counted?

The PA Supreme Court ordered it which is unconstitutional; the state legislature has complete control over the election rules. 

[SilasCoade 2622]

Just now, ConferenceRoom said:

The PA Supreme Court ordered it which is unconstitutional; the state legislature has complete control over the election rules. 

How are you on bird law?

[Horndog 2293]

2 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Outside of the fact that Trump wants to overturn PA regardless of the law, what is their main tactic?

Isn't PA's law that votes can arrive post-election day as long as they were postmarked by election day?  Is PA following their laws, or was this a special provision that their governor/state lege allowed this year only because of COVID19?

Obviously some states do NOT allow this. I believe that some (most?) states stop accepting mail-in ballots, outside of military, as of 7pm on Election Day. 

Is there even a low chance that the feds will find a way to toss ballots that arrived after Election Day? Do we even know the vote count if those ballots were not counted?

Pa. statute requires ballots to arrive by close of election day.  Pa. Supreme Court granted an equitable 3 day extension to that. Issue is whether the extension is invalid, so ballots received after election day don't count. 

[TexasEd 8248]

30 minutes ago, Horndog said:

Pa. statute requires ballots to arrive by close of election day.  Pa. Supreme Court granted an equitable 3 day extension to that. Issue is whether the extension is invalid, so ballots received after election day don't count. 

Which is a moot point because Trump was losing badly before the segregated ballots were counted and he still needs 2 others from AZ, NV, and GA

 

Edited November 10, 2020 by TexasEd

[Nice Guy Eddie 13707]

52 minutes ago, Llogg said:

How are you on bird law?

McPoyle v Ponderosa settled bird law once and for all.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Nice Guy Eddie

[BradInATX 9208]

Yeah, talking about the ballots is obfuscating the real point, which is that Trump lost PA by 50k votes even before the late ballots are counted. Who gives a shit about the late ones.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13707]

I'm not following PA closely. Has it been confirmed that they haven't counted the late ballots, or just that they segregated the late ballot vote count and can remove it from the totals if necessary. 

If I'm not mistaken, I believe that SCOTUS allowed this same scenario to occur in NC, and refused to hear a similar case from PA. Barrett didn't participate in either. 

[Gatorubet 30631]

That will only make trump supporters believe that much more that the fix is in. They believe that the military votes at least 90% for trump. And you can’t convince them otherwise.

Gonna make ‘em madder at Libtard Fox News tho

[Gatorubet 30631]

The PA Supreme Court ordered it which is unconstitutional

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Yeah, talking about the ballots is obfuscating the real point, which is that Trump lost PA by 50k votes even before the late ballots are counted. Who gives a shit about the late ones.

I care about getting it right.  IDGAF about Trump, but I do care about ensuring votes are valid going forward, regardless of the candidates in the future.

To your point, stop fucking with this election, as his fate is sealed.  The process  does matter in the big picture of things, with regard to elections in general.

Edited November 10, 2020 by slorch

[Bateshorn 9989]

33 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Yeah, talking about the ballots is obfuscating the real point, which is that Trump lost PA by 50k votes even before the late ballots are counted. Who gives a shit about the late ones.

Again,  that's the stupidity of the whole thing:  Trump should want these votes counted, even if they probably Dem, because if they aren't counted, then PA is done and he's lost. 

Edited November 10, 2020 by Bateshorn

[TexasEd 8248]

8 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Again,  that's the stupidity of the whole thing:  Trump should want these votes counted, even if they probably Dem, because if they aren't counted, then PA is done and he's lost. 

He has lost either way.  It don't make a shit of difference.

[C-Man 27685]

Again,  that's the stupidity of the whole thing:  Trump should want these votes counted, even if they probably Dem, because if they aren't counted, then PA is done and he's lost. 

Like others have said, I think even Trump knows he isn’t overtaking Biden in votes cast. He can only “win” if massive quantities of Biden votes are tossed. His main goal is discrediting and fomenting distrust in the actual election.

[High Plains Drifter 11161]

 

 

 

Can the House do this?

 

 

[Bateshorn 9989]

6 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

 

 

Can the House do this?

 

 

Yes.

Or more directly:  The House can insist on some sort of language during CR negotiations during the next month.  But they have to be willing to shut the govenment down if the Senate refuses.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Bateshorn

[burntorangebongos 10809]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Almost none of this is subject to trial by jury.  Most every one of these cases present questions of law and statutory interpretation that do not require a jury trial.

I can't find a Nevada case that challenges any particular group of NV votes.  Is this just a Trumpco talking point?

Sorry, I thought judges collectively were called Jurists. I meant judges in my post.

[immamac 44199]

15 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Yes.

Or more directly:  The House can insist on some sort of language during CR negotiations during the next month.  But they have to be willing to shut the govenment down if the Senate refuses.

 Sounds good to me. Government shut down till Jan 20 is great.

[Neonmoon 38130]

lol 180

[HenryJames 67116]

[TwiceHorn 31987]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I'm not following PA closely. Has it been confirmed that they haven't counted the late ballots, or just that they segregated the late ballot vote count and can remove it from the totals if necessary. 

If I'm not mistaken, I believe that SCOTUS allowed this same scenario to occur in NC, and refused to hear a similar case from PA. Barrett didn't participate in either. 

Those were only preliminary rulings and they have not refused to hear anything yet.  The Pennsylvania case is pending certiorari, on a normal schedule that would put any ruling far beyond anything relevant.  That is, a response to the cert petition is due 11/25.

You can follow US Supreme Court cases on the election here.  https://www.scotusblog.com/election-litigation/

Edited November 10, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[TwiceHorn 31987]

12 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

Sorry, I thought judges collectively were called Jurists. I meant judges in my post.

I was just trying to inform.

Most of these cases are severely lacking in competent evidence of mal- or misfeasance, so most of the jurists are "laughing" them out of court.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

2 hours ago, ConferenceRoom said:

The PA Supreme Court ordered it which is unconstitutional; the state legislature has complete control over the election rules. 

I don't know that it's wholly unconstitutional.  The scope of that is unclear.

We do know that "state law is virtually inviolate" when it comes to elections.  That is very clear as to legislative law, so long as it is pre-election.  It is less clear about judicial "interpretations" of legislative law. That the interpretations preceded the election by a couple of months works in their favor, as it was post-election judicial interpretations that opened up Florida to Bush v. Gore.

[ConferenceRoom 6210]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

I don't know that it's wholly unconstitutional.  The scope of that is unclear.

We do know that "state law is virtually inviolate" when it comes to elections.  That is very clear as to legislative law, so long as it is pre-election.  It is less clear about judicial "interpretations" of legislative law. That the interpretations preceded the election by a couple of months works in their favor, as it was post-election judicial interpretations that opened up Florida to Bush v. Gore.

I was just being brief; it should have said it was the GOP's contention that the ruling was unconstitutional. 

[TwiceHorn 31987]

26 minutes ago, ConferenceRoom said:

I was just being brief; it should have said it was the GOP's contention that the ruling was unconstitutional. 

Fair enough, that is accurate for sure.  I think it is probably legally unsustainable, but that doesn't mean that it's unconstitutional or something the Supreme Court should be unduly concerned with.

Also, this case raises a pretty interesting question about what states and their courts can "get away with" as far as election law goes.

Although it is currently "configured" as a pro-Trump case, it could have lasting effects that cut both ways.

Edited November 10, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Bateshorn 9989]

13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Those were only preliminary rulings and they have not refused to hear anything yet.  The Pennsylvania case is pending certiorari, on a normal schedule that would put any ruling far beyond anything relevant.  That is, a response to the cert petition is due 11/25.

You can follow US Supreme Court cases on the election here.  https://www.scotusblog.com/election-litigation/

That says to me that PA has convinced the court that the ballots have been segregated, and it won't make any difference, so everyone is taking their sweet time. Which means it's a nothing burger.

[Superhero 8990]

My 2016 PTSD is kicking in again. There's a lot of noise out of the Trump campaign, and Democrats (as far as I see) have not been actively pushing back, relying on some members of the media and twitterverse to do their work. Problem is the Republicans are getting a lot more news coverage, and the endless lies become normalized until more people believe the bullshit.

DNC and Biden Campaign has done an absolute shit job countering QAnon bullshit, stealing the vote. socialists, etc.

I'd like them to get their hands dirty - highlight the racists, the anti-democratic, obstructionist, conniving sons of bitches the likes of Devin Nunez, Ted Cruz, William Barr, Matt Gaetz, Mitch McConnell, etc. They need to starting putting out Lincoln Project'esque ads to fucking pummel the Rs, but they are "too nice". Time to take off the kid gloves and put on the brass knuckles.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/10/democrats-anxious-after-election-performance-435600

Quote

Still, some frustration is bubbling up in the Senate as well. Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.), who lost by 20 points to Republican Tommy Tuberville last week, blamed getting tied to GOP “catch-phrases” as the reason red- and purple-state Democrats took a beating.

“We’re not some demonic cult like we’re portrayed to be,” said Jones. “I was fighting the same battle that Jaime Harrison was fighting, that Mike Espy was fighting, that Cal Cunningham was fighting, that Steve Bullock was fighting. And Democrats have not been able to fully counter the Republican narrative.”

Spoiler

‘We’re not some demonic cult’: Democrats fume over faulty messaging

House Democrats have the majority and are ripping each other to shreds. Senate Democrats fell short for the third cycle in a row, but are only grousing about getting out-messaged by Republicans.

The two caucuses are going about their soul-searching a little differently.

The fallout in the House has been swift. Though Nancy Pelosi’s speakership appears safe, the chair of House Democrats’ campaign arm, Cheri Bustos, announced Monday she wouldn’t run for another term after more than a half dozen Democratic incumbents lost their races.

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, Senate Democrats are expected to easily reelect their leadership team headed by Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who is in the minority at least until two Georgia Senate run-offs in January — and possibly far longer.

Still, some frustration is bubbling up in the Senate as well. Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.), who lost by 20 points to Republican Tommy Tuberville last week, blamed getting tied to GOP “catch-phrases” as the reason red- and purple-state Democrats took a beating.

“We’re not some demonic cult like we’re portrayed to be,” said Jones. “I was fighting the same battle that Jaime Harrison was fighting, that Mike Espy was fighting, that Cal Cunningham was fighting, that Steve Bullock was fighting. And Democrats have not been able to fully counter the Republican narrative.”

While Democrats are relieved that Joe Biden has defeated Donald Trump from the White House, their underperformance down ballot is fueling anxiety among lawmakers in both chambers — about how to govern under Biden and how to fend off more GOP attacks in 2022.

For now, many Democrats are anxiously hoping to sweep in Georgia — a steep task — before concluding this entire election cycle was a debacle for congressional Democrats.

“It ain’t over,” said Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), who offered to go to Georgia to explain to voters that Democrats don’t agree with liberal activists on everything. “I don’t want anyone to think that I am trying to defund the police.”

The two races in Georgia will give the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and Schumer himself one last bite at the majority. Schumer’s fingerprints are all over Senate Democrats’ political strategy, from recruiting to DSCC ad spending to messaging. Though the party fell short in battleground states from Montana and Maine to North Carolina and Iowa, his support in the caucus remains strong.

Members love Schumer’s loyalty to them and his work ethic, factors that far outpace any private grumbling about his centralization of party leadership over the past four years and the continued relegation to the minority.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said no one in the party could work harder than Schumer but said: “Chuck has to understand we need to take a strong look at ourselves.”

“I’ve watched the last three elections: 2016, ‘18 and ‘20. We truly should have been in the majority and it didn’t happen,” said Manchin, who won reelection two years ago in a deep red state. “Whatever our message is, it hasn’t worked. And I would hope that our leadership from the top to bottom understands that. It has not worked. And if we’re going down that path again, we’re in trouble.”

The biggest change in the party’s leadership will likely come at the DSCC, which was run by Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) this cycle. Rep. Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), who just won a Senate seat and ran the DCCC previously, is interested in the job, according to three people familiar with the matter. His office did not comment. The DSCC job is not expected to be settled on Tuesday.

Jones, the sole incumbent Democratic senator to lose, said both party campaign arms need to change their mission. He said Stacey Abrams’ work in Georgia should be a model for the party’s work in individual states, while he contends the “DSCC and DCCC spend too much time investing in candidates and not the electorate. They don’t invest in House districts, they don’t invest in states.”

Unlike Bustos, Cortez Masto was not expected to return to the gig since she’s up for reelection next year in battleground Nevada. And Bustos is likely to be the only leadership casualty in the House, with Pelosi and her two longtime deputies — Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) — expected to easily win reelection in their leadership races next week.

But the fallout will extend far beyond stunting Bustos’ leadership ambitions. At least seven House Democrats lost their reelection — a total that could tick up to around a dozen as several tight races remain uncalled. Before the election, and echoing most election forecasters, Pelosi and Bustos had predicted the party would in fact add seats.

Now Pelosi and her team will have to balance a slim majority brimming with ideological differences and an emboldened GOP minority as they try to navigate the first months of Biden’s administration. A Democratic House is no sure thing in two years.

In the meantime, the House Democratic Caucus has broken out into a full-on food fight, with some of the most prominent progressive and moderate members openly warring with each other over the Election Day losses.

A three-hour caucus call last week turned nasty as centrists said their far-left colleagues cost them seats with progressive calls to defund the police and ban fracking. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) responded in the press, blasting swing district Democrats for not doing enough to shore up their own races by spending on digital advertisements and canvassing.

Now Pelosi and her team will have to balance a slim majority brimming with ideological differences and an emboldened GOP minority as they try to navigate the first months of Biden’s administration. A Democratic House is no sure thing in two years.

In the meantime, the House Democratic Caucus has broken out into a full-on food fight, with some of the most prominent progressive and moderate members openly warring with each other over the Election Day losses.

A three-hour caucus call last week turned nasty as centrists said their far-left colleagues cost them seats with progressive calls to defund the police and ban fracking. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) responded in the press, blasting swing district Democrats for not doing enough to shore up their own races by spending on digital advertisements and canvassing.

 

[TwiceHorn 31987]

9 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

That says to me that PA has convinced the court that the ballots have been segregated, and it won't make any difference, so everyone is taking their sweet time. Which means it's a nothing burger.

There were two issues.  The first was whether the SCt. should enjoin the three-day extension entirely.  It declined to do so.  During that hearing/briefing, the SOS volunteered to segregate the votes so there was no ruling on it.

Later, it came to light that possibly county election officials weren't bound by the SOS's voluntary segregation policy, so Alito ordered them to comply with it.

Pretty much a nothingburger on the segregation issue.  A definite loss on the extraoardinary relief on the three-day extension.

And, as noted, it appears the whole case is a nothingburger as there don't appear to be enough "segregated votes" to change the outcome.

Edited November 10, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Neonmoon 38130]

One side of me is like, they're just doing their jobs. The other side is saying yeah but their jobs is to undermine democracy for money, so fuck em. 

 

[High Plains Drifter 11161]

7 minutes ago, Superhero said:

My 2016 PTSD is kicking in again. There's a lot of noise out of the Trump campaign, and Democrats (as far as I see) have not been actively pushing back, relying on some members of the media and twitterverse to do their work. Problem is the Republicans are getting a lot more news coverage, and the endless lies become normalized until more people believe the bullshit.

DNC and Biden Campaign has done an absolute shit job countering QAnon bullshit, stealing the vote. socialists, etc.

I'd like them to get their hands dirty - highlight the racists, the anti-democratic, obstructionist, conniving sons of bitches the likes of Devin Nunez, Ted Cruz, William Barr, Matt Gaetz, Mitch McConnell, etc. They need to starting putting out Lincoln Project'esque ads to fucking pummel the Rs, but they are "too nice". Time to take off the kid gloves and put on the brass knuckles.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/10/democrats-anxious-after-election-performance-435600

  Reveal hidden contents

‘We’re not some demonic cult’: Democrats fume over faulty messaging

House Democrats have the majority and are ripping each other to shreds. Senate Democrats fell short for the third cycle in a row, but are only grousing about getting out-messaged by Republicans.

The two caucuses are going about their soul-searching a little differently.

The fallout in the House has been swift. Though Nancy Pelosi’s speakership appears safe, the chair of House Democrats’ campaign arm, Cheri Bustos, announced Monday she wouldn’t run for another term after more than a half dozen Democratic incumbents lost their races.

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, Senate Democrats are expected to easily reelect their leadership team headed by Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who is in the minority at least until two Georgia Senate run-offs in January — and possibly far longer.

Still, some frustration is bubbling up in the Senate as well. Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.), who lost by 20 points to Republican Tommy Tuberville last week, blamed getting tied to GOP “catch-phrases” as the reason red- and purple-state Democrats took a beating.

“We’re not some demonic cult like we’re portrayed to be,” said Jones. “I was fighting the same battle that Jaime Harrison was fighting, that Mike Espy was fighting, that Cal Cunningham was fighting, that Steve Bullock was fighting. And Democrats have not been able to fully counter the Republican narrative.”

While Democrats are relieved that Joe Biden has defeated Donald Trump from the White House, their underperformance down ballot is fueling anxiety among lawmakers in both chambers — about how to govern under Biden and how to fend off more GOP attacks in 2022.

For now, many Democrats are anxiously hoping to sweep in Georgia — a steep task — before concluding this entire election cycle was a debacle for congressional Democrats.

“It ain’t over,” said Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), who offered to go to Georgia to explain to voters that Democrats don’t agree with liberal activists on everything. “I don’t want anyone to think that I am trying to defund the police.”

The two races in Georgia will give the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and Schumer himself one last bite at the majority. Schumer’s fingerprints are all over Senate Democrats’ political strategy, from recruiting to DSCC ad spending to messaging. Though the party fell short in battleground states from Montana and Maine to North Carolina and Iowa, his support in the caucus remains strong.

Members love Schumer’s loyalty to them and his work ethic, factors that far outpace any private grumbling about his centralization of party leadership over the past four years and the continued relegation to the minority.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said no one in the party could work harder than Schumer but said: “Chuck has to understand we need to take a strong look at ourselves.”

“I’ve watched the last three elections: 2016, ‘18 and ‘20. We truly should have been in the majority and it didn’t happen,” said Manchin, who won reelection two years ago in a deep red state. “Whatever our message is, it hasn’t worked. And I would hope that our leadership from the top to bottom understands that. It has not worked. And if we’re going down that path again, we’re in trouble.”

The biggest change in the party’s leadership will likely come at the DSCC, which was run by Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) this cycle. Rep. Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), who just won a Senate seat and ran the DCCC previously, is interested in the job, according to three people familiar with the matter. His office did not comment. The DSCC job is not expected to be settled on Tuesday.

Jones, the sole incumbent Democratic senator to lose, said both party campaign arms need to change their mission. He said Stacey Abrams’ work in Georgia should be a model for the party’s work in individual states, while he contends the “DSCC and DCCC spend too much time investing in candidates and not the electorate. They don’t invest in House districts, they don’t invest in states.”

Unlike Bustos, Cortez Masto was not expected to return to the gig since she’s up for reelection next year in battleground Nevada. And Bustos is likely to be the only leadership casualty in the House, with Pelosi and her two longtime deputies — Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) — expected to easily win reelection in their leadership races next week.

But the fallout will extend far beyond stunting Bustos’ leadership ambitions. At least seven House Democrats lost their reelection — a total that could tick up to around a dozen as several tight races remain uncalled. Before the election, and echoing most election forecasters, Pelosi and Bustos had predicted the party would in fact add seats.

Now Pelosi and her team will have to balance a slim majority brimming with ideological differences and an emboldened GOP minority as they try to navigate the first months of Biden’s administration. A Democratic House is no sure thing in two years.

In the meantime, the House Democratic Caucus has broken out into a full-on food fight, with some of the most prominent progressive and moderate members openly warring with each other over the Election Day losses.

A three-hour caucus call last week turned nasty as centrists said their far-left colleagues cost them seats with progressive calls to defund the police and ban fracking. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) responded in the press, blasting swing district Democrats for not doing enough to shore up their own races by spending on digital advertisements and canvassing.

Now Pelosi and her team will have to balance a slim majority brimming with ideological differences and an emboldened GOP minority as they try to navigate the first months of Biden’s administration. A Democratic House is no sure thing in two years.

In the meantime, the House Democratic Caucus has broken out into a full-on food fight, with some of the most prominent progressive and moderate members openly warring with each other over the Election Day losses.

A three-hour caucus call last week turned nasty as centrists said their far-left colleagues cost them seats with progressive calls to defund the police and ban fracking. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) responded in the press, blasting swing district Democrats for not doing enough to shore up their own races by spending on digital advertisements and canvassing.

 

 

democrats suck so bad at messaging. same as it ever was.

 

[High Plains Drifter 11161]

34 minutes ago, immamac said:

 Sounds good to me. Government shut down till Jan 20 is great.

 

Except that a lot of people get fucked over in a shutdown. Add that to the economic crisis we are already in.

And somehow, I don't think a shutdown means dOTarD has to stop playing golf.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

34 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

lol 180

That's comforting.  That lawsuit had some potentially scary implications with regard to how poll workers were operating the tabulator machines.  And supported by actual evidence.

It appears, though, that the actual evidence pretty much encompassed the entirety of the problem:  a handful of votes.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

3 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

One side of me is like, they're just doing their jobs. The other side is saying yeah but their jobs is to undermine democracy for money, so fuck em. 

 

Yeah, I'm kind of torn on this.

I will offer this:  criminal defendants are entitled to a defense under the Constitution.  I will rarely criticize a defense lawyer for their "choice" of client.

This, however, is a civil matter, where no one is entitled to (much of) anything.  And the ramifications of this are pretty nasty.

And I might tend to except the associate "baby lawyer" from criticism because they may have little choice.  She's not a baby, though, and seems to have voluntarily taken on poltiical clients and causes.  https://www.porterwright.com/carolyn-b-mcgee/

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

I don’t understand PA. 
the PA supreme court’s job is to interpret state law, right?  So if the 3 day extension was granted before voting started, it’s not a change during or after the election, right?  And they agreed to it/created it, right?  And it doesn’t violate any federal laws, right?  So where’s the illegality?

and, shouldn’t the lawsuit have been filed after the extension was announced, instead of after the election?  There’s no remedy now. 

[TwiceHorn 31987]

7 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I don’t understand PA. 
the PA supreme court’s job is to interpret state law, right?  So if the 3 day extension was granted before voting started, it’s not a change during or after the election, right?  And they agreed to it/created it, right?  And it doesn’t violate any federal laws, right?  So where’s the illegality?

and, shouldn’t the lawsuit have been filed after the extension was announced, instead of after the election?  There’s no remedy now. 

Well, that's the problem.  There's no real authority on how far a court can go with a state law.

The Supreme Court can find that it violates the "electors and elections" clauses of Article II, or the Equal Protection Clause.  Or it could say that it has no ability to review it at all.

The case was "filed" at the Supreme Court on 9/28, 20 days after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled, as a motion to stay the judgment of the PA SCt.  That was denied and essentially converted into a petition for cert.

So, it's pretty timely as far as it goes.

Edited November 10, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[bluto 4980]

Is there a place with all of the litigation cases summarized by state? Not in overly great detail but a

PA - 3 day window, philly poll watchers (right?)
NV - non residents voting

[Neonmoon 38130]

2 minutes ago, bluto said:

Is there a place with all of the litigation cases summarized by state? Not in overly great detail but a

PA - 3 day window, philly poll watchers (right?)
NV - non residents voting

https://time.com/5908505/trump-lawsuits-biden-wins/

 

[TwiceHorn 31987]

2 minutes ago, bluto said:

Is there a place with all of the litigation cases summarized by state? Not in overly great detail but a

PA - 3 day window, philly poll watchers (right?)
NV - non residents voting

Not really.  Democracydocket.com has a lot of them that are in early stages.

As noted above, those that are in the appeals courts or closer to Supreme Court review are at scotusblog.com.