Good to know, but isn't that different from the legislature sending electors to the convention to have them vote contrary to the popular vote in their state?
Yes, but I'm merely pointing out that there have been electoral disputes before that were rectified after election day. In that way, it's similar and it's reasonable to accept that Trump would want to exhaust all avenues. There is another tidbit in there I hope people catch and it's this-------(...the elections in each state were marked by electoral fraud and threats of violence against Republican voters)
Little to no safeguards in many states to ensure a. that only citizens vote.. and they only vote once. b. that the citizens are the ones casting the ballot c. that they are being counted properly and fairly. d. that computers are not flipping the votes e. that a full set of impartial observers have useful remedies when irregularities are documented. There are myraid other problems that a future campaign will not be able to solve... if the Supreme Court does not use this case to secure our democracy and our votes. Trump winning or losing is of secondary importance. Frankly I think the court must hear this case and make a ruling which forces states to make sure our votes are counted once... fully and properly.
Do you believe the republican governors who said their states' elections were free and fair are lying, then? In on the Great Gonspiracy?
clowning while Rome burns... anything to support the party line. and don't give me some pro Trump shit... I already said that its not my concern about this. My concern is the future integrity of our vote in the US.
These are baseless allegations. There are safeguards and secondary measures to ensure election security. The failure or fraud rate is 0.00006%. You’re more likely to get struck by lightning.