• quixotic120@lemmy.worldEnglish
    28·
    11 hours ago

    On the last point there is a precedent to not bother when the Supreme Court is stacked against you, and the Supreme Court of 2000 was outright balanced compared to the kook show of today

    When George w won Florida under fairly suspect terms in 2000 gore pushed it a bit and probably should’ve pushed it more. The recount was sketch as fuck, the margin was literally like 500 votes for the entire state, it was later found that a bunch of counties never actually did the recount, George’s brother was the governor, his cousin at Fox News made the first call that Florida and the election went to him, just a lot of fuckery all around. And there was a lot more to it than that but that’s the stuff they couldn’t bring up in court for various reasons.

    Gore pushed back and went to the Supreme Court with it and lost.

    So say there was strong evidence beyond major statistical anomalies. Do you think the stacked court system isn’t going to do everything possible to shoot down anything possible to actually litigating it? The democrats are well aware the only chance they would possibly have is if they literally had the most airtight evidence known to man of fraud, like elon himself admitting fraud with all the receipts to back it up, and even then they’d probably hit some kind of roadblock

    Anyway I think what people are referring to is this letter about bullet ballots:

    https://substack.com/home/post/p-151721941

    It’s an interesting point that is unverifiable and could only be investigated by the current admin but see above. Given they only have about 5 hours left and frankly trump has been acting as president since he was elected anyway I don’t think it would matter even if the above was moot

    • Anti-Face Weapon@lemmy.world
      1·
      2 hours ago

      I will say that I think the discourse around the 2000 elections is generally very flawed. The SC ruled that you cannot do recounts only of select counties, which is a ruling that is actually pretty fair and reasonable. Furthermore, Florida later did a full recount and Bush won the state.

      • quixotic120@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        31 minutes ago

        So like fine, you have to review the whole state? Fine. But then address the other nonsense too. Address that tens of thousands of paper ballots were incompatible with machine counting and somehow had to be discarded even though they were easily human verifiable. Explain why these ballots were 3x more likely to be discarded in precincts that had a black majority.

        Explain why NORC reviewed the ballots that voting machines rejected from the entire state and found it would’ve resulted in a gore win, albeit a very thin one