Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2024 05:53:30 -0600
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [OT] Trump wins in Supreme Court. Now what?
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
References: <20240304110817.00006df9@example.com> <us4tm0$u9r6$1@solani.org> <20240304124228.000012e5@example.com> <D9GcnV0hZJw9k3v4nZ2dnZfqnPvGyJ2d@giganews.com> <us5539$39nl9$2@dont-email.me> <Q2OdnYeVg5Bmhnv4nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> <OufGN.468486$PuZ9.129767@fx11.iad> <usgbln$1vp6f$5@dont-email.me>
From: trotsky <gmsingh@email.com>
In-Reply-To: <usgbln$1vp6f$5@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 94
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Nntp-Posting-Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:53:32 +0000
X-Received-Bytes: 4589
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <17bb167da0225d2e$36$2218499$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com>
Bytes: 4967

On 3/8/24 6:48 PM, FPP wrote:
> On 3/7/24 4:09 AM, trotsky wrote:
>> On 3/4/24 1:07 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> On Mar 4, 2024 at 10:49:13 AM PST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" 
>>> <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> BTR1701  <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 4, 2024 at 9:42:28 AM PST, "Rhino" 
>>>>> <no_offline_contact@example.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>   On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 08:42:38 -0800
>>>>>>   suzeeq <suzee@imbris.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>    On 3/4/2024 8:08 AM, Rhino wrote:
>>>>>>>    > Now that Trump has won unanimously in the Supreme Court and 
>>>>>>> will be
>>>>>>>    > allowed to contest the election in Colorado, how does that 
>>>>>>> affect
>>>>>>>    > voting procedures in Colorado and other states that excluded 
>>>>>>> him
>>>>>>>    > from the ballot?
>>>>>>>    >
>>>>>>>    He hasn't won the right to contest the election in CO, he's 
>>>>>>> just won
>>>>>>>    the right to be ON the ballot.
>>>>>>   I don't understand the difference between the two. If he's on the
>>>>>>   ballot, people can vote for him. You're implying that people 
>>>>>> could vote
>>>>>>   for him tomorrow but those votes wouldn't count.
>>>>>>>    > First of all, I'm not completely clear on WHICH ballot(s) the
>>>>>>>    > Colorado Supreme Court excluded him from. Was it just the 
>>>>>>> primary,
>>>>>>>    > just the > actual election in November or both? If it was the
>>>>>>>    > primary, what happens tomorrow when Coloradans go to the polls?
>>>>>>>    > Presumably, the ballot was printed without Trump's name on 
>>>>>>> it. How
>>>>>>>    > will people who want to vote for him do that? Will they have to
>>>>>>>    > write him in? Is that even possible in Colorado? (We got rid 
>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>    > write-in option two or three decades back. I don't remember 
>>>>>>> it even
>>>>>>>    > being discussed so I'm not sure if none of the legislators 
>>>>>>> noticed
>>>>>>>    > or if they were all okay with removing that option.) Or does
>>>>>>>    > Colorado do everything with computer screens that could be 
>>>>>>> easily
>>>>>>>    > changed today to add Trump's name back in?
>>>>>>>    It was for all elections. So it shouldn't affect tomorrow's 
>>>>>>> primary
>>>>>>>    at all. The ballots were printed with his name on them. And 
>>>>>>> yes it's
>>>>>>>    possible to write in names,
>>>>>>   I'm surprised they put his name on the ballot if the court 
>>>>>> decided he
>>>>>>   was ineligible to be a candidate but that certainly makes things 
>>>>>> easier
>>>>>>   tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>> But it's not just tomorrow. People have been voting for several 
>>>>> weeks now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Did they go with ballots with Trump's name on them and then were 
>>>>> going to
>>>>> just
>>>>> not count any Trump votes if the Court upheld Colorado's ruling?
>>>>
>>>> The Colorado ruling was stayed by the courts themselves pending the 
>>>> U.S.
>>>> Supreme Court appeal. Trump's name was never removed.
>>>
>>> Right, but assume the Court upheld Colorado and said they could keep 
>>> Trump off
>>> the ballot. Were they just going to invalidate the votes of everyone 
>>> who had
>>> already voted for Trump before the Court's decision was announced?
>>
>>
>> That would be so weird, it would be like having a marriage annulled or 
>> something.
>>
> 
> Funny... but Thanny and the MAGA's were willing to throw away millions 
> of legally cast votes after Trump lost.
> 
> 17 Red states tried to throw out valid votes by the millions in Georgia, 
> Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania and more.
> 
> Didn't hear a peep out of Thanniford then, did you?


Oath Keeper Troon's mind has fallen down some MAGA rabbit hole.  He's 
fucked.
>