Electoral College Question : If Ohio is thrown out then Chimpy still

[In Truth We Trust]

gets sworn in because the current count with Ohio is 286-252. If you take Ohio away then it is 266-252. Don't we need to get Fla. thrown out too?

My understanding is that there will not be a separate democratic slate of Ohio electors submitted therefore we are F**ked regardless. Please correct me if I am wrong (and I hope I am).

[tk2kewl]

1. need 270 to win

266 is not enough

so it would go to congress and bushCo would win anyway

[In Truth We Trust]

4. That is my understanding too. Then we should be actively considering plan

of action such as Protest a-la-Kiev

[Truman01]

5. No, you only need a majority of the electors empanelled...

If Ohio's electors are thrown out then 266 will be enough to win. We had this discussion on another thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=148839&mesg_id=149638

[bemis12]

10. The debate

has been going on for years, and with better scholars than you and I. They haven't reached a consesus, so declaring someone "wrong" seems a bit extreme.

That said, the majority of Consitutional scholars fall int he "need 270" camp.

[Truman01]

16. See the other thread.. That isn't the case, the

Article is quite clear as to the definition of a majority. Part of my expertise is election law, but if you read the Constitutional amendment in the above thread, you don't need a law degree to see that a simply majority of the electors empanelled are enough to win. I have worked in this all my life and have never seen an "expert" claim that 270 is the magic number, do you have a link or authority for that?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=148839&mesg_id=149638

TC

[Peace Patriot]

36. We need clarification...

...for those new to the issue, or those who are pressed for time, or whose heads are swimming with facts! I just got clear myself that OHIO CAN PUT KERRY IN THE WHITE HOUSE! (Really, I thought we needed FLA or some others--and I've been following this very closely the whole time, and have read ALL of the statistical studies!) So...

Currently...

Electoral Vote

Bush 286 (winner)
Kerry 252

Is that right?

If OH Electoral Vote is deducted from Bush and added to Kerry, we get:

Bush 266
Kerry 272 (winner)


Right?

If OH Electoral Vote is deducted from Bush, but is NOT added to Kerry (thus disenfranchising all OH voters):

Bush 266 (winner)
Kerry 252

This last result doesn't seem like it would be very acceptable, politically, to either party (disenfranchising all OH voters--and re: Republicans, I'm talking about their face, not their reality--they deliberately disenfranchised thousands of OH voters, in truth).

And here's where we get into the courts vs. Congress controversy, and also the people vs. Congress. Right?

Say the court rules that there was extensive fraud in OH, enough to change the outcome. The questions are:

What are the remedies that are available to the court?

What are the remedies available to the K/E campaign and the Dem Party? (And to the K/E Electors?)

What are the remedies available to the people?

And if the court rules against fraud, or delays, or gives an ambiguous ruling, or it goes into appeals, etc., but the K/E campaign, the Dem Party, and the people are convinced that sufficient fraud occurred to change the outcome, what then?

Is this a correct rundown of the current situation?

(Note: This is more or less how it all ended up in Congress in '00, with the black House members petitioning the Senate NOT to certify the FLA Electors, needing only one Senate signature to require an investigation first, and not one Senator, Dem or Repub, coming forward to sign it--the famous scene in "F 9/11." Will the Democrats repeat this betrayal?)

(Question re: the note. Am I right that this is what a House members' petition with at least one Senate signature can do--require an investigation before certifying the OH Electors? If they got that signature, would it stop Bush's inauguration?)

[Peace Patriot]

38. More on clarification...

Re: my posting above

"If OH Electoral Vote is deducted from Bush, but is NOT added to Kerry (thus disenfranchising all OH voters):

"Bush 266 (winner)
"Kerry 252

"This last result doesn't seem like it would be very acceptable, politically, to either party (disenfranchising all OH voters--and re: Republicans, I'm talking about their face, not their reality--they deliberately disenfranchised thousands of OH voters, in truth)."

Add:

This last result is also why it would be good to have challenges in New Mexico, FLA and wherever else these thieves stole votes. If OH is excluded, Kerry needs 7 more Electoral Votes to tie, and 8 to win (by one). Right?

(Electoral Votes in some of the current questionable states are: FLA-27, NMex-5, Iowa-7, NC-15, Nev-5).

[mulethree]

20. or is it 260?

270 = (538/2) + 1

If Ohio's 20 votes aren't counted

260 = (518/2) +1

[Peace Patriot]

37. Removal of duplicate. n/t

[berni_mccoy]

2. OVERTURN not throwout

The prize Arnebeck is going for is an OVERTURN of the results. If one side has to cheat, then the law says they LOSE. Plain and simple.

And guess what, we have plenty of evidence. A judge can easily throw out the EV's cast by one group and have another group cast their EV's. It's that simple.

We win.

[Truman01]

7. No law says that if we catch one side cheating in ohio

that they lose nationally. Their slate of electors can be disavowed in that state and then the remaining electors will be in effect 266 to 252 * wins.

TC

[Qutzupalotl]

23. Ohio can be overturned.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/12/13/ohio.electoralcollege.ap/index.html
If the court decides to hear the challenge, it can declare a new winner or throw out the results.

[Peace Patriot]

35. Removal of duplicate. n/t

[In Truth We Trust]

8. Thanks for the response and optimism!

[politicasista]

9. Wasn't that the pupose of filing the suit today...

before the Ohio electors met? Help please?

[Truman01]

18. What is this craziness about optimism?????

What do you want me to say?? You're right, the Ohio Supreme Court is going to invalidate the Constitution and 230 years of election law and they are going to become DU believers.... They are going to ignore all established precedent and install Kerry as President. Is that the optimism you are looking for??

That is just fantasy. What I am saying is just cold hard fact. Not optimism or pessimism.

TC

[Qutzupalotl]

25. Arnebeck's got facts too. :)

The court can declare a new winner.

[Truman01]

30. The courts won't declare a winner... They can and may

send it back to the officials that should have done it right with instructions on counting or whatever they did wrong. Courts overturn actions and give instructions on how to do it right. For example, we never asked and never received a ruling to DECLARE Gore a winner. Bush never got a ruling that DECLARED him a winner. He got a ruling that required that we recount the entire state in a time period that was untennable so the winner that was already certified by the state of Florida went unchallenged.

TC

[Qutzupalotl]

33. That's not what CNN says...

If the court decides to hear the challenge, it can declare a new winner or throw out the results.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/12/13/ohio.electoralcollege.ap/index.html

But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this. (CNN has been full of shit before.)

From what you wrote here, you have to admit that if a court orders that certain votes be counted in a certain way, the totals could change. The question is, could they change enough to give a different outcome. As long as that is possible, I see no reason to tell people to give up. Quite the contrary.

[Truman01]

34. Well depending on what the ruling is, it could have the same effect.

But the court isn't going to declare a winner because that isnt their job. For example, and appellate court will overturn a case and say that the prosecution can retry the defendant but without the key piece of tainted evidence. They didn't let him go, they just overturned the decision and took away certain evidence. The lower court will be the one to let him go.

If the court decided that certain ballots should be counted certain ways they would return it to the proper authorities in that area with instructions on how to count.

CNN is almost always full of it :toast:

[In Truth We Trust]

11. Thank you, good news!!!

[shiina]

3. Don't worry

You can't just throw out a whole state.

Arnebeck (I think) said in the first forum that were would be two sets of electoral votes for Ohio if the recount shows Kerry won.

[Truman01]

12. How would two sets of electors work?

The options were to set aside the election and have a revote (too late to count) or to set aside the electors all together. If you sent two sets of electors to the EC * wins hands down.

[rockedthevoteinMA]

6. New Mexico is also going to have a recount. n/t

[In Truth We Trust]

13. Perhaps our dreams will come true after all!!!!!

[Truman01]

14. Where did you see this?

NM certified its vote.

TC

[rockedthevoteinMA]

19. Uh they need to certify the vote before there is a recount

For someone whose specialty is election law you should know that right?

The GLIBS are doing it. I saw it on here.

[Truman01]

21. Of course they do, but I had not seen anything on a recount....

Do you have a link for it?

[rockedthevoteinMA]

27. here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=201&topic_id=7070

or here

www.votecobb.org

[Truman01]

28. Thank you. n/t

[New Earth]

15. you can't 'throw out' a states vote

wtfffffff why do people keep saying that?

[Carolab]

17. I understood that was part of Arnebeck's challenge

declare a winner, revote or throw it out

[New Earth]

22. i just can't see a court throwing out an entire state's vote

it would be a recount or a revote. if they threw out the whole state, that would disenfranchise every single voter in the state.

what happened already is bad enough....o.

[senegal1]

26. for the NM recount check on the Cobb site. I donated.

[k8conant]

24. but you can overturn it...

So then we have Kerry 271 Bush 266 Edwards 1

[AntiFascist]

29. If the Ohio vote is thrown out then....

perhaps it would covered by CSPAN 3, maybe it will be mentioned in an article buried in the WSJ....perhaps a quick mention on CNN Headline News...

[McCamy Taylor]

31. ...a chimp. Thank God I am not him!

[Hobbes199]

32. The 270 is just a majority

Of the certified electors. If Ohio doesn't certify theirs then the number would go down, but Chimp would still be elected. The electors would have to go to Kerry, or yes we'd need Fla too.