When trump loses and the SC overturns the election, what do we do?

[Eliot Rosewater]

One of the reasons this is all happening is my statement above a couple years ago would have been laughed at and I would have been told I was hyperbolic and irresponsible.

[ColinC]

1. If it's clear that Trump lost and not close at all (like 2000)

Then you ignore the court altogether as they have no enforcement power. It would be an illegal and unconstitutional ruling entirely.

[shelshaw]

2. Long live King Biden 😀

[TheRealNorth]

16. This would be only way if SCOTUS corruptly installed TFG

Biden would have to declare martial law.

[Biophilic]

3. If trump loses than Joe is still president.

He’s been around the block a few times and so have the people around him.

[Big Blue Marble]

4. That risk is significant as is the risk the Republican House overturns the election results.

The Republicans are gaming this out already. First to question the polling results
in close swing states; then claim it is indeterminable throwing it to the house who
will have one vote for each state. Win or lose, they are not walking away quietly.

[Walleye]

8. Seems to make all the talk about Biden, stepping aside and switching candidates to be moot

[Big Blue Marble]

9. It does.

We have to have clear wins in all swing states and prepare for battle.

[Walleye]

11. Well, it's a good thing. Biden will still be commander and chief if this happens.

[bluestarone]

5. Like i stated before. There is probably a 70% chance this WILL happen.

It's not a dumb question.I don't think what needs to be done, CAN be discussed here.

[hamsterjill]

6. I believe you are correct

And we had best be ready. Being prepared is always a good thing.

[Emile]

7. President Biden enacts the insurrection act.

[Blue Cape]

10. It takes a larger portion of Congress to sign onto a challenge.

Under the new rules, one fifth of each Chamber would be required to sign onto a challenge to a state's electors.

Might happen in the House. Wouldn't be nearly as likely in the Senate.

At any rate, the only official that can sign off on the electors are the Governors. In MI, WI, PA, and AZ we are in good shape.

[brooklynite]

12. On what basis does the Supreme Court overturn the Election?

The Constitution allows each State to determine its Electoral Vote. That was the SC's basis for ruling in Bush v Gore.

[Diraven]

17. Lately they decide cases first

And figure out a basis afterwards.

[brooklynite]

18. So what you're saying is "it's hopeless"?

As long as you believe the SC can do anything, there's not basis for preparing a response.

[Fiendish Thingy]

20. Folks are forgetting the revised Electoral Count Act of 2022. Nt

[kwolf68]

13. The idea that Trump and his lackeys

Would lose this election, concede defeat and go quietly into the night is simply not an option I think exists. They will make a mockery of things, the questions is WHAT will they do?

[GenThePerservering]

25. It's a good question

and it does not good to pretend it'll never happen.

Hope for the best, but be prepared for the worst.

[Frasier Balzov]

14. This reminds me of the What Happens when Biden steps down during his second term

and Harris ascends to the office.

The answer was consistently Cross that bridge if and when we come to it.

[ecstatic]

15. Biden would need to physically remove them to keep the peace.

Those assholes have done a lot of damage to the country without much pushback, but if they go there, we'll literally have to go there as well.

[Fiendish Thingy]

19. Why didn't they overturn it in 2020?

Read up in the revised electoral count act.

If a state’s electoral votes are in dispute between the governor and legislature, the decision goes to a panel of three judges, whose decision is final and unappealable.

On January 6, the requirements to object to a slate of electors has been increased significantly (used to be 1 rep and 1 senator, now requires one fifth of each house)

https://www.collins.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/one_pager_on_electoral_count_reform_act_of_2022.pdf

[Eliot Rosewater]

37. OK,.thanks for the info. So I remember this a while back and my first reaction was we are

at the mercy of a 3 judge panel?

Do we know in each state who would be on the panel or HOW it is decided who is on it?

[Kaleva]

21. Continue to to prepare for catastrophic climate change

Which I'll be doing no matter who wins this fall

[kacekwl]

22. Storm the Supreme Court

Storm the justices residences. Storm the Capital. Storm the White House and refuse admittance to anyone new. 1st unarmed if that doesn't work then armed to the teeth. If it's war they want then come get it.

[Fiendish Thingy]

23. Walk us through the exact steps to get to a SCOTUS ruling overturning the election

Remember to include the new steps in the revised Electoral Count Act, including the judiciary panel to review any disputed state’s slates, whose ruling is unappealable to SCOTUS .

[Eliot Rosewater]

38. I dont know, that is why I asked, though I could have framed it better.

You have provided some excellent info here and I love to be corrected when I am wrong or ignorant or both...

[jalan48]

24. Probably not much. Our party doesn't have a strong radical element to counter the Republican reactionaries.

If this were to happen it would force a change in our party I think.

[GenThePerservering]

26. We're not all pushovers

I'm just one of quite a few radical militants, and we WILL fight, that includes resisting a supine Democratic leadership.

Just shrugging our shoulders isn't going to get us anywhere.

[Mike Niendorff]

27. That's not the plan.

The plan is to create another false "controversy" during the electoral count, and then throw the election to the House -- at which point the actual vote won't matter, because Republicans control more state delegations and will therefore put their own candidate into office regardless of who the people actually voted for.

And at that point, I think we're going to see both mass protests and a general strike.

(* and yes, when that happens I believe that Trump will 100% attempt to call in the US military against American citizens. But even if he successfully steals office this way, he can't do a damn thing until inauguration day (1/20) -- so you've got small window (2-3 weeks) where the theft will be declared by Republicans in the House, but will not be formally in effect regardless of its validity. At that point, people are going to have to make a decision. It's going to get real, very very fast.)


MDN

[lees1975]

31. Then we need to work toward controlling enough state delegations so that Biden gets 26 votes in the house.

How many do we need, four? And DC does count in that vote, too.

[Mike Niendorff]

35. Which four?

And remember, we're still dealing with massively gerrymandered districts and a corrupt SCOTUS that is allowing rigged maps to remain in play where it can.

If someone better informed than me can show me what the path is here, I'd like to see the details. I will support state-level candidates accordingly if that path exists. This is a serious question.


MDN

[Eliot Rosewater]

33. I stand corrected, I appreciate this response. Another thing I thought of is how the media and traitor

(my name for the prick) keep referring to polls about how he is ahead or it is a dead heat. When in FACT we know polling is going to be way off due to who IS and who is NOT polled. I fully expect any coup or action by SC to include the idea that "he couldn't have lost, look at the polls!"



And i want to say to you and many others on this thread THANK GOD the majority of us here now realize what some have for a long time.

This is why i ask the occasional question, I dont know how it would work, that is why I am asking. I also wish people would realize the prez cant increase the court or impeach anyone without first getting rid of the filibuster, right? But if we did, and controlled the Senate, could we?

[Mike Niendorff]

40. 28 USC 1

Expanding the Court (which I 1000% support) requires an act of Congress -- specifically, it requires changing 28 USC 1, (which is the specific federal statute that sets the number of Justices). This requires passage in both houses of Congress, plus a Democratic president to sign it into law.

That's only a simple majority in the House, but in the Senate it requires getting around (or eliminating) the current filibuster rule. This *could have been done* in 2021 and 2022, but it was blocked by Sens Manchin and Sinema -- both of whom are history after this year's election (and good riddance).

The filibuster rule is determined by the Senate, which sets its own rules as a matter of Constitutional law, so control of any other branch doesn't affect that.

Bottom line -- it's gonna take a trifecta to reform the SCOTUS, and the fascists who have spent 40 years stacking the Court for exactly this moment in history aren't going to submit to that without all hell breaking loose. Doesn't mean it won't happen, but it won't be just a nice friendly ceremony -- it will be a dangerous situation imho.

MDN

[Eliot Rosewater]

41. I am going to copy paste this over and over to my friends who keep telling me they dont understand

why the Dems dont expand the court.

Does impeachment also take 67 votes because of the filibuster???

[CanonRay]

28. I see two scenarios

First, a military coup to restore the election results. Most of the officer corp are conservative, but also take their oath seriously.
Or, secession by blue states or groups of blue states, who dont want to live under fascism.

Probably something I cant even imagine.

[lees1975]

30. They couldn't overturn an election, but they can make a ruling regarding a challenge to ballot counting and certificatio

like they did in the Florida fiasco in 2000 when they allowed the Florida secretary of state to set aside provisional and uncounted ballots from a week after the election, giving it to Bush when Gore actually won it.

That's how it would have to happen. Remember, Kamala Harris will be in charge of certifying electoral college ballots and challenges require supermajorities to sustain. It may take hours, like it did in 2000, but the Supreme Court can't stop that process.

Trump had laid out a whole list of plans given to him by his criminal advisors of things he could try to stop the certification.

I would suggest that we should already be putting this possibility out on social media, because the mainstream media won't put it out there, and let people know that the Republicans are going to try every trick to steal the election. We should have dozens of people show up at counting stations, like they did last time, to act as witnesses in fraud cases.

[Eliot Rosewater]

32. Thanks for agreeing people should at least talk about it, because a few folks would treat my

question with the same certainty they treated our warnings years ago about how bad this will, not might, get. They assured me I was being hyperbolic.

I dont know how the SC could overturn the election other than what you and a couple others here explained, showing that instead of treating this issue with scorn and ridicule, you correct me where I am wrong but then point out what the actual concern is, thank you for that!

I guess when I said "overturn" I misspoke, as you say. I was just thinking about how they ordered FL to stop counting votes and I was thinking about how they ignore precedent and the law itself, often.

[kentuck]

34. That would leave them with their last option...

Whether or not to add 3 more Justices to the Court? There is no escaping the corruption.

[peggysue2]

36. We take one step at a time

No need to freak out over what's yet to come. Eyes on the Prize first.

[Eliot Rosewater]

39. Yes, of course. What I want though is people to at least think about scenarios where the other

party and the SC are known fascists who are corrupt and who have no intention of following rules or laws.

But first, win...

I get riled up sometimes and need to be brought down again...

[peggysue2]

42. I think we're all somewhat rattled by the ongoing events of this campaign

We knew it was going to be bad. And it is.

The only way I stay relatively calm (in any situation) is take one moment at a time, deal with things as they come. Also, I'm pretty confident that our Democratic leadership and their raft of legal-eagles have and continue to consider the scenarios the GOP will likely pull and work at strategies and ways to counter the crazy.

So, I concentrate on what I can do (right now that's getting postcards written) and keeping away from the endless noise. But always . . .

Eyes on the Prize.