Why A Senator (or two) Refusing To Certify Is Pointless

[cali]

A lot of folks around here seem to believe that a Senator refusing to certify would focus public attention on election fraud. I don't. Do you really think that the MSM would cover the story that way? It's far more likely that that Senator would be marginalized as a nut or sore loser. Without compelling and easily understood evidence of massive fraud and conspiracy, it's an exercise in futility. We need witnesses with sworn affadavits from Diebold, Triad (not the guy who's been discredited), and Sequoia. We have better documentation of voter suppression, but I don't think it's enough to impress the general public.

And what would repubs in Congress do? They'd surely pull out evidence of dem fraud. They'd relentlessly mock and bellow, and drown out the opposition. Then they'd vote for bushco overwhelmingly, leaving voting reform further tainted and in the gutter. We can't achieve anything significant re reform without a bi-partisan effort.

Their opposition to reform will, if anything, harden and they'll simply make things even harder on dems then before. You think the public will rally to the side of dems in such a situation? I don't.

I realize some people will say that Senators should stand up because it's the right thing to do, regardless of outcome. I understand that sentiment, but respectfully disagree.