Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[eschatological]

I'm thinking we'd get Leahy himself as POTUS. President Pro Tempore is first in the line of succession after Speaker of the House, and without any sitting House members as of 1/20/2021, there would be no Speaker.

(POTUS>VPOTUS>SotH>PPT>State>Defense>Treasury>etc on down to Homeland Security)

Presumably he would act as an interim President to deal with foreign affairs and working with the FEC to set new elections as soon as humanly possible, then abdicate to the new President-elect after elections were held.

The problem with your #2 scenario is that the whole general election might be declared invalid by Trump, but he can't invalidate House elections. That's up to the states to do. So unless the California Secretary of State invalidates Pelosi's election (which won't happen), she'll be Speaker, and she'll become President.

Oh, and Congress is seated in January 3rd, I believe, not the same day as the President.

[Antiganon]

Right, and that is scenario #1, and we have precedent here, because that is essentially what happened to Florida in 2000. Bush v. Gore had a lot of complex legalize around it, but the basic result is that a State has to pick a result and go with it. You can't just wave your hands and pretend you don't know WTF just happened.

So if a SecState refuses to certify, the Courts will make them certify. I don't think that is particularly likely either, even the most partisan SecStates know they have to certify an election. Trump can pressure them, but they have more then enough legal cover to do so anyway. Now obviously I fully expect a lot of partisan bullshit to try to change the results, but that is a different issue. I expect we will get a result from the Presidential Election by the first or second week of December. I would be surprised if it was much earlier or much later. You can quote me on that if you like.

Edit: The one condition on the above prediction is if it is a close election. Which it might not be. If Biden absolutely destroys Trump, then we will know fairly early in the evening of that night. But if it is close, we won't get a result until December. I don't think Trump can win outright that evening.

Yeah, but 2000 was Florida royally screwing up due to their own incompetence.

If there are issues with mail-in ballots (not unthinkable given the volume of people voting by mail for the first time), suppressed turn out at the polls (almost a guarantee given Coronavirus), irregularities pointing to voter fraud (unlikely but possible, or possible that partisans would float this regardless of the facts), especially in multiple states, what then?

Does SCOTUS just tell the SoS for the states in question to pick a winner?

[Thekri]

#1 I have been read into and understand - and it sucks, it's the doomsday scenario for the Democrats, and the one Trump is most likely gaming out (I would if I were on his team).

#2 is interesting. My curiosity begins by asking from what authority the Federal Government could declare the election invalid and have it stick? @Gorsameth brings this up as well (stop me if I'm misunderstanding your point). Trump might want to do that, but him declaring it would be like me declaring war on Canada - no authority to do so. It's clear the states determine their votes for president - if they certify the results, that's all that matters. That's how I see it at least.

Well as I addressed in the later posts, both are technically legally impossible. That doesn't mean they are actually impossible, it just means there isn't a legal way to get into that mess, so there isn't a law to deal with it. The historical reason for the 12th Amendment is really to cover 3 party elections, which have happened a few times. It is why it specifies they have to pick from the Top 3. Historically when the US has had 3 way races, it was really a two way race with one side split in half, so the side that wasn't split easily walked away with the majority. The most recent example of this was George Wallace's campaign, where North Democrats went for Humphrey, Southern Democrats went for Wallace, and Richard Nixon walked away with the vast majority of the nation. This isn't going to happen in 2020, Kanye can't pull any electorial college votes, and nobody serious is going to run.

The "Refuse to validate" is something I addressed earlier, and I really doubt a SecState could or would do that. If they did, it would be a Bush v. Gore: Part 2: Mission Accomplished. Which did result in a President taking office on January 20, even if it wasn't the President we actually elected (or maybe it was, we will never know).

[Thekri]

Yeah, but 2000 was Florida royally screwing up due to their own incompetence.

If there are issues with mail-in ballots (not unthinkable given the volume of people voting by mail for the first time), suppressed turn out at the polls (almost a guarantee given Coronavirus), irregularities pointing to voter fraud (unlikely but possible, or possible that partisans would float this regardless of the facts), especially in multiple states, what then?

Does SCOTUS just tell the SoS for the states in question to pick a winner?

I think the most likely scenario is a large scale Cyber attack on state level infrastructure on the afternoon of November 3rd, or in the few days immediately following it. Even if they don't get the election machines, they may be able to destroy enough vote tallies and records to prevent any reasonable record of voting from being collected. I have honestly no idea what happens next.

That isn't something Trump can actually control, but it is something Russia or China could actually do. I don't think China has any interest in doing so, but Russia might.

[kaid]

So, we're all okay with McConnell wearing a tan suit in the Oval Office, right? I seem to remember that being a big deal a while ago...

Mitch is up for reelection this year so if the election is rendered invalid then he automatically would get the boot when his term is up. Basically given that more senate seats for the GOP are being contested than democrats it probably winds up with some random democrat with the most senority I think layhe being president until they can get a valid election through.

[Gorsameth]

Yeah, but 2000 was Florida royally screwing up due to their own incompetence.

If there are issues with mail-in ballots (not unthinkable given the volume of people voting by mail for the first time), suppressed turn out at the polls (almost a guarantee given Coronavirus), irregularities pointing to voter fraud (unlikely but possible, or possible that partisans would float this regardless of the facts), especially in multiple states, what then?

Does SCOTUS just tell the SoS for the states in question to pick a winner?

The SC would likely indeed force the SoS to declare a winner based on counted votes.

[Antiganon]

The problem with your #2 scenario is that the whole general election might be declared invalid by Trump, but he can't invalidate House elections. That's up to the states to do. So unless the California Secretary of State invalidates Pelosi's election (which won't happen), she'll be Speaker, and she'll become President.

Oh, and Congress is seated in January 3rd, I believe, not the same day as the President.

I'm positing a scenario in which no officials are elected in 2020, due to a number of possible scenarios, what happens next.

No members of Congress would be seated on 1/3, because no election was held/certified/whatever. So there is no House. The 35 Senate seats up this year would be vacant, as nobody has been elected to fill them. The Presidency and Vice Presidency would be vacant as of 1/20, when Trump and Pence's terms end by Constitutional mandate.

At that point, the remaining 65 members of the Senate would constitute the entire Federally elected government. Of those 65 people, Patrick Leahy is the longest serving member of the majority party, and thus next in the line of succession.

[Thekri]

I'm positing a scenario in which no officials are elected in 2020, due to a number of possible scenarios, what happens next.

No members of Congress would be seated on 1/3, because no election was held/certified/whatever. So there is no House. The 35 Senate seats up this year would be vacant, as nobody has been elected to fill them. The Presidency and Vice Presidency would be vacant as of 1/20, when Trump and Pence's terms end by Constitutional mandate.

At that point, the remaining 65 members of the Senate would constitute the entire Federally elected government. Of those 65 people, Patrick Leahy is the longest serving member of the majority party, and thus next in the line of succession.

Not sure, but wouldn't that trigger vacancies that could be filled by state governors? At least in the Senate? For instance, if Lindsey Graham's term expires, and nobody is elected to that seat, I am pretty sure Henry McMaster could put any Non-Lindsey butt that he wants into that seat. Granted he couldn't do that before January 3, but it would be fair game to do so on January 4.

[Odinfrost]

Praying to the wrong god.

Maybe we should try Odin rather than the god of the Jews and Christians?

Yeah, no. I really am not the go to guy on this.

[Omega10]

All of this is covered in this article.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazi...n-power-192883

WOW major publications are also discussing these types of issues

America has fallen a long way

[Antiganon]

Not sure, but wouldn't that trigger vacancies that could be filled by state governors? At least in the Senate? For instance, if Lindsey Graham's term expires, and nobody is elected to that seat, I am pretty sure Henry McMaster could put any Non-Lindsey butt that he wants into that seat. Granted he couldn't do that before January 3, but it would be fair game to do so on January 4.

We'd be dealing with a 50-state patchwork of how vacant seats are filled. Some are appointed until a special election is held. Some are appointed until the next general election. Some are left vacant until a special election is held.

I'm not about to research the state law for all 35 to-be-vacant seats, so I'm assuming that the seats aren't filled in the 17 intervening days.

- - - Updated - - -

There’s basically 0% chance no elections are held.

I agree, this is a thought exercise.

[eschatological]

I'm positing a scenario in which no officials are elected in 2020, due to a number of possible scenarios, what happens next.

No members of Congress would be seated on 1/3, because no election was held/certified/whatever. So there is no House. The 35 Senate seats up this year would be vacant, as nobody has been elected to fill them. The Presidency and Vice Presidency would be vacant as of 1/20, when Trump and Pence's terms end by Constitutional mandate.

At that point, the remaining 65 members of the Senate would constitute the entire Federally elected government. Of those 65 people, Patrick Leahy is the longest serving member of the majority party, and thus next in the line of succession.

What scenario exists where 50 SecStates of the 50 states all invalidate all their House elections?

I guarantee you California and NY aren't doing it. Neither is most of New England. And then it puts pressure on Republican SecStates to do so because they don't want a House with just one's state's reps seated.

What I'm saying is - certification of the General Election AND House Reps are done by individual states' SecStates. Trump may try and invalidate the certification of the General Election, but he can't do that for the House races, and I guarantee you if he tries, California, NY, etc will immediately sue and we'll have a constitutional crisis on our hands.

Considering some recent things that've happened in SCOTUS, I'm pretty confident that Roberts (at least) would side with the liberals denying Trump the ability to invalidate certification of all 50 states. Considering it's a states right issue, philosophically it would be a difficult case for Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch to worm themselves out from under. Kavanaugh is a true toady and will just do what Trump wants essentially.

[Benggaul]

WOW major publications are also discussing these types of issues

America has fallen a long way

Well the problem Trump has there is that he's already spent months downplaying the seriousness of COVID-19, undermining any future wish he may have to use the pandemic as an excuse not to hold elections. I'm betting even several "Red" states wouldn't let that fly at this point.

[Gorsameth]

I'm positing a scenario in which no officials are elected in 2020, due to a number of possible scenarios, what happens next.

No members of Congress would be seated on 1/3, because no election was held/certified/whatever. So there is no House. The 35 Senate seats up this year would be vacant, as nobody has been elected to fill them. The Presidency and Vice Presidency would be vacant as of 1/20, when Trump and Pence's terms end by Constitutional mandate.

At that point, the remaining 65 members of the Senate would constitute the entire Federally elected government. Of those 65 people, Patrick Leahy is the longest serving member of the majority party, and thus next in the line of succession.

Elections are held by the states. There is 0 chance the Democratic states decide not to hold an election so the congressmen from those states that did hold an election will take their seats.

The better question is what would happen if some states decide not to have an election.
And I don't think there is any provision for that happening.

[kaid]

There’s basically 0% chance no elections are held.

Yup because of the hard end date on presidential terms any attempt to not hold elections could benefit anybody but trump would be the least likely to benefit. There still are some avenues where he would get nominated as president but they are all pretty dubious so if he wants to remain president then he will want to hold the elections.

[Breccia]

Jacksonville sheriff says security for Trump's ego rip is not possible.

Duval County Sheriff Mike Williams told Politico that security plans put forth for the Republican National Convention in Jacksonville, Florida, next month are "not achievable" under current time constraints.

The decision to move most of the RNC's programming to Jacksonville last month has already come under scrutiny due to a massive surge in coronavirus cases in Florida. These new security concerns deal another blow to President Trump's hopes for a raucous in-person convention.

"As we're talking today, we are still not close to having some kind of plan that we can work with that makes me comfortable that we're going to keep that event and the community safe," Williams told Politico in an interview published Monday.

"We do need law enforcement officers and we’ve gotten commitments, but not to the level that we thought we needed. And a lot of that is people having virus concerns from their communities, and I understand that," he continued.

Um...wasn't it moved to Jacksonville because NC couldn't do it, either? Man, it's a shame that the lethal outbreak Trump allowed and now encourages is preventing him from having rallies. It's like there are consequences for his actions or something.

EDIT:

"But there's a lot of things that need to happen: an event schedule nailed down, and being able to sign contracts and spend money so that we can prepare for this event. And none of that has happened yet."

Hmm. Didn't Trump refuse to pay for event security over and over? Man, it's a shame bla bla bla consequences.

[DarkTZeratul]

I'm thinking we'd get Leahy himself as POTUS. President Pro Tempore is first in the line of succession after Speaker of the House, and without any sitting House members as of 1/20/2021, there would be no Speaker.

(POTUS>VPOTUS>SotH>PPT>State>Defense>Treasury>etc on down to Homeland Security)

Presumably he would act as an interim President to deal with foreign affairs and working with the FEC to set new elections as soon as humanly possible, then abdicate to the new President-elect after elections were held.

It's important to note that only the Vice President actually becomes President. Anyone else in the line of succession only becomes Acting President.

[Benggaul]

So, Trump is sending unidentified federal troops to disappear protesters and somehow Rand Paul is a voice of reason?!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...rtan-ntp-feeds

"We cannot give up liberty for security. Local law enforcement can and should be handling these situations in our cities but there is no place for federal troops or unidentified federal agents rounding people up at will,"

Someone stole an infinity stone or something because reality keeps changing.

[Edge-]

So, Trump is sending unidentified federal troops to disappear protesters and somehow Rand Paul is a voice of reason?!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...rtan-ntp-feeds



Someone stole an infinity stone or something because reality keeps changing.

He occasionally remembers that he cosplays as a libertarian and has to do something to keep up the act.

[zorkuus]

So, Trump is sending unidentified federal troops to disappear protesters and somehow Rand Paul is a voice of reason?!

Someone reminded him he's a wannabe libertarian. Don't worry, he'll forget it soon enough.