Quote:
Originally Posted by
No insect
Actually a reasonable article. When it comes to diseases that are not catastrophic, i.e. not like ebola, this is what could happen. Some people are immune from the beginning, some are more or less unaffected, some get sick, and some are hit really hard. After this has has run its course for a while, and the bulk of the population is protected by vaccination, it could become like so many other diseases that are potentially harmful, but possible to live with.
We're LIVING with it now, you moron. The survival rate is 99.97%. How can you people continue to ignore this basic arithmetic?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wiigelec
Probably because one state does not have the constitutional ground, “standing” as it were, to effect the elector selection process identified by another state’s legislature, nor contest it in the event of perceived misconduct.
If the state legislatures of Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, or Wisconsin have issues with the way their electors were selected, why haven’t they filed suit against their respective executive branch in their respective state court? That would be the only constitutionally appropriate course of action in this case.
Unless you disagree with the sovereignty of the individual states? You wouldn’t want New York or California to have a say in how Texas selects its electors, would you?
*still blue in the face*
...and you still haven’t answered the questions...
Wig, I said I was just joking around. You've already told us why the SCOTUS has no reason to investigate a Presidential Election. I believe you. It's done. Time to get on with more pressing issues:
Quote:
SEC. 3201. NATIONAL STRATEGY TO PROTECT UNITED STATES DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS. (a) In General.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President, acting through the Secretary, in consultation with the Chairman, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Education, the Director of National Intelligence, the Chairman of the Federal Election Commission, and the heads of any other appropriate Federal agencies, shall issue a national strategy to protect against cyber attacks, influence operations, disinformation campaigns, and other activities that could undermine the security and integrity of United States democratic institutions.
(b) Considerations.—The national strategy required under subsection (a) shall include consideration of the following:
(1) The threat of a foreign state actor, foreign terrorist organization (as designated pursuant to section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189)), or a domestic actor carrying out a cyber attack, influence operation, disinformation campaign, or other activity aimed at undermining the security and integrity of United States democratic institutions.
(3) Potential consequences, such as an erosion of public trust or an undermining of the rule of law, that could result from a successful cyber attack, influence operation, disinformation campaign, or other activity aimed at undermining the security and integrity of United States democratic institutions.
This one is particularly interesting, since New Mexico voted for President Biden by an 11% margin: