1. Could be.
   Then again, I’ve been imagining a larger scale copy of the NY primary vote by mail debacle, where the ballots still haven’t been counted a month later.
   In the case of the presidential election, they have a specific hard deadline: Dec 14th, the date set by law for the meeting of the Electoral College.
   So what happens if the votes (probably particularly in D-infested states) haven’t been counted yet by then? One possible answer is that the state can’t appoint its electors. That doesn’t cause any problem for the country, other than the massive uproar since the whole state loses its voice. Another possible answer is that the state legislature passes an emergency law changing how the electors are appointed (perhaps something like “whoever is on top based on the ballots counted by Dec 13th). Result: different kind of uproar, at least if the count is at all close. Third possible answer is that Congress moves the Electoral College meeting date. But that requires a law; what if Trump vetoes it? And in any case, it can’t reasonably move past Jan 20th since the president’s term ends on that day, whether the Electoral College has voted or not. (If it hasn’t, the Speaker ends up acting president until the EC vote is done.)
   Wow.

   1. Fetishists makes a good case fornPelosi being out in the cold .

      1. Dershowitz, NOT fetishists….

         Frickin’ autocorrect

         1. That’s funny right there

            1. Oh, I dunno….fetishists, leftists, andefascists, whatever. “Eess Alla sameding, amirite?”

               “Yeah, man! Eess Alla drag, man!”

   2. https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/493101-who-takes-control-if-there-is-no-presidential-election-this-year

      1. War. War takes control. The side with the most bullets. Also, the military is out since there is no CIC, and the Guard is only active within a state by the governor. So, if there is no president named to be sworn in on January 20th, civil war.

      2. Interesting article, but not the same scenario as I was worrying about. The trouble is that it’s possible to have elections that fill at least a substantial fraction of the House, while having enough trouble with mailed ballots that things aren’t ready for the Electoral College vote on Dec 14th. What then? Most likely some unconstitutional court decision to delay it. If it’s delayed past Jan 20, then there is no new president but there is a House, so there is a speaker.

2. A.G. Barr testified before that House that he has no evidence of voter fraud in vote-by-mail systems, but he has common sense.

   Well, here’s evidence. And even better, it’s from the FBI, which is under his direct supervision.

   And Biden would not win with 99% voter turnout. It’d have to be about 137%…

   … which the media would find some way to play off as a normal occurrence. Move along, nothing to see here.

   2

3. But… mail in voting is secure, or so I am told. There is a signature comparison test…. like my signature is identical all the time, and has not varied since I registered to vote…

   My opinion… Vote in person, picture ID required, and after you vote, you have to stick your index finger into the ink to ensure you cannot vote again. No more early voting, and absentee voting is considered a provisional/contested ballot unless notarized, or signed off by a commanding officer for military overseas. (With appropriate postmark as well)

   I know I am taking some kind of hardass approach, but who you elect is important, as we have found out with all this ridiculousness this year.

   1

   1. I can’t speak to other states but Oregon does actually check signatures because i got letter from the county clerk in 2016 because my signature varied too much.

      1. What Slow Joe Crow said. I’ve gotten that letter, too. I had to go down to the elections office in person, show ID, visually examine and confirm my ballot was my ballot, and sign a new voter registration card so they’d have my “new” signature on file. Then, and ONLY then, my ballot would be counted.

         That’s not to say voter fraud couldn’t be done in Oregon (similar to the case tweeted in the OP), but the county clerks’ offices do a pretty decent job keeping tabs on it.

         And the Secretary of State’s office completed an audit a couple years back which among other things required counties to remove inactive voters (people who hadn’t voted in over 10 years) from the rolls and notify them that they will need to re-register in person.

         I won’t say it’s perfect or foolproof, but they do take it seriously, and as a result it’s better than you might otherwise expect.

         1. How long ago was that? These days, even an obviously sane action like removing dead people from the voter roll is attacked as a racist policy.

            1. My letter about my signature not matching was about 8 years ago during Obama’s re-election, and the Sec. of State’s audit was (IIRC) 2 years ago. SoS Dennis Richardson (Republican, if that makes a difference) headed up the audit before he passed away in February 2019.

               1. “Republican, if that makes a difference”. Well, yes. Republicans are the ones that want elections to have integrity, Democrats are the ones who do not want that.

Comments are closed.