Good thing we have a full Supreme Court so there's no tie.

As it should. In an election this close states must be held accountable to obeying both federal laws and their own laws in the handling of election ballots. In 2,000 the FL supreme court failed to enforce FL law which resulted in different standards being applied in different counties. In MI federal law requires each party have access to the counting but that was not upheld. In PA standards of identification of the voter were being ignored.

1776 (MRCROSSROADS) said:

Good thing we have a full Supreme Court so there's no tie.

Bad thing that Kavanaugh is proving he has no clue what he is doing.

Bad thing that Kavanaugh is proving he has no clue what he is doing.

How so? He is one of the most respected jurists in this country. Have you not finished with your "lynching" of this fine husband, father, jurist?

He cited, specifically, the 2000 election Supreme Court ruling as reason for precedence, despite the findings of that case SPECIFICALLY stating they could never be cited in the future as a precedent.

He cited, specifically, the 2000 election Supreme Court ruling as reason for precedence, despite the findings of that case SPECIFICALLY stating they could never be cited in the future as a precedent.

Since I have no quotes I have to do my research for you and found an article. He DID NOT STATE what you claimed here; https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/27/politics/bush-gore-cnn-interview-brett-kavanaugh/index.html

He STATED that Article II is clear. The state legislatures have the Constitutional authority to set the rules as they see fit. Not state courts. Bush v Gore ruled that the FL Supreme court unconstitutionally allowed those rules to be changed by local precincts after the election was held. That fact was agreed to 7-2. The 6-5 decision had to do only with the remedy.

The bush v gore ruling did not state it could not be used as precedent. That is simply a lie.

It's your choice to take propaganda as fact, without any research into the veracity of it. It's a bad choice for rational people to make, but you are free to do it!

I take it you, also, enjoyed that lynching of that fine husband, fine father, well respected jurist!

Oh?

If what Trump & one of his attorneys (Sidney Powell) said today on Fox is true we R looking at massive planned fraud.  Of course the proof is in the pudding.

I would guess that this entire election could B declared null & void couldn't it?  And if so what does THAT portend for the safety of all of us?

Of course the proof is in the pudding.

And, proof that the tens of thousands of votes in certain states are invalid, well, better chance to win the powerball without buying a ticket.

I would guess that this entire election could B declared null & void couldn't it?  And if so what does THAT portend for the safety of all of us?

No, it could not. There is no Constitutional provision for any "do over's".