2020 General Election

[Skjellyfetti]

Mean conks just have to eek out one of the Senate runoffs in GA, assuming Manchin sticks to his guns.

I think they just really need to win one of the seats, and to have Manchin on their side, to prevent court packing or Senate packing or ending the filibuster. Only winning one seat would leave the Dems in control of the Senate (with the VP tiebreaker) but if Manchin isn't going to go along with those more apocalyptic items then that would still serve to block those things from happening. Obviously, winning both Georgia runoffs would do that as well. I'd be surprised if there's a split outcome in those runoffs, I think the races go to one party, and if I had to be on it I'd say it would go to the GOP. But I don't bet so take that with a grain of salt.

Assuming Republicans win in North Carolina (Cunningham has conceded) and Alaska, Democrats would need to win both Georgia seats.

[BDKJMU]

Mean conks just have to eek out one of the Senate runoffs in GA, assuming Manchin sticks to his guns.

I think they just really need to win one of the seats, and to have Manchin on their side, to prevent court packing or Senate packing or ending the filibuster. Only winning one seat would leave the Dems in control of the Senate (with the VP tiebreaker) but if Manchin isn't going to go along with those more apocalyptic items then that would still serve to block those things from happening. Obviously, winning both Georgia runoffs would do that as well. I'd be surprised if there's a split outcome in those runoffs, I think the races go to one party, and if I had to be on it I'd say it would go to the GOP. But I don't bet so take that with a grain of salt.

The conks already have 50 in the Senate. Conks just need to win 1 of the 2 Jaw-Jah seats, irregardless of Manchin. The donks will need to win both to get to 50. Of course, anything is possible with GA I guess, because the below makes no sense:
-GA just 2 years ago elected one of the most, if not the most, Trumpian gov out there, more Trumpian than some conk gov in some deep red states that went to Trump by 20-40 pts.
-GA just now (Biden up by .2% before the recount) looks like they might go Biden.

[BDKJMU]

I think they just really need to win one of the seats, and to have Manchin on their side, to prevent court packing or Senate packing or ending the filibuster. Only winning one seat would leave the Dems in control of the Senate (with the VP tiebreaker) but if Manchin isn't going to go along with those more apocalyptic items then that would still serve to block those things from happening. Obviously, winning both Georgia runoffs would do that as well. I'd be surprised if there's a split outcome in those runoffs, I think the races go to one party, and if I had to be on it I'd say it would go to the GOP. But I don't bet so take that with a grain of salt.

Assuming Republicans win in North Carolina (Cunningham has conceded) and Alaska, Democrats would need to win both Georgia seats.

Damn it, another case of me posting before reading ahead. Jelly already beat me to it.

[BDKJMU]

Well, even if Donks win BOTH Jaw-jah senate seats to get the 50-50 tie with Commiela tiebreaker, any chance of end of the fillibuster, court packing, implementing much of the Green New Deal, gun bans, are DOA.

Manchin shoots down chance that Senate Democrats nix filibuster, expand court

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) on Monday night effectively shot down any chance that Democrats are able to nix the legislative filibuster if they find themselves with control of the Senate next year.

Democrats are currently poised to have 48 seats in January and are fighting to win two seats in Georgia that would give the party control of the Senate because in a 50-50 split Vice President Harris could break a tie, giving the party the majority.

Manchin, during an interview with Fox News, said that if there's a 50-50 tie that he would not vote to nix the legislative filibuster, a decision that would take it off the table for Democrats. In order to nix the legislative filibuster should they have 50 seats, Democrats would need the support of every member of their caucus including Manchin.

"50-50 means there's a tie. But if one senator does not vote on the Democratic side there is no tie. ... When they talk about, whether it be packing the courts or ending the filibuster, I will not vote to do that," Manchin said.

Manchin, referring to chatter that Democrats could nix the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court, said he wanted to "rest those fears for you."

"That won't happen because I will not be the 50th Democrat voting to end that filibuster or to basically stack the court," Manchin said.

Pressed if he was saying definitively that if Democratic leadership tried to use the nuclear option to nix the filibuster if he would vote against that, Manchin replied, "Absolutely. I will vote against that."

Manchin is part of a small group of senators who have long been viewed as opposed to ending the legislative filibuster.

Manchin said earlier this year that he did not support eliminating the 60-vote procedural requirement, but progressive activists viewed him as persuadable if President-elect Joe Biden got behind the idea. Progressives would likely apply fierce pressure for Democrats to nix the legislative filibuster, arguing that it stands in the way of key priorities including health care and climate change legislation.

Democratic aides have said that a 50-50 tie likely took getting rid of the filibuster off the table for the foreseeable future given opposition from some senators.

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) has previously left the door open to killing the filibuster if Democrats control the chamber, an idea that has gained more support within the caucus.

But asked on Monday if getting rid of the filibuster would still be on the table in a 50-50 Senate, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) demurred saying he didn't want to speculate.

Manchin's comments come amid a fight, particularly in the House, between centrists and progressives about the direction of the party and messaging this cycle.

Manchin, during the Fox News interview, knocked calls to "defund the police" and "Medicare for All," and warned that the country wants a government that is moderate.

"Doesn't make any sense at all. We've got to fix the Affordable Care Act we have and I think our Republican, moderate Republicans, will work with us," Manchin said.

Manchin added that the "Green New Deal" and "all this socialism" was "not who we are as a Democratic Party."

"We've been tagged if you've got a D by your name you must be for all the crazy stuff and I'm not," Manchin said, adding that Democrats should have a message that "didn't scare the bejeezus out of people."

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/525 ... pand-court
I would imagine Senator Testor is in the same/similar boat..Still would much rather have McConnell wielding the Senate gavel than Chuckie Schumer..

[SeattleGriz]

Not sure how reliable, but if true. This seems impossible.

[JoltinJoe]

In 1936, a bipartisan statement of the Senate Judiciary Committee concluded that it was unconstitutional (a violation of the separation of powers principle) to seek to "pack" the Court for political reasons, or because the Executive or Congress was unhappy with court decisions.

I would contend that court packing as contemplated Democrats is unconstitutional.

Further, I would argue that Congress does not actually have the authority to reconstitute the Supreme Court by adding or subtracting from the number of judges -- even though Congress has always seemed to have assumed to have that power.
In 1789, under the Judiciary Act, Congress initially fixed the number of Supreme Court justices at six. It has added or subtracted seats in the past by amending this provision of the Judiciary Act.

It may be that, as an initial matter, Congress possessed authority to fix the number of justices. But the Constitution says only that Congress may constitute lower courts. It contains no such provision concerning the Supreme Court.

Having fixed the number of justices initially, Congress (I would argue) lacks any authority, express or implied, to constitute the Supreme Court thereafter. I think, if pushed, the Supreme Court could fix internal rules of operation that would decisively fix the number of justices and allow for the Court to determine when to add or subtract justices.

[BDKJMU]

Another speaking of Manchin. I doubt he flips from donk to conk like the WV gov did, but the writing is on the wall in WV- he'll have to do either that or retire by 2024.

..And for the next two months, Manchin will never be in a better position to cut a deal with Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans for a chair in the next session of Congress...

...He managed to win re-election in 2018 despite the state’s governor, Jim Justice, very ostentatiously switching to the GOP in 2017. However, Manchin only barely held off Patrick Morrisey, 49.6/46.3 in that race....

Consider these harbingers of doom for Manchin:

[*]He will have to run for re-election in 2024 — a presidential cycle that will have heavy Republican turnout in West Virginia. He only beat Morrisey by three points (and only with a plurality) in a Democratic wave election in 2018.
[*]Shelly Moore Capito just won her Senate re-election contest 70/27 in West Virginia … and she won every single county. Handily.
[*]Republicans won all three WV House seats. And the closest race of the three took place in WV-02, which Alex Mooney won with 63.1% of the vote.

...Eventually, Manchin will either have to retire or change parties to survive in his state. If he doesn’t want to retire, this is the best opportunity he will have to get something significant for the switch. Until Georgia holds its runoff election, McConnell is looking at the potential for a Kamala Harris-run Senate while he sits at 50 seats for the next two years. Flipping Manchin would cement Republican control of the Senate now, rather than hoping for at least one out of two runoff wins on January 5.

What can McConnell offer as an inducement? Manchin is ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, perhaps the most important panel to West Virginia. Lisa Murkoswki chairs that panel and she might not be happy to step aside, as Alaskans have a lot of interest in that as well, thanks to federal control over most of their state. Perhaps Murkowski would step aside, but Pat Roberts’ retirement leaves the Agriculture chair open, which might interest Manchin. Or McConnell could move Jerry Moran to Ag and have Manchin take over Veterans’ Affairs. Lamar Alexander’s retirement also leaves the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee chair open, which is stacked with progressives on the minority side.

The point is that McConnell has room to deal for Manchin, and both have a significant interest in getting him on the GOP side at some point. Manchin won’t have this kind of leverage once David Perdue wins his runoff election, and especially if Kelly Loeffler also wins hers and gets McConnell to 52. If he ever cuts a deal, Manchin won’t find a better opportunity than in the next eight weeks.

https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrisse ... -majority/

[Baldy]

I think they just really need to win one of the seats, and to have Manchin on their side, to prevent court packing or Senate packing or ending the filibuster. Only winning one seat would leave the Dems in control of the Senate (with the VP tiebreaker) but if Manchin isn't going to go along with those more apocalyptic items then that would still serve to block those things from happening. Obviously, winning both Georgia runoffs would do that as well. I'd be surprised if there's a split outcome in those runoffs, I think the races go to one party, and if I had to be on it I'd say it would go to the GOP. But I don't bet so take that with a grain of salt.

The conks already have 50 in the Senate. Conks just need to win 1 of the 2 Jaw-Jah seats, irregardless of Manchin. The donks will need to win both to get to 50. Of course, anything is possible with GA I guess, because the below makes no sense:
-GA just 2 years ago elected one of the most, if not the most, Trumpian gov out there, more Trumpian than some conk gov in some deep red states that went to Trump by 20-40 pts.
-GA just now (Biden up by .2% before the recount) looks like they might go Biden.

He is, but he hasn't governed like a Trumpian, which has drawn some ire from Trump in the past.

The chance of either one of those seats going Donk are slim. Even with the Libertarian stealing 110K votes, Perdue 'won' by about 90K, and the same can be said for the other Senate seat as well.

[SDHornet]

Oh.

[SDHornet]

Um no. Try again. Canvassing is basically exit polling. I'm talking about an actual audit/recount of the votes that were cast.

Here's a state by state breakdown for you. It's not exit polling
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections ... 26066.aspx


An audit and a recount are different things. Do you want an audit in each of the relatively close states or a full recount?

Well if hand counting is needed to eliminate the idea that the "software glitch" was a systemic issue, then sure go with that.

[SDHornet]

Mean conks just have to eek out one of the Senate runoffs in GA, assuming Manchin sticks to his guns.

I think they just really need to win one of the seats, and to have Manchin on their side, to prevent court packing or Senate packing or ending the filibuster. Only winning one seat would leave the Dems in control of the Senate (with the VP tiebreaker) but if Manchin isn't going to go along with those more apocalyptic items then that would still serve to block those things from happening. Obviously, winning both Georgia runoffs would do that as well. I'd be surprised if there's a split outcome in those runoffs, I think the races go to one party, and if I had to be on it I'd say it would go to the GOP. But I don't bet so take that with a grain of salt.

Did I miss something? The 2 GA seats makes it 51-49 conks, right? So one seat makes it 50-50, Manchin would make it 51-49 against court packing, etc.

[SDHornet]

The conks already have 50 in the Senate. Conks just need to win 1 of the 2 Jaw-Jah seats, irregardless of Manchin. The donks will need to win both to get to 50. Of course, anything is possible with GA I guess, because the below makes no sense:
-GA just 2 years ago elected one of the most, if not the most, Trumpian gov out there, more Trumpian than some conk gov in some deep red states that went to Trump by 20-40 pts.
-GA just now (Biden up by .2% before the recount) looks like they might go Biden.

He is, but he hasn't governed like a Trumpian, which has drawn some ire from Trump in the past.

The chance of either one of those seats going Donk are slim. Even with the Libertarian stealing 110K votes, Perdue 'won' by about 90K, and the same can be said for the other Senate seat as well.

Oh you think the donks won't cheat in the runoff? Cute.

[BDKJMU]

I think they just really need to win one of the seats, and to have Manchin on their side, to prevent court packing or Senate packing or ending the filibuster. Only winning one seat would leave the Dems in control of the Senate (with the VP tiebreaker) but if Manchin isn't going to go along with those more apocalyptic items then that would still serve to block those things from happening. Obviously, winning both Georgia runoffs would do that as well. I'd be surprised if there's a split outcome in those runoffs, I think the races go to one party, and if I had to be on it I'd say it would go to the GOP. But I don't bet so take that with a grain of salt.

Did I miss something? The 2 GA seats makes it 51-49 conks, right? So one seat makes it 50-50, Manchin would make it 51-49 against court packing, etc.

2 GA seats going conk would make it 52-50 conk.
Donks have to sweep GA to get to 50-50.

[SDHornet]

Did I miss something? The 2 GA seats makes it 51-49 conks, right? So one seat makes it 50-50, Manchin would make it 51-49 against court packing, etc.

2 GA seats going conk would make it 52-50 conk.
Donks have to sweep GA to get to 50-50.

Oh, I guess I did miss something.

[BDKJMU]

He is, but he hasn't governed like a Trumpian, which has drawn some ire from Trump in the past.

The chance of either one of those seats going Donk are slim. Even with the Libertarian stealing 110K votes, Perdue 'won' by about 90K, and the same can be said for the other Senate seat as well.

Oh you think the donks won't cheat in the runoff? Cute.

Yep, conks have to take that approach. They need 24/7 poll counters, not just poll watchers, in all the heavy donk polling places.
-Even from 6 feet away you can't compare signatures and make out postmarks.
-Need people at the polls (or wherever they count the ballots) all night long, watching out for early AM ballot dumps.
-Have reams of lawyers on standby ready to challenge any irregularities. It will be the only election going on, so they should be no shortage, and there should be $$$ for any challenges.

[dbackjon]

The beauty of America - we can disagree and the Brown Shirts aren't going to be knocking on our doors.

Yet.

Why, you planning a raid on local liberals?

[dbackjon]

[Skjellyfetti]

Aw shucks

[dbackjon]

Oh you think the donks won't cheat in the runoff? Cute.

Yep, conks have to take that approach. They need 24/7 poll counters, not just poll watchers, in all the heavy donk polling places.
-Even from 6 feet away you can't compare signatures and make out postmarks.
-Need people at the polls (or wherever they count the ballots) all night long, watching out for early AM ballot dumps.
-Have reams of lawyers on standby ready to challenge any irregularities. It will be the only election going on, so they should be no shortage, and there should be $$$ for any challenges.

The only election fraud comes from the GOP.

[SeattleGriz]

Yep, conks have to take that approach. They need 24/7 poll counters, not just poll watchers, in all the heavy donk polling places.
-Even from 6 feet away you can't compare signatures and make out postmarks.
-Need people at the polls (or wherever they count the ballots) all night long, watching out for early AM ballot dumps.
-Have reams of lawyers on standby ready to challenge any irregularities. It will be the only election going on, so they should be no shortage, and there should be $$$ for any challenges.

The only election fraud comes from the GOP.

I've missed the, "I know you are, what am I" replies.

Where have you been lately?

[Ibanez]

Feel free to correct me here, and im repeating something that was suggested to me - if there are fraudulent ballots vote Biden isn’t there a down ballot impact that we aren’t considering?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skjellyfetti]

I think the theory is that the people filling out the hundreds of thousands of fake Biden ballots forgot or didn't have time to fill out down ballot races. SDHornet or SeattleGriz could say for sure, though.

[Baldy]

He is, but he hasn't governed like a Trumpian, which has drawn some ire from Trump in the past.

The chance of either one of those seats going Donk are slim. Even with the Libertarian stealing 110K votes, Perdue 'won' by about 90K, and the same can be said for the other Senate seat as well.

Oh you think the donks won't cheat in the runoff? Cute.

Of course they will...

[Skjellyfetti]

how is that cheating?

[AZGrizFan]

Yet.

Why, you planning a raid on local liberals?

Yeah, I’m not the one mandating salutes of obedience from diners or get attacked.