I'm ignoring your value-free narrative frame, and bringing the conversation back to concrete reality.
This made me laugh out loud.
It is concrete reality that there has been no evidence presented to support the claim of widespread fraud.
It is also concrete reality that this should not go to the SCOTUS as long as there is no evidence that the lower courts made an error.
Bottom line is that this will, and should, be presented to the Supreme Court for resolution, even if it casts the election into a ''Contingent Election'' scenario. Biden will not seriously want a cloud of illegitimacy over his head if he prevails, and likewise Trump and his voters if there was any illegal activity. This contesting of the election is not a challenge to the republic per se, but the system still works with such things happening from time to time.
No, it should not be presented to the SCOTUS if the lower courts have made no errors.
Trump does not get to take it to the SCOTUS just because he does not like what other courts said.
My suspicion is that you could care less about matters like Constitutionality or legality in this or any election, but seeing those you want to see win, win.
And you would be wrong about me. But since this is irrelevant, you are free to believe whatever insulting things you want about me.
Finfinder wrote:Yes ! This article proves two of your points are a fallacy. The first being that observers were allowed to properly monitor the vote counting, the second being there’s no way to confirm if votes were put aside when observers we’re NOT allowed proper observation. Of course you’ve had access to the same types of articles all along but refuse to acknowledge them because they debunk your propaganda. This gets very tiring with you. The rest of it I’ve gone over with you at least three or four times already.
Philadelphia Election Center Refuses to Let Trump Officials Watch Vote Counting Despite Court Order
Chaos is currently ensuing in the city of Philadelphia, where the election headquarters is refusing to allow Trump campaign officials to watch the vote counting process despite a court order from a state court permitting them to be 6 feet away from election workers tabulating the votes in order to monitor potential fraud.
https://www.lifenews.com/2020/11/05/phi ... urt-order/
This news outlet you use a source is extreme right wing and is known for failing fact checks.
So let us fact check the article:https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... e-barred-/
President Donald Trump wrongly claimed that Republican election observers have been barred from watching ballot counts in Pennsylvania and Michigan, repeating a falsehood that has been contradicted by his own campaign lawyers in court hearings and lawsuits.
"Nobody wants to report that Pennsylvania and Michigan didn’t allow our Poll Watchers and/or Vote Observers to Watch or Observe," Trump wrote in a Nov. 11 tweet tagged as "disputed" by Twitter. "This is responsible for hundreds of thousands of votes that should not be allowed to count. Therefore, I easily win both states."
Election observers representing the Republican Party and the Trump campaign have been allowed to observe the ballot-counting process alongside Democratic observers in both Pennsylvania and Michigan, despite the president’s repeated claims to the contrary.
A Trump campaign attorney conceded in court that the campaign had a "non-zero number" of election observers in Philadelphia. Another federal lawsuit the campaign filed in Michigan includes hundreds of pages of affidavits from people who served as election observers.
There also remains no evidence of widespread voter fraud that would invalidate "hundreds of thousands of votes" in those states. Independent decision desks for multiple news organizations have called the election for President-elect Joe Biden, who leads Trump by about 52,000 votes in Pennsylvania and 146,000 in Michigan, according to Decision Desk HQ.
"President Trump’s claims about lack of observers have been tested and continue to be tested in court," said Rick Hasen, a professor of law at the University of California, Irvine. "Importantly, there has been no proof of illegal votes in the election, and no pathway to go from complaints about inadequate access to overturning the results of the election."
PolitiFact has debunked false claims that GOP observers were denied access in Philadelphia and Detroit. Other fact-checkers who have looked at those cities and their surrounding states have also documented that observers were allowed. Litigation continues in both states as Trump refuses to concede defeat.
The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
Trump’s focus in Pennsylvania has been on Philadelphia, where a Nov. 5 judge’s order allowed election observers from both parties to view the ballot-counting process from 6 feet away.
Philadelphia appealed the order, arguing that the original arrangement let all observers "see the entire set up" in detail. The city said it has complied in the meantime by providing closer access to the observers, who were previously kept farther away due to the coronavirus.
Republican observers were never blocked from observing entirely, despite Trump’s claim. Under questioning from a federal judge in court, a Trump campaign attorney conceded that the campaign had several representatives monitoring the ballot counting.
"At all times, the city commissioners, who are a bipartisan organization, have followed the law," said Kevin Feeley, a spokesperson for the city commissioners. Feeley told PolitiFact Nov. 6 that he was "staring at" observers representing both parties in the city’s convention center.
Ellen Lyon, a spokesperson for the Pennsylvania Department of State, said Pennsylvania more broadly has "had a free, fair and secure election" with "the highest degree of transparency," including livestreams of the process in Philadelphia and other counties.
"In all counties, all parties have canvass observers throughout the process," Lyon said, pointing to the commonwealth’s guidelines for observers. "Any insinuation otherwise is a lie."
So we can see that Trump campaign had observers in Pennsylvania at all times.
Doug64 wrote:Why is it that Democrats think their voters are too incompetent to follow common sense laws protecting the integrity of the vote? In this case Georgia already requires a photo ID to vote in person, they're just talking about extending that to mail-in ballots. But apparently providing a photocopy of a photo ID with the ballot is too hard.
I think Democrat voters in Georgia know exactly what they are doing and are not incompetent at all.
They did beat you guys, after all.