Tim Scott refuses to say whether he'll accept the results of the 2024 election

[Badger]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

One out of three, and no riots occurred. Do better

[Ferguson97]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

Token virtue-signaling is not the same thing as a violent coup attempt. Be serious.

[VBM]

It would have been perfectly reasonable to say something like, "As long as the elections are free and fair, of course I'll accept them". That would have given him plenty of room to fall back to the next version of the GOP's "Big Lie". But instead we get this:

Kristen Welker: “Will you commit to accepting the election results of 2024?

Tim Scott: “At the end of the day, the 47th president of the will be Donald Trump”

Welker's question is like asking a football team/defense attorney what they'll do if they lose.  When engaged in a competition of wits, you don't acknowledge the possibility of losing until it's already been handed to you.  Anything else smacks of defeatism, which is not a very good trait to have as a presidential candidate.  Campaigns in the past have given similar non-answers to these types of questions.

By being so on the nose about it, Scott is also appealing to Trump's braggadocio. He's trying to keep himself ahead in the veepstakes. 

Has it ever occurred to you that maybe politics shouldn’t be treated like a sports match?

[Yoda]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

One out of three, and no riots occurred. Do better

And (arguably more importantly) there were no slates of fake electors from Democrats trying to steal the election the day of Congressional certification.

[Del Tachi]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

Token virtue-signaling is not the same thing as a violent coup attempt. Be serious.

Neither Trump's actions to dispute the election results nor the Capitol riot were "violent coup attempts."  Get a life.

And I guess the "token virtue signaling" includes Democrats objecting to the results in Congress, boycotting Trump's inauguration, organizing the largest protests against a president in U.S. history (almost 200 people were indicted on Federal charges resulting from the "DisruptJ20" protests), and pushing a fake "Russian collusion" conspiracy that was later summarily dispelled as fiction? 

[Never Made it to Graceland]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

Token virtue-signaling is not the same thing as a violent coup attempt. Be serious.

Neither Trump's actions to dispute the election results nor the Capitol riot were "violent coup attempts."  Get a life.

Del Tachi 🤝 Fuzzy Bear

Downplaying terrorism they were cheering on at home

[Del Tachi]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

One out of three, and no riots occurred. Do better

And (arguably more importantly) there were no slates of fake electors from Democrats trying to steal the election the day of Congressional certification.

For all of 2021 and into 2022, the subject of the DOJ's investigation was the Capitol riot itself and not the two-months Trump spent trying to dispute the election beforehand.  Trump's lobbying of state legislators, organizing of "alternate" elector slates in key states, and pressuring of Mike Pence to accept them all happened in plain sight and were reported by journalists in real time.  They were not a criminal conspiracy.   

And the DOJ knew it.  Officials at the Justice Department initially shot down several early 2021 proposals to probe Trump and his close allies, per the Washington Post. What changed in 2022 was growing desperation by the Biden administration and partisan investigators at the DOJ to hamstring Trump as a political opponent. They have relied on unprecedented theories of criminality to make their case.

[Never Made it to Graceland]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

One out of three, and no riots occurred. Do better

And (arguably more importantly) there were no slates of fake electors from Democrats trying to steal the election the day of Congressional certification.

For all of 2021 and into 2022, the subject of the DOJ's investigation was the Capitol riot itself and not the two-months Trump spent trying to dispute the election beforehand.  Trump's lobbying of state legislators, organizing of "alternate" elector slates in key states, and pressuring of Mike Pence to accept them all happened in plain sight and were reported by journalists in real time.  They were not a criminal conspiracy.   

LOL. Wow.

[Ferguson97]

Neither Trump's actions to dispute the election results nor the Capitol riot were "violent coup attempts."  Get a life.

You are sympathizing with terrorists and traitors. Do you have no shame at all?

You get a life.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It's a 319 map and Biden is at 45/51 not 38/61 Approvals as my signature states it's gonna be a 218D H 51/50 S and 26/24RG. But we are gonna have very close states Trump is gonna wind up with 45/47 and Biden 50%

[HisGrace]

Republicans only "accept" elections where they like the result. News at 11.

[Yoda]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

One out of three, and no riots occurred. Do better

And (arguably more importantly) there were no slates of fake electors from Democrats trying to steal the election the day of Congressional certification.

For all of 2021 and into 2022, the subject of the DOJ's investigation was the Capitol riot itself and not the two-months Trump spent trying to dispute the election beforehand.  Trump's lobbying of state legislators, organizing of "alternate" elector slates in key states, and pressuring of Mike Pence to accept them all happened in plain sight and were reported by journalists in real time.  They were not a criminal conspiracy.   

And the DOJ knew it.  Officials at the Justice Department initially shot down several early 2021 proposals to probe Trump and his close allies, per the Washington Post. What changed in 2022 was growing desperation by the Biden administration and partisan investigators at the DOJ to hamstring Trump as a political opponent. They have relied on unprecedented theories of criminality to make their case.

You seem to be under the impression that trying to steal an election by way false slates of electors is not a crime if one does it in broad daylight. This is incorrect. Also, you are factually incorrect that the media and therefore the rest of us knew everything that was going at the time. We did not know, for example, that some young staffer physically flew Wisconsin's false electoral vote paperwork to DC and was instructed to give them to Ken Chesebro, who was then to give them to Ron Johnson, who was then to give them Mike Pence, with the intent of the Vice President substituting trump's wishes in place of the Wisconsin electorate.

The fact the Biden's DoJ initially resisted investigating trump's many, many criminal acts in the flailing last days of his Presidency is a serious mistake and horrible professional judgement that they need to answer for, not some anecdote that absolves trump of his criminal acts.

[Del Tachi]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

One out of three, and no riots occurred. Do better

And (arguably more importantly) there were no slates of fake electors from Democrats trying to steal the election the day of Congressional certification.

For all of 2021 and into 2022, the subject of the DOJ's investigation was the Capitol riot itself and not the two-months Trump spent trying to dispute the election beforehand. Trump's lobbying of state legislators, organizing of "alternate" elector slates in key states, and pressuring of Mike Pence to accept them all happened in plain sight and were reported by journalists in real time.  They were not a criminal conspiracy.   

And the DOJ knew it.  Officials at the Justice Department initially shot down several early 2021 proposals to probe Trump and his close allies, per the Washington Post. What changed in 2022 was growing desperation by the Biden administration and partisan investigators at the DOJ to hamstring Trump as a political opponent. They have relied on unprecedented theories of criminality to make their case.

You seem to be under the impression that trying to steal an election by way false slates of electors is not a crime if one does it in broad daylight. This is incorrect. Also, you are factually incorrect that the media and therefore the rest of us knew everything that was going at the time. We did not know, for example, that some young staffer physically flew Wisconsin's false electoral vote paperwork to DC and was instructed to give them to Ken Chesebro, who was then to give them to Ron Johnson, who was then to give them Mike Pence, with the intent of the Vice President substituting trump's wishes in place of the Wisconsin electorate.

The fact the Biden's DoJ initially resisted investigating trump's many, many criminal acts in the flailing last days of his Presidency is a serious mistake and horrible professional judgement that they need to answer for, not some anecdote that absolves trump of his criminal acts.

Transmitting documents to Congress isn't a crime.  Forgery is one thing, but openly asserting that one is a duly appointed elector of a state, even when that claim is without serious merit, is a proposition of law. This was not an attempt to dupe recipients with counterfeit certificates.  The way to deal with such frivolous claims is to reject them, which is exactly what Congress did.

The exception to this point is a charge of overall conspiracy to defraud the United States.  The the fake electors *knew* that Trump hadn't won in their states, so their effort to elect him was a criminal conspiracy.  But it is not a crime to simply believe or act on a lie.

[Yoda]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

One out of three, and no riots occurred. Do better

And (arguably more importantly) there were no slates of fake electors from Democrats trying to steal the election the day of Congressional certification.

For all of 2021 and into 2022, the subject of the DOJ's investigation was the Capitol riot itself and not the two-months Trump spent trying to dispute the election beforehand. Trump's lobbying of state legislators, organizing of "alternate" elector slates in key states, and pressuring of Mike Pence to accept them all happened in plain sight and were reported by journalists in real time.  They were not a criminal conspiracy.   

And the DOJ knew it.  Officials at the Justice Department initially shot down several early 2021 proposals to probe Trump and his close allies, per the Washington Post. What changed in 2022 was growing desperation by the Biden administration and partisan investigators at the DOJ to hamstring Trump as a political opponent. They have relied on unprecedented theories of criminality to make their case.

You seem to be under the impression that trying to steal an election by way false slates of electors is not a crime if one does it in broad daylight. This is incorrect. Also, you are factually incorrect that the media and therefore the rest of us knew everything that was going at the time. We did not know, for example, that some young staffer physically flew Wisconsin's false electoral vote paperwork to DC and was instructed to give them to Ken Chesebro, who was then to give them to Ron Johnson, who was then to give them Mike Pence, with the intent of the Vice President substituting trump's wishes in place of the Wisconsin electorate.

The fact the Biden's DoJ initially resisted investigating trump's many, many criminal acts in the flailing last days of his Presidency is a serious mistake and horrible professional judgement that they need to answer for, not some anecdote that absolves trump of his criminal acts.

Transmitting documents to Congress isn't a crime.  Forgery is one thing, but openly asserting that one is a duly appointed elector of a state, even when that claim is without serious merit, is a proposition of law. This was not an attempt to dupe recipients with counterfeit certificates.  The way to deal with such frivolous claims is to reject them, which is exactly what Congress did.

The exception to this point is a charge of overall conspiracy to defraud the United States.  The the fake electors *knew* that Trump hadn't won in their states, so their effort to elect him was a criminal conspiracy.  But it is not a crime to simply believe or act on a lie.

Imma stop you right there. Transmitting false documents to Congress is very much a crime, especially when done with the intent to interfere with the function of government and to steal an election. We literally just had even the republican judges on SCOTUS agree with this (even state it on their own with no prompting!) during oral arguments just weeks ago.

Didn't bother reading the rest of your post since you started out with such a glaring error in the first sentence.

[Del Tachi]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

One out of three, and no riots occurred. Do better

And (arguably more importantly) there were no slates of fake electors from Democrats trying to steal the election the day of Congressional certification.

For all of 2021 and into 2022, the subject of the DOJ's investigation was the Capitol riot itself and not the two-months Trump spent trying to dispute the election beforehand. Trump's lobbying of state legislators, organizing of "alternate" elector slates in key states, and pressuring of Mike Pence to accept them all happened in plain sight and were reported by journalists in real time.  They were not a criminal conspiracy.   

And the DOJ knew it.  Officials at the Justice Department initially shot down several early 2021 proposals to probe Trump and his close allies, per the Washington Post. What changed in 2022 was growing desperation by the Biden administration and partisan investigators at the DOJ to hamstring Trump as a political opponent. They have relied on unprecedented theories of criminality to make their case.

You seem to be under the impression that trying to steal an election by way false slates of electors is not a crime if one does it in broad daylight. This is incorrect. Also, you are factually incorrect that the media and therefore the rest of us knew everything that was going at the time. We did not know, for example, that some young staffer physically flew Wisconsin's false electoral vote paperwork to DC and was instructed to give them to Ken Chesebro, who was then to give them to Ron Johnson, who was then to give them Mike Pence, with the intent of the Vice President substituting trump's wishes in place of the Wisconsin electorate.

The fact the Biden's DoJ initially resisted investigating trump's many, many criminal acts in the flailing last days of his Presidency is a serious mistake and horrible professional judgement that they need to answer for, not some anecdote that absolves trump of his criminal acts.

Transmitting documents to Congress isn't a crime.  Forgery is one thing, but openly asserting that one is a duly appointed elector of a state, even when that claim is without serious merit, is a proposition of law. This was not an attempt to dupe recipients with counterfeit certificates.  The way to deal with such frivolous claims is to reject them, which is exactly what Congress did.

The exception to this point is a charge of overall conspiracy to defraud the United States.  The the fake electors *knew* that Trump hadn't won in their states, so their effort to elect him was a criminal conspiracy.  But it is not a crime to simply believe or act on a lie.

Imma stop you right there. Transmitting false documents to Congress is very much a crime, especially when done with the intent to interfere with the function of government and to steal an election. We literally just had even the republican judges on SCOTUS agree with this (even state it on their own with no prompting!) during oral arguments just weeks ago.

Didn't bother reading the rest of your post since you started out with such a glaring error in the first sentence.

You stopped reading because the rest of my post proves you wrong.

The submitted fake elector certificates weren't "false".  They weren't forged or fabricated; they simply were not valid instruments under the law because they lacked the authorizations required under the Electoral Count Act.  They were incomplete, invalid but that doesn't make them illegal. 

At most, you can argue the fake elector certificates were part of a broader conspiracy to defraud the United States.  But where's the conspiracy?  Yes, Trump's allies "conspired" to make a far-fetched legal argument that would change the election's outcome.  But is that not what every legal team does in an election dispute?  Why is the legal maneuvering of Al Gore's team to affect selective, hand recounts overseen by partisan Democrats and change the legal outcome of Florida's election not a a similar "conspiracy"? 

[Yoda]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

One out of three, and no riots occurred. Do better

And (arguably more importantly) there were no slates of fake electors from Democrats trying to steal the election the day of Congressional certification.

For all of 2021 and into 2022, the subject of the DOJ's investigation was the Capitol riot itself and not the two-months Trump spent trying to dispute the election beforehand. Trump's lobbying of state legislators, organizing of "alternate" elector slates in key states, and pressuring of Mike Pence to accept them all happened in plain sight and were reported by journalists in real time.  They were not a criminal conspiracy.   

And the DOJ knew it.  Officials at the Justice Department initially shot down several early 2021 proposals to probe Trump and his close allies, per the Washington Post. What changed in 2022 was growing desperation by the Biden administration and partisan investigators at the DOJ to hamstring Trump as a political opponent. They have relied on unprecedented theories of criminality to make their case.

You seem to be under the impression that trying to steal an election by way false slates of electors is not a crime if one does it in broad daylight. This is incorrect. Also, you are factually incorrect that the media and therefore the rest of us knew everything that was going at the time. We did not know, for example, that some young staffer physically flew Wisconsin's false electoral vote paperwork to DC and was instructed to give them to Ken Chesebro, who was then to give them to Ron Johnson, who was then to give them Mike Pence, with the intent of the Vice President substituting trump's wishes in place of the Wisconsin electorate.

The fact the Biden's DoJ initially resisted investigating trump's many, many criminal acts in the flailing last days of his Presidency is a serious mistake and horrible professional judgement that they need to answer for, not some anecdote that absolves trump of his criminal acts.

Transmitting documents to Congress isn't a crime.  Forgery is one thing, but openly asserting that one is a duly appointed elector of a state, even when that claim is without serious merit, is a proposition of law. This was not an attempt to dupe recipients with counterfeit certificates.  The way to deal with such frivolous claims is to reject them, which is exactly what Congress did.

The exception to this point is a charge of overall conspiracy to defraud the United States.  The the fake electors *knew* that Trump hadn't won in their states, so their effort to elect him was a criminal conspiracy.  But it is not a crime to simply believe or act on a lie.

Imma stop you right there. Transmitting false documents to Congress is very much a crime, especially when done with the intent to interfere with the function of government and to steal an election. We literally just had even the republican judges on SCOTUS agree with this (even state it on their own with no prompting!) during oral arguments just weeks ago.

Didn't bother reading the rest of your post since you started out with such a glaring error in the first sentence.

You stopped reading because the rest of my post proves you wrong.

The submitted fake elector certificates weren't "false".  They weren't forged or fabricated; they simply were not valid instruments under the law because they lacked the authorizations required under the Electoral Count Act.  They were incomplete, invalid but that doesn't make them illegal. 

At most, you can argue the fake elector certificates were part of a broader conspiracy to defraud the United States.  But where's the conspiracy?  Yes, Trump's allies "conspired" to make a far-fetched legal argument that would change the election's outcome.  But is that not what every legal team does in an election dispute?  Why is the legal maneuvering of Al Gore's team to affect selective, hand recounts overseen by partisan Democrats and change the legal outcome of Florida's election not a a similar "conspiracy"? 

No, I stopped reading b/c you can't muster the ability to go one sentence without stating something wrong. Once you can do that, I'll start indulging the rest of your posts.

[Del Tachi]

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

One out of three, and no riots occurred. Do better

And (arguably more importantly) there were no slates of fake electors from Democrats trying to steal the election the day of Congressional certification.

For all of 2021 and into 2022, the subject of the DOJ's investigation was the Capitol riot itself and not the two-months Trump spent trying to dispute the election beforehand. Trump's lobbying of state legislators, organizing of "alternate" elector slates in key states, and pressuring of Mike Pence to accept them all happened in plain sight and were reported by journalists in real time.  They were not a criminal conspiracy.   

And the DOJ knew it.  Officials at the Justice Department initially shot down several early 2021 proposals to probe Trump and his close allies, per the Washington Post. What changed in 2022 was growing desperation by the Biden administration and partisan investigators at the DOJ to hamstring Trump as a political opponent. They have relied on unprecedented theories of criminality to make their case.

You seem to be under the impression that trying to steal an election by way false slates of electors is not a crime if one does it in broad daylight. This is incorrect. Also, you are factually incorrect that the media and therefore the rest of us knew everything that was going at the time. We did not know, for example, that some young staffer physically flew Wisconsin's false electoral vote paperwork to DC and was instructed to give them to Ken Chesebro, who was then to give them to Ron Johnson, who was then to give them Mike Pence, with the intent of the Vice President substituting trump's wishes in place of the Wisconsin electorate.

The fact the Biden's DoJ initially resisted investigating trump's many, many criminal acts in the flailing last days of his Presidency is a serious mistake and horrible professional judgement that they need to answer for, not some anecdote that absolves trump of his criminal acts.

Transmitting documents to Congress isn't a crime.  Forgery is one thing, but openly asserting that one is a duly appointed elector of a state, even when that claim is without serious merit, is a proposition of law. This was not an attempt to dupe recipients with counterfeit certificates.  The way to deal with such frivolous claims is to reject them, which is exactly what Congress did.

The exception to this point is a charge of overall conspiracy to defraud the United States.  The the fake electors *knew* that Trump hadn't won in their states, so their effort to elect him was a criminal conspiracy.  But it is not a crime to simply believe or act on a lie.

Imma stop you right there. Transmitting false documents to Congress is very much a crime, especially when done with the intent to interfere with the function of government and to steal an election. We literally just had even the republican judges on SCOTUS agree with this (even state it on their own with no prompting!) during oral arguments just weeks ago.

Didn't bother reading the rest of your post since you started out with such a glaring error in the first sentence.

You stopped reading because the rest of my post proves you wrong.

The submitted fake elector certificates weren't "false".  They weren't forged or fabricated; they simply were not valid instruments under the law because they lacked the authorizations required under the Electoral Count Act.  They were incomplete, invalid but that doesn't make them illegal. 

At most, you can argue the fake elector certificates were part of a broader conspiracy to defraud the United States.  But where's the conspiracy?  Yes, Trump's allies "conspired" to make a far-fetched legal argument that would change the election's outcome.  But is that not what every legal team does in an election dispute?  Why is the legal maneuvering of Al Gore's team to affect selective, hand recounts overseen by partisan Democrats and change the legal outcome of Florida's election not a a similar "conspiracy"? 

No, I stopped reading b/c you can't muster the ability to go one sentence without stating something wrong. Once you can do that, I'll start indulging the rest of your posts.

lol ok

[All Along The Watchtower]

Extremely dangerous stuff here.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I see the Republicans have gone “so it’s illegal to make plans with friends?” mode again.

[Republican Party Stalwart]

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol  

All of which is beside the point.

If the 2024 Presidential election is free and fair, but does not result in a win for the Republican nominee, will Republicans accept the result, or attempt to seize power by fraud and force?

I don't expect them to, and Senator Scott's answer strongly implies he, at least, will not.

Republicans will never accept, under any circumstances, a Joe Biden victory, as legitimate.

They didn't accept it in 2020, so why would they in 2024?

Democrats have not accepted a Republican victory since 1988.  Democrats objected to the electoral college results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 lol   

One out of three, and no riots occurred. Do better

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oUUEytRYUI

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_Donald_Trump#Post-election_protests

That's nowhere near the half of it.

[Torie]

Fuzzy do you approve od Trump's behavior in connection with the certification of the election? this is not a trick question. A simple yes or no would suffice.