Congressional Special Election (last call! unstickied after NY-27 final results)

[lfromnj]

How many votes is required in the House to expel a member? A simple majority or 2/3rds?

im pretty sure expulsion is 2/3 but refusing to seat is just a simple majority.

[lfromnj]

And I think so long as McCready is unable to catch up, Harris should be certified regardless of fraud. An insurmountable race ought to lead to certification.

That's not how this works. Any fraud committed in an election should nullify it regardless of if the candidate trailing can catch up.

no lol
If it is proven the fraud was limited and Harris was not involved then it should be certified. A special election is a waste of money in that scenario and also a middle finger to the other Harris voters and the plurality of voters who wanted Harris.

There is nothing funny about this. You are implying that it's okay to commit fraud if it doesn't effect the result or if the candidate didn't know about it (which seems hard to believe). If voters had their ballots forged or destroyed then they should be given the opportunity to vote in a fair election.

do you seriously believe that in all 7 districts in California that flipped that there wasn't a single misplaced or tampered ballot using harvesting?
If we find one does that mean there should be a new election.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

How many votes is required in the House to expel a member? A simple majority or 2/3rds?

im pretty sure expulsion is 2/3 but refusing to seat is just a simple majority.

What's the difference between being expelled and being unable to take your seat?

[Badger]

This also shows how useless voter ID laws are since they do nothing to prevent absentee ballot fraud,  which is where the vast majority of voter fraud (The little of it there is) occurs.

It’s where the vast majority of prosecuted* voter fraud is.

Neither you nor any other living soul has any idea how many non-citizens vote in California. Again, no one has ANY idea - I’m not saying it definitely happens because I don’t know, but I also know that you don’t know it doesn’t happen because there would be no way of knowing.

The point of voter ID laws is to know for sure who votes in our elections. The point against them is because Dems know that in as much as we don’t know, whoever is sliding through the cracks is likely voting for their candidates by large margins.

When you offer driver’s licenses to anyone and then only require a deiver’s license to vote, it is not unreasonable for an outsider to think that maybe the state doesn’t care about non-citizens voting. Look up the laws and requirements in California if you don’t believe me.

Your shiny hat needs a new layer of Reynolds Wrap.

[lfromnj]

How many votes is required in the House to expel a member? A simple majority or 2/3rds?

im pretty sure expulsion is 2/3 but refusing to seat is just a simple majority.

What's the difference between being expelled and being unable to take your seat?

expulsion would be in the middle of ones term and unable to take your seat is simply you were never a member to start with or your new term does not exist.

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

So in theory could democrats just refuse to seat every republican in the house just cuz?

[DrScholl]

And I think so long as McCready is unable to catch up, Harris should be certified regardless of fraud. An insurmountable race ought to lead to certification.

That's not how this works. Any fraud committed in an election should nullify it regardless of if the candidate trailing can catch up.

no lol
If it is proven the fraud was limited and Harris was not involved then it should be certified. A special election is a waste of money in that scenario and also a middle finger to the other Harris voters and the plurality of voters who wanted Harris.

There is nothing funny about this. You are implying that it's okay to commit fraud if it doesn't effect the result or if the candidate didn't know about it (which seems hard to believe). If voters had their ballots forged or destroyed then they should be given the opportunity to vote in a fair election.

do you seriously believe that in all 7 districts in California that flipped that there wasn't a single misplaced or tampered ballot using harvesting?
If we find one does that mean there should be a new election.

And therein lies the hypocrisy. You want elections overturned based on zero evidence, but you want someone who paid for fraud to be sworn into the House. The process in California is quite transparent and legal representation for candidates can challenge ballots. None of the Republicans who lost even filed a challenge which should tell you that they had no evidence.

California isn't even the subject here, it's North Carolina.

[lfromnj]

So in theory could democrats just refuse to seat every republican in the house just cuz?

and yeah the senate could retaliate. And I consider myself  an indie who dislikes Trump but if the dems did this I will vote straight R in 2020 including Trump and a large portion of the country probably would

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

So in theory could democrats just refuse to seat every republican in the house just cuz?

and yeah the senate could retaliate. And I consider myself  an indie who dislikes Trump but if the dems did this I will vote straight R in 2020.

> Implying that either party would ever do that.

[lfromnj]

So in theory could democrats just refuse to seat every republican in the house just cuz?

and yeah the senate could retaliate. And I consider myself  an indie who dislikes Trump but if the dems did this I will vote straight R in 2020.

> Implying that either party would ever do that.

yeah exactly some lines are way too far for either party to break due to both the moral implications and the political consequences would be broad.

[GeorgiaModerate]

So in theory could democrats just refuse to seat every republican in the house just cuz?

and yeah the senate could retaliate. And I consider myself  an indie who dislikes Trump but if the dems did this I will vote straight R in 2020.

> Implying that either party would ever do that.

Yeah, the idea of not seating an entire party is sheer fantasy.  Not seating one member due to a questionable election is entirely different and has ample precedent.

[Crumpets]

Save this name:

Leslie McCrae Dowless

Good call. What was your source?

[President Phil Scott]

So in theory could democrats just refuse to seat every republican in the house just cuz?

In therory, lol ... in theory, YES.

[Strong Candidate]

Man, some people on RRH are not taking this well at all.

https://twitter.com/RRHElections/status/1068894581377384448
The true nuclear takes come from HoneyBee and Krazen's comments on the website:

HoneyBee:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Krazen:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Beet]

So in theory could democrats just refuse to seat every republican in the house just cuz?

and yeah the senate could retaliate. And I consider myself  an indie who dislikes Trump but if the dems did this I will vote straight R in 2020.

> Implying that either party would ever do that.

Yeah, the idea of not seating an entire party is sheer fantasy.  Not seating one member due to a questionable election is entirely different and has ample precedent.

The most likely is if the Republicans control the House and Senate, and we had a Democratic president. They could do it to neuter the veto and govern by themselves.

[President Phil Scott]

And I think so long as McCready is unable to catch up, Harris should be certified regardless of fraud. An insurmountable race ought to lead to certification.

That's not how this works. Any fraud committed in an election should nullify it regardless of if the candidate trailing can catch up.

no lol
If it is proven the fraud was limited and Harris was not involved then it should be certified. A special election is a waste of money in that scenario and also a middle finger to the other Harris voters and the plurality of voters who wanted Harris.

There is nothing funny about this. You are implying that it's okay to commit fraud if it doesn't effect the result or if the candidate didn't know about it (which seems hard to believe). If voters had their ballots forged or destroyed then they should be given the opportunity to vote in a fair election.

I don't think that's what he meant.

But indeed, if we wend up discovering out that the outcome itself won't possibly be changed whether or not the fraud occurred, yet couldn't have swing the outcome, then Harris deserves to be declared the winner.

That is, of course, not to say that no investigations should be opened, in the name of security transparency and simple safety's sake, one (or maybe multiple) certainly should.

And those involved must definitely be held responsible according to the law. Obviously if Harris turns out to have played a part then he will deserve to be prosecuted and the consequences I imagine will be serious (not just removal from the chamber)

[lfromnj]

Man, some people on RRH are not taking this well at all.

https://twitter.com/RRHElections/status/1068894581377384448

The true nuclear takes come from HoneyBee and Krazen's comments on the website:

HoneyBee:

"Threaten not to seat Carper for admitting to beat his wife:

Elections decide seats, not “PR battles” Mark Harris is the elected member of NC-09 and deserves to be seated as such"

"Ah yes, because if we surrender this election, the Dems will bow down and accept every voter fraud claim ever made in the future.

This “strategy” of bowing down and giving the Dems what they want while the Dems never do so to us deserves to be left in the ashes of history with the pre-Trump GOP."

Krazen:

"BS.

I don’t recall Al Franken or Christine Gregoire surrendering. Go eff yourself is an appropriate response given the history."

most of RRH is taking it reasonably well like Boehner and even Izengabe but those two hacks Krazen and Honeybee just keep spamming muh constitution and MUH GREGOIRE/Franken. Overall they agree by now there is fraud but also did the fraud affect the election.

[ON Progressive]

Man, some people on RRH are not taking this well at all.

https://twitter.com/RRHElections/status/1068894581377384448

The true nuclear takes come from HoneyBee and Krazen's comments on the website:

HoneyBee:

"Threaten not to seat Carper for admitting to beat his wife:

Elections decide seats, not “PR battles” Mark Harris is the elected member of NC-09 and deserves to be seated as such"

"Ah yes, because if we surrender this election, the Dems will bow down and accept every voter fraud claim ever made in the future.

This “strategy” of bowing down and giving the Dems what they want while the Dems never do so to us deserves to be left in the ashes of history with the pre-Trump GOP."

Krazen:

"BS.

I don’t recall Al Franken or Christine Gregoire surrendering. Go eff yourself is an appropriate response given the history."

LMAO. RRH truly is pathetic. They've also cried like babies about Maine's RCV and California's ballot counting.

[lfromnj]

Man, some people on RRH are not taking this well at all.

https://twitter.com/RRHElections/status/1068894581377384448

The true nuclear takes come from HoneyBee and Krazen's comments on the website:

HoneyBee:

"Threaten not to seat Carper for admitting to beat his wife:

Elections decide seats, not “PR battles” Mark Harris is the elected member of NC-09 and deserves to be seated as such"

"Ah yes, because if we surrender this election, the Dems will bow down and accept every voter fraud claim ever made in the future.

This “strategy” of bowing down and giving the Dems what they want while the Dems never do so to us deserves to be left in the ashes of history with the pre-Trump GOP."

Krazen:

"BS.

I don’t recall Al Franken or Christine Gregoire surrendering. Go eff yourself is an appropriate response given the history."

LMAO. RRH truly is pathetic. They've also cried like babies about Maine's RCV and California's ballot counting.

the maine thing was just pathethic but this time its just two hacks who hate the opposing party with a passion. Like the rest of the comments are quite reasonable and even telling those two to stfu.

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

I would have voted for McCready in the GE this time around. But, if I lived in NC 9 and there was a special election, there is a decent chance that I would flip my vote to Harris because I don't believe it is ok to have the election invalidated because of alleged fraud (again, I trust Bladen county too) that is not even enough for McCready to catch up if you take that into account.

Honestly I have no clue what will come next. Hopefully certification. But if it is a special election, McCready should be considered the slight favorite from a neutral and strategic standpoint, regardless of your opinion of each candidate.

[TomC]

Those who are asserting the lead is insurmountable are only looking at the ballots turned in, not the ones not turned in. What the data and affidavits suggest are that in Bladen ballots were changed to benefit Harris. In Robeson, the markedly high request rate coupled with the low return rate and the low turnout rate suggests ballots were destroyed. Both of these things mean several thousand ballots could be in question. That’s more than Harris’ margin. Can the BOE ever be certain if the race would have turned out differently? No, and they don’t have to be certain.

The hacks who insist this is nothing need to be ignored. When it happens to the other party, we need to admit the truth and call it for for what it is. Repairing our democracy should be our #1 priority.

If we can sacrifice Al Franken for heavy, inappropriate flirting, they can sacrifice this shmuck for the sake of rooting out election fraud.

[jimrtex]

Hate to point out the obvious, but Bladen and Robeson SHOULD NOT BE IN THE 9TH!!!!


I hope there is a new election, and I hope the State Supreme Court puts this map through a paper shredder, burns the shreds and then forces Mark Harris to eat the ashes.

It'll be nice when Bladen County ends up in a Likely D Fayetteville-Robeson seat.

[Xing]

I guess cheating and breaking the law doesn't matter if it appears that the candidate would've won without doing so, and the candidate should face no consequences whatsoever for their actions.

[pantsaregood]

I would have voted for McCready in the GE this time around. But, if I lived in NC 9 and there was a special election, there is a decent chance that I would flip my vote to Harris because I don't believe it is ok to have the election invalidated because of alleged fraud (again, I trust Bladen county too) that is not even enough for McCready to catch up if you take that into account.

Honestly I have no clue what will come next. Hopefully certification. But if it is a special election, McCready should be considered the slight favorite from a neutral and strategic standpoint, regardless of your opinion of each candidate.

You are ignoring two factors:

1. Harris could end up in prison. Electoral fraud is not treated lightly.

2. You're assuming that McCready needs to "make up the gap." That's not how electoral fraud works. The integrity of the election is at stake - for all we know, 5,000 absentee ballots for McCready were destroyed. The election is tainted to the point that no valid results can be discerned from it. At this point, the Board of Elections certifying the election would be equivalent to "Harris probably won, but who knows?"


You've mentioned that you "trust" Bladen County - the issue is that there's clearly something here that's illegitimate. There is reason to not trust the elections, and the entirety of the NC Board of Elections has recognized this.

[Antonio the Sixth]

FFS, everybody calm down.

There's an investigation going on and we'll find out soon enough what ends up being done about this race. Stop feeding the trolls like Bagel and 2016 and also stop assuming we know everything already.