Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues The Trump Administration Post-Election Mischief

I tend to think Democrats are looking at Hispanics with a one shoe fits all. Hispanics make up more than just Mexicans and Central Americans who do vote solid Democratic. Cuban-Americans on the other hand vote Republicans which is why Trump won Florida twice. Trump's 32% among Hispanics is the highest for a Republican presidential candidates since G.W. Bush's 40% in 2004. Bush's 40% is the highest since Pew Research started keeping track of the Hispanic vote back in 1980.

Then there's Texas where Trump won 41% of the Hispanic vote. Much more than the 32% nationally. There was a good article about Texas which unfortunately I failed to save.

Many Hispanic down in Texas according to the article consider themselves Tejanos instead of Hispanics. This group went for Trump. Tejano's are the Hispanic residents of the state of Texas who are culturally descended from the original Spanish-speaking settlers of Tejas, Coahuila, and other northern Mexican states. They may be variously of Criollo Spaniard or Mestizo origin. There roots in Texas go back to way before the war of Texas independence. They fought along side the Texans against Mexico. There are at least four Tejano Republican congress members from Texas. Those Hispanic who consider themselves Tejano's tend to vote Republican as do Cuban-Americans.

You can also break down Hispanics into other sub groups throughout the U.S. Not all Hispanics come from Mexico who fled economics as many democrats tend to believe.

Now this isn't that article, but it explains exactly what I just said.

Trump Didn’t Win the Latino Vote in Texas. He Won the Tejano Vote.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/17/trump-latinos-south-texas-tejanos-437027

As an aside, Trump also increased his percentage of the Asian vote from 2016 27% to 34% in 2020. The highest for a Republican presidential candidate since G.W. Bush's 42% in 2004. To round this off, Trump went from 8% of the black vote up to 12% in 2020. That's the highest since Bob Dole received exactly 12% back in 1996.

S’funny. I remember the Sanders campaign doing well on the border in the primary. Dominating the texas Hispanic vote, IIRC.
How odd....

If Sander dominated the border regions of Texas it was due to Hispanic's active in the democratic party and primaries. Dominating the primaries doesn't mean the general election which includes all, Democrats, Republicans and independents.

Since Tejano's tend to vote Republican, they most likely voted in the Republican primary instead of the democratic one.

Rather hilarious little Rachael Maddow post on YouTube today: She had video of the governor of Arizona bragging about how close he was with Trump and Pence before the election, so he had to assign them a special "Hail To The Chief" ringtone on his cellphone.

Then she played his video from today, as he was signing the certification of the state's election for Biden. In the middle of that, we can hear "Hail To The Chief" resounding from his pocket. He pulls out his cell phone, glances at the phone to see who is calling, then hits the "go to voicemail" button, and places it facedown on the table. Then he went back to signing the documents....

I'm fascinated by the pay-for-pardon case that came out yesterday. I'm wondering if that was intended as a shot across the bow for Trump, who is contemplating pardons for himself, his family, and his other co-conspirators (since he's given some already). Who asked that it be released? Why now?

I suspect it may have been the Ukrainian Dirt Search Team of Giuliani, Parnas, and Fruman.

I have been biding my time waiting to see which way the wind is blowing and today is a good day to type something.

The Washington Post is reporting 222 Republican congressmen do not acknowledge VP Biden won the election. or to put it another way that is about 90% of Republicans. Couple that with what Rep Mo Brooks is saying (he will vote to not seat some state electors ... only those battleground states which Mr Trump lost). Now is it a stretch to think he is not the only one? Now is it still unimaginable that if Congress can not agree to seat electors who have been sent by the states, that it would throw the election to the House, where Republicans control 26 of the 50 votes ... and guess who they will select

I suspect the probability of this happening is >0.

222? They only had 199 prior to the election. Even with their 13 seat pick up, the Republicans are up to 212. In the new congress it will be 222 Democrats, 212 Republicans with NY 22 still to be decided. Old congress 236 Democrat, 199 GOP.

What they think is really irrelevant.

That would be all Congressmen .... House & Senate.

Remember both the House and Senate will convene to accept the slate of electors from each state. Once the process begins each state in alphabetical order will present to the joint session their slate of electors, at which point anyone can object, when there will be (if I understand this part correctly) a separate session of each house to find a resolution to the objection. Now I do not understand what happens. Is only a majority enough to proceed and what if one house does not agree with the other etc. The possibilities are 3. They either reject the state slate and reject any slate, reject the state slate and accept the alternate slate, or finally accept the slate sent by the states. In the first two VP Biden would not have enough electoral votes on Jan 6 to get 270 votes nor would Mr Trump. It would therefore go to the House which has a Republican majority of states 26-23 (one state is split) and ergo, presuming the Republican states would vote for Mr Trump, he would continue to be occupant of the WH.

To me this is scary sheis. This would essentially be voter nullification. How can I even be typing these words ... and people still be oblivious!!!

If you got the crazy ... you're probably a Republican

Here’s what the Constitution says: Article II, Section 1 Para 3.

The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. And they shall make a list of votes for each, which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of Government of the United States, directed to the President of the senate. The president of the senate shall, in the presence of the senate and house of representatives, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted. The person having the greatest number of votes shall be the president, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed…

Now some of that was changed by the 12th amendment.

The 12th basically made the vote for the President and Vice President. Thus preventing a tie for the presidency as was the case with Jefferson and Burr along with other minor changes such as instead of taking up the top 5 electoral vote receivers, it cut it down to 3.

Unless I missed something, the constitution specifies the president of the senate will count the certified results. No where does it give the senate nor the house authority to challenge the certified results. Only in case of a tie or if no candidate has received a majority of the electoral votes does the House become involved in choosing a president, the senate the vice president.

I suppose the bottom line is the actual vote of electors take place in their states on 14 Dec and is then certified. The certified count is then sent to the President of the senate by the 23 Dec. Who counts them on 6 Jan 2021 and the new president takes office on 20 Jan.

https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/december-electoral-dates/

There is no provision in the Constitution for rejection. At least that I can find either in the main document or in the amendments by the senate or the house.