4w ago

Lawsuit Challenging 2024 Election Results Moves Forward After Kamala Harris Received Zero Votes in a New York County

www.latintimes.com Lawsuit Challenging 2024 Election Results Moves Forward After Kamala Harris Received Zero Votes in a New York County

A lawsuit disputing the results of the 2024 election has moved forward after it was revealed that former Vice President Kamala Harris received no votes a New York county.

United States | News & Politics @midwest.social

www.latintimes.com /lawsuit-challenging-2024-election-results-moves-forward-after-kamala-harris-received-zero-votes-584787

195 20

BoycottUnitedStates @europe.pub

Lawsuit Challenging 2024 Election Results Moves Forward After Kamala Harris Received Zero Votes in a New York County

www.latintimes.com /lawsuit-challenging-2024-election-results-moves-forward-after-kamala-harris-received-zero-votes-584787

192 16

You're viewing a single thread.

229 comments

Why didn't the democrats demand hand recounts when the election was initially called? It felt like they all just rolled over and accepted defeat.
- No fuckin idea. Didn't make sense then, either. We were so afraid to look like the crazy MAGAs. Their tactic worked.
  
  "Accuse your enemy of what you intend to do"
  Not actually a quite from Goebbels or Marx, but the Republican guiding principle nonetheless.
  
  Accuse your enemy of what you intend to do
  It's ironic that Hitler's "Night of the Long Knives" (when the Nazis arrested and eventually murdered numerous brownshirts and their leader, Ernst Roehm) acquired that name because Hitler himself used the expression in a speech that he gave immediately after the event. In the speech, he accused Roehm of having been planning a "NIght of the Long Knives" himself, directed at Hitler and the other Nazi leaders. Quite unintentionally, the phrase came to describe Hitler's actions.
- Probably same reason they just gave up in Gore v Bush.
  
  They didn't give up. The supreme Court decided Bush won Florida, without a recount.
  
  Gore then conceded without continuing to fight, to help the county heal. Because actual fighting to win would be bad
  
  Yes, but then he un-conceded. How do you think it got to the Supreme Court unless he fought?
  He brought it to the Florida circuit court, and when he lost he appealed to the Florida Supreme Court, who ruled in his favor. Then Bush appealed to the US Supreme Court.
  The problem was a coordinated effort to steal the election by the bitch queen Katherine Harris, Florida Secretary of State and Bush's Florida campaign co-chair, a fake riot by Republican operatives to disrupt a recount, and a collaborating Supreme Court. It was all tied up nicely in a bow and there wasn't much Gore could have done, although he should have requested a statewide recount right from the start instead of just cherry picking solidly Democratic-leaning counties like Miami-Dade.
  
  He only conceded after that...
  https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/algore2000concessionspeech.html
  
  He initially called Bush to concede and then called him back to un-concede, which really pissed off Bush. That's what I was referring to. It wasn't public, though.
  
  As Trump has shown us quite clearly, it doesn't really matter what the Supreme Court says.
  
  That was the acceleration point of the downward slide we'd been on since Reagan.
- Because they were following their billionaire overlord's orders? Because they are controlled opposition?
- Because they didn't want to be perceived as doing the same thing as the Republicans after the 2020 election. After complaining about the Republicans not having a "peaceful transfer of power," Dems thought it was important to demonstrate how that works, and be smug about it.
  Unfortunately, this was precisely the wrong election to make that point, since this election truly was rat fucked by MAGA.
  
  I've thought about that. But that seems like a terrible strategy, because it lets the Republicans do anything. The Republicans do a bad thing, or accuse you of doing a bad thing, and now you're incapable of responding to it?
  
  But that seems like a terrible strategy...
  I mean.... we are talking about the Democrats. That's almost their motto.
  
  Yes, it's a terrible strategy, but it's the easiest one to default to if you are a cowardly spineless weenie Democrat who is afraid to confront serious treason and corruption, like Chuck Schumer. Traditional Dems are satisfied with losing, as long as they can feel smug about being morally superior while doing it, even if it means watching the Reps systematically dismantle America on behalf of the Russians.
  We need elected representatives at every level who aren't afraid to go to battle to defend our country from treasonous criminals and Sociopathic Oligarchs.
  
  basically sums up Biden's whole presidency
- Others clearly have their pitch forks ready to go but the real reason here is because they won NY. I'd be shocked if any presidential candidate in the history of the US demanded a recount in a state they won.
  Is 0 votes suspicious? Absolutely. Is the recount process the right way to uncover something happening at a scale to compromise an entire district's election process? Probably not.
  According to Balletpedia, it's unclear who in NY even pays for a voluntary recount (NY has mandatory recounts in close elections).
  However suspicious this district is, it's not justification for a recount in another district in a completely different state.
  If there is interference at a meaningful scale, it's not going to be uncovered by volunteers working without sleep to deliver election results as quickly as humanly possible. The wheels of justice turn far top slowly.
  A lawsuit is a good first step.
- because that’s what the left does unless it’s against their own. it’s infuriating to watch the party fight itself harder than it’ll fight the opposition
  
  lol, democrafts are left??
  
  To be clear, the DNC is fighting against its constituents. This is Washington politicians and funders vs. the people. Sad to say, Washington is winning.

229 comments