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

[NewYorkExpress]

Look, my opinion here is that Harris should be seated BUT, there should also be a new election to deal with the massive amounts of fraud, and Harris should barred from the ballot in that election, given it's rather clear he would just steal it.

In any event, it's really just a preview of what the Republican nominee will do against Cooper in 2020.

[NewYorkExpress]

Do they have enough to indict Harris now?

I'd like Democrats to have ammo to be able to easily refuse to seat him when the new Congress convenes.

[NewYorkExpress]

Harris personally directed Dowless' hiring despite warnings that he may have used fraud in 2016. They interacted regularly during the primary according to a former Dowless associate, and said associate claims Dowless and Harris spoke often about the "program."

LOCK HIM UP LOCK HIM UP.

Harris's fellow North Carolina Republicans should push him off the pier at Cape Hatteras for (probably) blowing a seat that they would've won with Pittenger as the nominee.

[NewYorkExpress]

Harris confirms he personally hired Dowless for absentee work but says he knew nothing about illegality.

Trump lies better than Harris does, and that's saying something.

If we're denying Harris the seat, and we want to cut a deal with Republicans, can we just award it to Pittenger? I mean, he was clearly robbed of victory by illegal activity in the primary.

[NewYorkExpress]

I still think seating Pittenger would be the proper thing to do here, even if isn't legal.

[NewYorkExpress]

I still think seating Pittenger would be the proper thing to do here, even if isn't legal.

That's absurd.  You can't say with certainty that he would have won a general election in which he wasn't a candidate.  Anything could have happened there.

No, I can't say with certainty, but if Pittenger could win an primary where he was facing a personal scandal (against Harris) in 2016, then he probably could beat a Democrat in 2018.

[NewYorkExpress]

Predicting it now. Will the new Congress reconvenes in a week, they refused to seat Mark Harris as the winner. Fox News acknowledges indications of possible reported fraud, maybe, but their main angle is on how the new democratic majority is already over reaching their power Etc by refusing to seat a Republican, completely not even trying to explain why not seating Harris despite the evidence of fraud is somehow overreach.

That's a good argument for why we should have more limited free speech, if we have media organizations (FOX News, MSNBC) acting as propaganda mouthpieces for a political party.

[NewYorkExpress]

NC BoE dissolved by Wake County court: https://www.wcnc.com/mobile/article/news/politics/wake-county-superior-court-rules-that-nc-board-of-elections-to-dissolve-amid-district-9-investigation/275-07a600fc-2ced-404e-8d6e-2c86770a8286

They are right.

Couldn't the board of elections have presented it's case before Christmas?

[NewYorkExpress]

Hoyer repeats that Dems will not seat Harris. Since the House is the ultimate judge of its own membership, a court will laugh at Harris. House Admin can order a new election or theoretically even seat McCready immediately, though Pelosi will not do the latter. See IN-8 1985.

https://twitter.com/JoeBrunoWSOC9/status/1078763120863178752

As a Dem, I want the to seat McCready.

As someone who believes in fair play I want them to seat Pittenger, or leave the seat vacant until 2020.

[NewYorkExpress]

Hoyer repeats that Dems will not seat Harris. Since the House is the ultimate judge of its own membership, a court will laugh at Harris. House Admin can order a new election or theoretically even seat McCready immediately, though Pelosi will not do the latter. See IN-8 1985.

https://twitter.com/JoeBrunoWSOC9/status/1078763120863178752

As a Dem, I want the to seat McCready.

As someone who believes in fair play I want them to seat Pittenger, or leave the seat vacant until 2020.

How is leaving the seat vacant until 2020 functionally different from calling a totally new election now (something many of us support, but you have argued against)?

If a new election is called, a new Congressman (who probably would be a Democrat, but not necessarily), would probably be seated sometime in 2019. If the seat is left vacant until after the 2020 elections (which would be the third best way to do things after seating McCready or Pittenger), the new incumbent would be seated with the other freshmen of the 2020 class.

[NewYorkExpress]

Hoyer repeats that Dems will not seat Harris. Since the House is the ultimate judge of its own membership, a court will laugh at Harris. House Admin can order a new election or theoretically even seat McCready immediately, though Pelosi will not do the latter. See IN-8 1985.

https://twitter.com/JoeBrunoWSOC9/status/1078763120863178752

As a Dem, I want the to seat McCready.

As someone who believes in fair play I want them to seat Pittenger, or leave the seat vacant until 2020.

How is leaving the seat vacant until 2020 functionally different from calling a totally new election now (something many of us support, but you have argued against)?

If a new election is called, a new Congressman (who probably would be a Democrat, but not necessarily), would probably be seated sometime in 2019. If the seat is left vacant until after the 2020 elections (which would be the third best way to do things after seating McCready or Pittenger), the new incumbent would be seated with the other freshmen of the 2020 class.

Yes, obviously there is a time difference.  What I meant was: you are OK with leaving the seat vacant until 2020 -- when the whole election process starts over -- but you are against starting over with a special election now.  These positions seem inconsistent.  Both courses of action start over with new primaries.  Why do you support a new election in 2020 but NOT one in 2019?

I'm not okay with a new special election. I'd rather just leave the seat vacant until the next general election, if we aren't going to seat McCready/Pittenger.

Yes, that would require a new primary, but that primary would be the one that comes with the general election, not one North Carolina has create out of whole cloth.

[NewYorkExpress]

Well Jacobs is under investigation, but this is a very Republican District...

Since he doesn't have the incumbency advantage that Collins had, I'll make the following prediction.

Nate McMurray (D) 50%
Chris Jacobs (R) 49%
Duane Whitmer (L) 0.6%
Michael Giammaerllo (G) 0.4%

[NewYorkExpress]

Well Jacobs is under investigation, but this is a very Republican District...

Since he doesn't have the incumbency advantage that Collins had, I'll make the following prediction.

Nate McMurray (D) 50%
Chris Jacobs (R) 49%
Duane Whitmer (L) 0.6%
Michael Giammaerllo (G) 0.4%

lol

I will accept my humble pie with dignity.