So Um I’m kinda worried about that Texas case

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/chris__nardi/status/1336423900620730374

[emailking]

Soooooooooo does this evidence mean it is more likely for it to be accepted? Denied? Idk what they are trying to say here...

The suit is saying that if, on average each county should vote the same Dem/Rep percentages they did in 2016 (e.g. if you could replay the 2020 election over and over) then what are the chances that the actual tabulated vote totals could have happened? And it's saying that the chance is less than 1 in quadrillion for each of the 4 states. That probably works out but there's no reason to think states should be voting similarly to how they did in 2016. So it's irrelevant.

[emailking]

Which is dumb because it doesn't weaken their influence, they still have 38 EVs. At most it weakens the influence of certain voters in those states (not TX).

[emailking]

Also I'm quite confused by the premise of that statistical nonsense above, is he basically saying that one should expect two candidates from the same party to recieve the exact same number of votes in two elections four years apart?

Not exactly. He's saying the exact 2016 result represents the average the candidate should receive in 2020. By average, I mean pretend you could run the 2020 election over and over again, average all of the results. Then he calculated the probability that the 2020 results could have happened if the average tends to the 2016 result.

Here's an analogy. Let's say you're 5'10. You postulate because of this that your siblings should have an average height of 5'10. But you have a sibling (only 1) who's 6'5 and conclude this is extremely unlikely because the average height of your siblings is supposed to be 5'10. So they must be adopted or something.

[emailking]

Yeah it's nuts.

[emailking]

I think it was fine to be worried. I worry about a lot of things that intellectually I know have no chance of happening. It's kind of just human nature.

[emailking]

If Alito and Thomas really did dissent, they are also seditious traitors. They should be impeached, and after Republicans presumably refuse to remove them, Biden has complete and total justification to add 4 more to the Supreme Court to cancel out their votes.

As a compromise, however, we can pass a law permanently setting the Court to 9 eventually, meaning the first 4 vacanies of this larger Court will not be filled. That way packing is off the table permanently.

From what I understand, they believe all cases between states must be heard regardless of the merits. So the dissent was just was on standing only.

[emailking]

Ugh, Alito and Thomas. It was kind of funny to see them cite Thomas's sole dissent from like 2004 but they're still horrible hacks. It's also kind of hilarious that only Roberts (who is now probably the swing vote) plus all the Trump appointees jumped ship.

Roberts isn't the swing vote.

Sorry, I was unclear. Swing vote insofar as he is closest to the center ideologically, not swing vote as in "the vote which decides which side wins." Come to think of it maybe I should have said centrist vote.

I don't understand the distinction.

Like the difference between the tipping point state and the state that's closest to split down the middle.

[emailking]

Trump thinks it was 7-2.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1337743516294934529

retweet:
https://twitter.com/toddstarnes/status/1337555701527416832