SAM News Corp. Comment and Debate thread

[Q]

Sam, I found myself agreeing with almost everything in your most recent editorial, which summed up perfectly, in my opinion, all that's been going on in Atlasia as of late.  I hadn't even considered some of the implications you discuss, and they've both given me new perspective on all this as well as convinced me that my feelings about it have been reasonable.  Thank you for your continued insights as GM.

[Q]

The Senate (amazingly on the advice of one of the forum's most prominent strict constructionists) actively assumed the power to declare the result of a controversial Presidential election as its own, one that by all indication of the text of the Constituition belongs to the Supreme Court.

I have to ask what sort of precedent this has set - is every controversial election result now going to be decided by a show of hands in the Senate?

When did this happen?

[Q]

The Senate never decided this election.

There was merely a resolution to lend the Senate's unofficial support to the results as declared by the SoFA, in the name of unity.

I certainly would never have voted to install a president in such a manner.  That is simply not what happened.  Read the resolution again.

It is troubling that anyone would so grossly misunderstand what occurred.

[Q]

It may not have done anything officially, but it pretty much told anyone who wanted to challenge results that they wouldn't get anywhere because public opinion was against them.

I sincerely hope that such was not the case.  I do not believe that it would have influenced the Supreme Court in deciding such a case.  "Public opinion" should not be a criterion in our judicial system.

I cannot say that I truly agreed with all aspects of the SoFA's decision, but I signed in the name of national unity.  Emsworth and I felt it would be less important to take the oaths of office ourselves than to try to maintain this experiment in democracy we all belong to.

[Q]

If I had known the Senate was seen as usurping judicial authority, I would not have signed the resolution.

I just wish people had voiced their concerns at the time.  It might have averted this conflict.  Why did the justices, or anyone else, not say something back when action could have been taken?

Also, I agree with Preston: Can we get a final audit of the election results?

[Q]

much whining about nothing.

What are you talking about?

That I believe a final accounting of the election results is needed?

[Q]

Fact is the ones involved settled it like adults and didn't need the court so the hindsight is useless.
Not you, Q.  Bell.

Ah, ok.  Thank you, Texasgurl.  I really do agree with you.