Attention doomers: No, Trump cannot use state legislators/faithless electors to steal election

[Ferguson97]

Please actually look into state laws before you go spreading baseless conspiracies.

In order for Trump to actually do this, there would have to be a state with the following things:

• Won by Biden.
• Has a Republican legislature.
• Has no faithless elector laws.

The only states with all three are... Wisconsin and Georgia. And Wisconsin has the state party's choose who the electors are. Obviously the Wisconsin Democrats would only pic someone they know they can trust. And even if by some massive malpractice they chose 10 people who all flipped to Trump... it wouldn't be enough to give Trump the election. Similarly, Georgia has a state law that has the state party committee select the electors.

Other states with no faithless elector laws: Alaska, Hawaii, Oregon, Wyoming, Ohio, Virginia, Florida, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Maryland, Delaware, Connecticut, Vermont, and Massachusetts.

Of those states that Biden won, all of them have Democratic legislatures.

Of the states Biden won that do have republican legislatures: Arizona and Michigan - have laws on the books that cancel the vote and replace the elector. Michigan has a Democratic Governor and would veto any nonsensical law that the Michigan legislature passes. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin also have Democratic Governors, who would veto any nonsense.

And in Pennsylvania, Biden himself chooses who the electors are.

Arizona has a Republican legislature and Governor, but has a faithless elector law.

So in the absolute worse case scenario where the Georgia and Wisconsin Democrats incompetently select electors who ALL flip to Trump... those 26 electoral votes would not be enough to flip the election. Biden wins with 280 electoral votes.

So sorry Trump supporters and doomers, it's not happening.

Sources:
https://www.fairvote.org/faithless_elector_state_laws
https://electoralvotemap.com/how-are-electors-chosen/

[Alben Barkley]

The doomers clinging to this theory will tell you that they’ll change the law now. But:

1. Pretty sure the Democratic governor could just veto the changes in enough states to stop that.

2. Anybody who believes the courts would let them get away with changing electoral law after the fact because they didn’t like the outcome, I have a beachfront property in Arizona to sell you.

[Hammy]

Are there actually people claiming Trump will get DEMOCRATIC electors to vote for him?

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Ah yes, the "but the Republicans will follow the law" defense. If I see it again I think I'm going to puke.

Republicans only use the law as a cudgel to beat their opponents with. They do not obey it themselves.

The Trump administration has just spent four years successfully violating the law and Constitution on a daily basis.

If the Republicans attempt a coup (because that's what we're talking about here - a coup under the pretense of law) they're not going to be stopped by legal technicalities. They'll do it, and present the rest of us with the choice of starting a civil war or pretending to agree with their post-facto made-up BS excuses for why it was technically legal. I'm not convinced they will, but I'm far from re-assured they won't, either.

If you want an example of how such interference might work, look at Michigan. It's election law has a hole in it the size of Trump's diseased ego:

The electors of president and vice-president shall convene in the senate chamber at the capitol of the  state  at  2  p.m.,  eastern  standard  time,  on  the  first  Monday  after  the  second  Wednesday  in  December following  their  election.

No access for the electors to the Michigan senate chamber in Lansing at the designated time, and their electoral votes are arguably invalid, if they even can be cast. The GOP can doubtless find a judge who would "regretfully" agree that since the law didn't provide for an alternate convention, they cannot now vote. 

[Alben Barkley]

Ah yes, the "but the Republicans will follow the law" defense. If I see it again I think I'm going to puke.

Republicans only use the law as a cudgel to beat their opponents with. They do not obey it themselves.

The Trump administration has just spent four years successfully violating the law and Constitution on a daily basis.

If the Republicans attempt a coup (because that's what we're talking about here - a coup under the pretense of law) they're not going to be stopped by legal technicalities. They'll do it, and present the rest of us with the choice of starting a civil war or pretending to agree with their post-facto made-up BS excuses for why it was technically legal. I'm not convinced they will, but I'm far from re-assured they won't, either.

If you want an example of how such interference might work, look at Michigan. It's election law has a hole in it the size of Trump's diseased ego:

The electors of president and vice-president shall convene in the senate chamber at the capitol of the  state  at  2  p.m.,  eastern  standard  time,  on  the  first  Monday  after  the  second  Wednesday  in  December following  their  election.

No access for the electors to the Michigan senate chamber in Lansing at the designated time, and their electoral votes are arguably invalid, if they even can be cast. The GOP can doubtless find a judge who would "regretfully" agree that since the law didn't provide for an alternate convention, they cannot now vote.  

The courts are well-aware that if they say "f--k it" to the law here and allow an election to be blatantly stolen before everyone's eyes in a far more grievous way than Bush v. Gore ever was, everything American democracy AND rule of law is built on falls apart instantly. Most of these people are institutionalists who actually would care about that, even if some nutty GOP legislators don't. There is a reason every one of their challenges so far has been laughed out of court.

It's just not going to happen. Have a drink, take a Xanax, just f--king breathe, do whatever it takes to relax. I get the PTSD from 2016 on is strong, but it's over now. You CAN in fact breathe again.

I mean for Christ's sake, MARK MEADOWS is telling Trump to concede. Imagine knowing that and still worrying about a "coup."

[Sbane]

Mitch Mcconnell didn't get to where he is by being stupid. Of course he won't say anything contradicting Trump right now. He doesn't have to. All he has to do is stay quiet and Biden will get elected by the electoral college and sworn in by John Roberts on January 20th. He will likely get two more seats out of Georgia and hold on to power. Why would he screw it up by carrying Trump's water. What does he gain from that?

[Ferguson97]

Are there actually people claiming Trump will get DEMOCRATIC electors to vote for him?

There are not enough Republicans to do it on their own.

[Alben Barkley]

Mitch Mcconnell didn't get to where he is by being stupid. Of course he won't say anything contradicting Trump right now. He doesn't have to. All he has to do is stay quiet and Biden will get elected by the electoral college and sworn in by John Roberts on January 20th. He will likely get two more seats out of Georgia and hold on to power. Why would he screw it up by carrying Trump's water. What does he gain from that?

I can tell you that Mitch likely keeping the Senate AND getting rid of Trump makes him the happiest man in the world, even if he won't fully show it right now. He knows Trump has been cancer to the GOP in the suburbs (basically said as much), but was thrilled that many voters gave the GOP another chance downballot even as they rejected Trump. His perfect world is one in which he has basically all say over anything Biden has a prayer of getting passed, if he allows anything through at all. That way he can dump Trump and still keep all of his power if not more. But it's not gonna happen overnight. He's been taking moves to slowly but surely (like a turtle) distance himself from Trump for weeks now.

[Hammy]

Ah yes, the "but the Republicans will follow the law" defense. If I see it again I think I'm going to puke.

Republicans only use the law as a cudgel to beat their opponents with. They do not obey it themselves.

The Trump administration has just spent four years successfully violating the law and Constitution on a daily basis.

If the Republicans attempt a coup (because that's what we're talking about here - a coup under the pretense of law) they're not going to be stopped by legal technicalities. They'll do it, and present the rest of us with the choice of starting a civil war or pretending to agree with their post-facto made-up BS excuses for why it was technically legal. I'm not convinced they will, but I'm far from re-assured they won't, either.

If you want an example of how such interference might work, look at Michigan. It's election law has a hole in it the size of Trump's diseased ego:

The electors of president and vice-president shall convene in the senate chamber at the capitol of the  state  at  2  p.m.,  eastern  standard  time,  on  the  first  Monday  after  the  second  Wednesday  in  December following  their  election.

No access for the electors to the Michigan senate chamber in Lansing at the designated time, and their electoral votes are arguably invalid, if they even can be cast. The GOP can doubtless find a judge who would "regretfully" agree that since the law didn't provide for an alternate convention, they cannot now vote.  

The courts are well-aware that if they say "f--k it" to the law here and allow an election to be blatantly stolen before everyone's eyes in a far more grievous way than Bush v. Gore ever was, everything American democracy AND rule of law is built on falls apart instantly. Most of these people are institutionalists who actually would care about that, even if some nutty GOP legislators don't. There is a reason every one of their challenges so far has been laughed out of court.

It's just not going to happen. Have a drink, take a Xanax, just f--king breathe, do whatever it takes to relax. I get the PTSD from 2016 on is strong, but it's over now. You CAN in fact breathe again.

I mean for Christ's sake, MARK MEADOWS is telling Trump to concede. Imagine knowing that and still worrying about a "coup."

There is no PTSD from 2016 involved here--you are assuming that people think Trump can still win the election (though there is a strangely high number of people here who do still seem to think this)

And this whole "no it can't happen because laws" talk is naive and assumes Republicans are honest people who honor the law, when the reality is they've shown no regard for democracy so far. And yes, this will be the end of democracy--hence why this possibility needs to be absolutely taken seriously rather than dismissed as doomerism or PTSD--especially from people who thought a Democratic Texas was a sure thing.

[Alben Barkley]

Ah yes, the "but the Republicans will follow the law" defense. If I see it again I think I'm going to puke.

Republicans only use the law as a cudgel to beat their opponents with. They do not obey it themselves.

The Trump administration has just spent four years successfully violating the law and Constitution on a daily basis.

If the Republicans attempt a coup (because that's what we're talking about here - a coup under the pretense of law) they're not going to be stopped by legal technicalities. They'll do it, and present the rest of us with the choice of starting a civil war or pretending to agree with their post-facto made-up BS excuses for why it was technically legal. I'm not convinced they will, but I'm far from re-assured they won't, either.

If you want an example of how such interference might work, look at Michigan. It's election law has a hole in it the size of Trump's diseased ego:

The electors of president and vice-president shall convene in the senate chamber at the capitol of the  state  at  2  p.m.,  eastern  standard  time,  on  the  first  Monday  after  the  second  Wednesday  in  December following  their  election.

No access for the electors to the Michigan senate chamber in Lansing at the designated time, and their electoral votes are arguably invalid, if they even can be cast. The GOP can doubtless find a judge who would "regretfully" agree that since the law didn't provide for an alternate convention, they cannot now vote.  

The courts are well-aware that if they say "f--k it" to the law here and allow an election to be blatantly stolen before everyone's eyes in a far more grievous way than Bush v. Gore ever was, everything American democracy AND rule of law is built on falls apart instantly. Most of these people are institutionalists who actually would care about that, even if some nutty GOP legislators don't. There is a reason every one of their challenges so far has been laughed out of court.

It's just not going to happen. Have a drink, take a Xanax, just f--king breathe, do whatever it takes to relax. I get the PTSD from 2016 on is strong, but it's over now. You CAN in fact breathe again.

I mean for Christ's sake, MARK MEADOWS is telling Trump to concede. Imagine knowing that and still worrying about a "coup."

There is no PTSD from 2016 involved here--you are assuming that people think Trump can still win the election (though there is a strangely high number of people here who do still seem to think this)

And this whole "no it can't happen because laws" talk is naive and assumes Republicans are honest people who honor the law, when the reality is they've shown no regard for democracy so far. And yes, this will be the end of democracy--hence why this possibility needs to be absolutely taken seriously rather than dismissed as doomerism or PTSD--especially from people who thought a Democratic Texas was a sure thing.

Two major things to unpack here:

1. No it is not naive. It's not up to "Republicans." It's up to the courts, which have so far laughed every challenge the GOP has thrown at them out of court. Even that ultra-conservative judge in Texas, remember? They literally have no case, no evidence, no legal basis for any claims. They won't even reach SCOTUS, let alone be upheld by them, because there is literally nothing there. Bush v. Gore was a case of a recount being halted in one state, and there was at least some legitimate legal justification for it. "All mail votes are fake because I don't like them, therefore let's just throw out hundreds of thousands of legally cast ballots" or "I don't like who won so now I'm changing the rules" are in a different world.

Again, I'm basing this on REAL THINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED IN RECENT DAYS/WEEKS ALONE. It's one thing to speculate that conservative justices might fail to uphold the law when we have no proof they will; after we have about a dozen or so instances in which they JUST DID, there is no longer any rational reason to think this. I am not being naive; you are being paranoid.

2. I never, not once, ever, in a million years, EVER said Texas was a "sure thing." I said I thought we COULD win Texas, which the polls supported, as did the trends from 2016 and 2018. I NEVER said we WOULD, let alone that it was a "sure thing." You are just outright lying now. I base my opinions on concrete evidence whenever possible, and we already have that as far as what the courts are deciding. When it came to predicting Texas, I went on the best data I had -- polls in saying we MIGHT win. But it's not the same league as saying with ABSOLUTE CONFIDENCE (and you CAN quote me on that) that we HAVE won already based on MUCH more solid evidence and reason.

Oh and by the way, pretty sure YOU said blue Georgia would never happen. Didn't you even say Texas was a more likely flip? Hmm...

Hell, didn't you even specifically doom over the Republicans who run Georgia rigging the election? Pretty clear now that didn't happen...

[Hammy]

Ah yes, the "but the Republicans will follow the law" defense. If I see it again I think I'm going to puke.

Republicans only use the law as a cudgel to beat their opponents with. They do not obey it themselves.

The Trump administration has just spent four years successfully violating the law and Constitution on a daily basis.

If the Republicans attempt a coup (because that's what we're talking about here - a coup under the pretense of law) they're not going to be stopped by legal technicalities. They'll do it, and present the rest of us with the choice of starting a civil war or pretending to agree with their post-facto made-up BS excuses for why it was technically legal. I'm not convinced they will, but I'm far from re-assured they won't, either.

If you want an example of how such interference might work, look at Michigan. It's election law has a hole in it the size of Trump's diseased ego:

The electors of president and vice-president shall convene in the senate chamber at the capitol of the  state  at  2  p.m.,  eastern  standard  time,  on  the  first  Monday  after  the  second  Wednesday  in  December following  their  election.

No access for the electors to the Michigan senate chamber in Lansing at the designated time, and their electoral votes are arguably invalid, if they even can be cast. The GOP can doubtless find a judge who would "regretfully" agree that since the law didn't provide for an alternate convention, they cannot now vote.  

The courts are well-aware that if they say "f--k it" to the law here and allow an election to be blatantly stolen before everyone's eyes in a far more grievous way than Bush v. Gore ever was, everything American democracy AND rule of law is built on falls apart instantly. Most of these people are institutionalists who actually would care about that, even if some nutty GOP legislators don't. There is a reason every one of their challenges so far has been laughed out of court.

It's just not going to happen. Have a drink, take a Xanax, just f--king breathe, do whatever it takes to relax. I get the PTSD from 2016 on is strong, but it's over now. You CAN in fact breathe again.

I mean for Christ's sake, MARK MEADOWS is telling Trump to concede. Imagine knowing that and still worrying about a "coup."

There is no PTSD from 2016 involved here--you are assuming that people think Trump can still win the election (though there is a strangely high number of people here who do still seem to think this)

And this whole "no it can't happen because laws" talk is naive and assumes Republicans are honest people who honor the law, when the reality is they've shown no regard for democracy so far. And yes, this will be the end of democracy--hence why this possibility needs to be absolutely taken seriously rather than dismissed as doomerism or PTSD--especially from people who thought a Democratic Texas was a sure thing.

Two major things to unpack here:

1. No it is not naive. It's not up to "Republicans." It's up to the courts, which have so far laughed every challenge the GOP has thrown at them out of court. Even that ultra-conservative judge in Texas, remember? They literally have no case, no evidence, no legal basis for any claims. They won't even reach SCOTUS, let alone be upheld by them, because there is literally nothing there. Bush v. Gore was a case of a recount being halted in one state, and there was at least some legitimate legal justification for it. "All mail votes are fake because I don't like them, therefore let's just throw out hundreds of thousands of legally cast ballots" or "I don't like who won so now I'm changing the rules" are in a different world.

Again, I'm basing this on REAL THINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED IN RECENT DAYS/WEEKS ALONE. It's one thing to speculate that conservative justices might fail to uphold the law when we have no proof they will; after we have about a dozen or so instances in which they JUST DID, there is no longer any rational reason to think this. I am not being naive; you are being paranoid.

2. I never, not once, ever, in a million years, EVER said Texas was a "sure thing." I said I thought we COULD win Texas, which the polls supported, as did the trends from 2016 and 2018. I NEVER said we WOULD, let alone that it was a "sure thing." You are just outright lying now. I base my opinions on concrete evidence whenever possible, and we already have that as far as what the courts are deciding. When it came to predicting Texas, I went on the best data I had -- polls in saying we MIGHT win. But it's not the same league as saying with ABSOLUTE CONFIDENCE (and you CAN quote me on that) that we HAVE won already based on MUCH more solid evidence and reason.

Oh and by the way, pretty sure YOU said blue Georgia would never happen. Didn't you even say Texas was a more likely flip? Hmm...

Hell, didn't you even specifically doom over the Republicans who run Georgia rigging the election? Pretty clear now that didn't happen...

The problem here is people are claiming, with absolute certainty, that Republicans CANNOT do this, and I'm saying that yes, they actually can, and laws will not stop them if they truly want to. I'm not treating this like a sure thing (though it's absolutely terrifying--especially that such a thing shouldn't even be in the realm of discussion in the first place) but it's foolish to completely dismiss this as impossible.

While it may very well fail in the end, they're definitely going to try every avenue they have: first was the courts, that failed. They still have the state legislatures, blocking vote certification or electoral votes (which would send it to the Senate), Pence being part of the counting process, and challenging electors or entire states' elector slate when the Senate formally certifies the electoral votes in January.

Republicans absolutely can, and most certainly will, try all of these avenues, using the technicalities of existing laws in their favor--and they only have to succeed once for it to be legally binding, regardless of the fact that Biden has actually won.

Worse yet, people seem either okay that this is even a possibility in the first place (even if it turns out it's only 1%) or in denial that it is.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Ah yes, the "but the Republicans will follow the law" defense. If I see it again I think I'm going to puke.

Republicans only use the law as a cudgel to beat their opponents with. They do not obey it themselves.

The Trump administration has just spent four years successfully violating the law and Constitution on a daily basis.

If the Republicans attempt a coup (because that's what we're talking about here - a coup under the pretense of law) they're not going to be stopped by legal technicalities. They'll do it, and present the rest of us with the choice of starting a civil war or pretending to agree with their post-facto made-up BS excuses for why it was technically legal. I'm not convinced they will, but I'm far from re-assured they won't, either.

If you want an example of how such interference might work, look at Michigan. It's election law has a hole in it the size of Trump's diseased ego:

The electors of president and vice-president shall convene in the senate chamber at the capitol of the  state  at  2  p.m.,  eastern  standard  time,  on  the  first  Monday  after  the  second  Wednesday  in  December following  their  election.

No access for the electors to the Michigan senate chamber in Lansing at the designated time, and their electoral votes are arguably invalid, if they even can be cast. The GOP can doubtless find a judge who would "regretfully" agree that since the law didn't provide for an alternate convention, they cannot now vote.  

The courts are well-aware that if they say "f--k it" to the law here and allow an election to be blatantly stolen before everyone's eyes in a far more grievous way than Bush v. Gore ever was, everything American democracy AND rule of law is built on falls apart instantly. Most of these people are institutionalists who actually would care about that, even if some nutty GOP legislators don't. There is a reason every one of their challenges so far has been laughed out of court.

It's just not going to happen. Have a drink, take a Xanax, just f--king breathe, do whatever it takes to relax. I get the PTSD from 2016 on is strong, but it's over now. You CAN in fact breathe again.

I mean for Christ's sake, MARK MEADOWS is telling Trump to concede. Imagine knowing that and still worrying about a "coup."

There is no PTSD from 2016 involved here--you are assuming that people think Trump can still win the election (though there is a strangely high number of people here who do still seem to think this)

And this whole "no it can't happen because laws" talk is naive and assumes Republicans are honest people who honor the law, when the reality is they've shown no regard for democracy so far. And yes, this will be the end of democracy--hence why this possibility needs to be absolutely taken seriously rather than dismissed as doomerism or PTSD--especially from people who thought a Democratic Texas was a sure thing.

Two major things to unpack here:

1. No it is not naive. It's not up to "Republicans." It's up to the courts, which have so far laughed every challenge the GOP has thrown at them out of court. Even that ultra-conservative judge in Texas, remember? They literally have no case, no evidence, no legal basis for any claims. They won't even reach SCOTUS, let alone be upheld by them, because there is literally nothing there. Bush v. Gore was a case of a recount being halted in one state, and there was at least some legitimate legal justification for it. "All mail votes are fake because I don't like them, therefore let's just throw out hundreds of thousands of legally cast ballots" or "I don't like who won so now I'm changing the rules" are in a different world.

Again, I'm basing this on REAL THINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED IN RECENT DAYS/WEEKS ALONE. It's one thing to speculate that conservative justices might fail to uphold the law when we have no proof they will; after we have about a dozen or so instances in which they JUST DID, there is no longer any rational reason to think this. I am not being naive; you are being paranoid.

The Emoluments Clauses. Contempt of Congress. The Hatch Act. Extortion by officers or employees of the United States.  Refusal of witness to testify. Coercion of political activity. Election interference. Misappropriation of funds. Whether it's violating the Constitution, abusing his office for personal gain, or publishing counterfeit weather reports, Donald Trump and his administration have been laughing at rule of law for years. And while some of his campaign officials have gone to jail, the legal consequences for his administration have been nonexistent. That's what has already happened.

I'll pull some of my examples from a different thread for things that Republicans could still do to try and keep Donald Trump in office:

*Republican governors in AZ, GA or NE can prepare a Certificate of Ascertainment for pro-Trump electors instead of their states' chosen Biden electors, or simply refuse to prepare the Certificates.

*Republican legislatures in PA, WI, MI GA, NE or AZ can pass post-facto legislation changing the allocation of electors in their states. In NE, AZ and GA, this could be done with the agreement of the Governor.

*The legislatures or governors could interfere with the meeting of the electors in their respective states on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December, preventing some (Nebraska) or all of the electors from voting. In some states, the electors must, by law, meet in the state capitol building, which a Republican legislature may simply deny access to. With no legal meeting of the electors, there are no electoral votes to be counted by Congress.

*Various forms of pressure and interference can be applied by a hostile state government to a chosen elector, to either prevent them from voting, or induce them to vote for an alternative candidate.

*Finally, the signed and paired Certificates of Vote (by the electors) and Certificates of Ascertainment (by the governors or their designated representatives) are distributed to: the President of the united states, the Archivist of the United states, two copies to the State's Secretary of State, and one to the chief judge of the appropriate Federal district court. If all those Certificates were "lost" there would again be no vote for Congress to count.


If you think there is some judicial remedy for Mitch McConnell announcing to a joint session of Congress that no one candidate a majority because not all electoral votes were delivered, I think you're wrong. If you think that Republicans are going to play by the rules, you didn't pay attention when they stole two Supreme Court seats and packed the courts. If you think the party that has spent years pretending they have no idea what Donald Trump is doing, who have looked the other way at gross abuse of office and collusion with hostile foreign powers is going to suddenly becomes very, very concerned with "law" and "the courts" (at least, the ones they haven't rigged) you are sadly mistaken.

As Hammy says, I'm not worried about Trump winning the election. I'm worried because, as David Frum said not so long ago, "When conservatives are presented with a choice between conservatism and democracy, they will choose conservatism". I am worried that, based on their last four, last twelve and last twenty years of behavior, the Republican party will be all too willing to play a game of chicken with democracy, where the only outcomes are chaos or autocracy.

I'm not confident that's what will happen. I hope that once the vote counts are final and official, the vast majority of the GOP will support the results, and oppose any attempt to seize power by Donnie and Co.  But if you've paid any attention to how the GOP actually operates, you will see that those are far from foregone conclusions. I will relax when President Biden is acknowledged by Congress, the military, and the law, and when Trump and his cronies are unemployed and have lost much of their power to abuse.

[Former President tack50]

Not sure how "correct this is", but the argument I've read seems to think that the R state legislatures (and only the state legislatures) would be the only thing that matters.

The modus operandi went something like this according to a video I saw:

1) Base yourelf on this part of the US constitution

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress

2) Interpret that as literally only the state legislature

3) The R controlled state legislatures pass resolutions claiming that the election was rigged by Democrats and that no electors may be appointed (or alternatively, that Republican electors are appointed)

4) When this inevitably ends up in court, the conservative SC rules in favour of the state legislatures

5) Trump wins with a map comparable to the current statem legislature control map (without governors; which basically means WI/MI/PA/GA/AZ flipping to Trump); or the election goes to the House which then elects Trump

Do I think that is likely to happen? No, I am 99.9% sure it won't happen. But this is the method I think would be used if the election was to be stolen (which like I said I saw on some internet video so it is probably an inaccurate interpretation of the constitution and what not)

[Ferguson97]

Not sure how "correct this is", but the argument I've read seems to think that the R state legislatures (and only the state legislatures) would be the only thing that matters.

The modus operandi went something like this according to a video I saw:

1) Base yourelf on this part of the US constitution

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress

2) Interpret that as literally only the state legislature

3) The R controlled state legislatures pass resolutions claiming that the election was rigged by Democrats and that no electors may be appointed (or alternatively, that Republican electors are appointed)

4) When this inevitably ends up in court, the conservative SC rules in favour of the state legislatures

5) Trump wins with a map comparable to the current statem legislature control map (without governors; which basically means WI/MI/PA/GA/AZ flipping to Trump); or the election goes to the House which then elects Trump

Do I think that is likely to happen? No, I am 99.9% sure it won't happen. But this is the method I think would be used if the election was to be stolen (which like I said I saw on some internet video so it is probably an inaccurate interpretation of the constitution and what not)

Even if 1-4 happen, they would almost certainly say it cannot retroactively apply to 2020. It would only work for 2024 and beyond.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Not sure how "correct this is", but the argument I've read seems to think that the R state legislatures (and only the state legislatures) would be the only thing that matters.

The modus operandi went something like this according to a video I saw:

1) Base yourelf on this part of the US constitution

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress

2) Interpret that as literally only the state legislature

3) The R controlled state legislatures pass resolutions claiming that the election was rigged by Democrats and that no electors may be appointed (or alternatively, that Republican electors are appointed)

4) When this inevitably ends up in court, the conservative SC rules in favour of the state legislatures

5) Trump wins with a map comparable to the current statem legislature control map (without governors; which basically means WI/MI/PA/GA/AZ flipping to Trump); or the election goes to the House which then elects Trump

Do I think that is likely to happen? No, I am 99.9% sure it won't happen. But this is the method I think would be used if the election was to be stolen (which like I said I saw on some internet video so it is probably an inaccurate interpretation of the constitution and what not)

Doing this - handing Trump victory in an election which he has clearly lost - would invite secession and civil war. Even if that doomsday scenario didn't happen, you would have the not-so-small issue of other countries, including key allies like Canada and the UK, refusing to acknowledge Trump as the legitimate President. I don't see why the GOP would do this when their brand has held up pretty well, they'll almost certainly hold the Senate and be able to use it to block most of Biden's initiatives, and they have an excellent chance of winning in 2024 and having a trifecta at that point.

[pbrower2a]

The slate of electors has been chosen by a state government but once -- in Colorado in 1876, the Colorado state legislature doing so because there was inadequate time in which to organize a Presidential election by voters. The Centennial State had just achieved statehood, so there is the excuse. 

[Skill and Chance]

SCOTUS ruled that "legislature thereof" in the context of the Elections Clause included the governor's veto under the state's ordinary veto override rules in a 1930's congressional redistricting case called Smiley v. Holm.  With that precedent, the Biden win is safe because Wolf, Whitmer, and Evers would veto the assignment of Trump electors in PA/MI/WI.  They could only flip AZ and GA this way. 

[Non Swing Voter]

https://twitter.com/KDKA/status/1325619117014081542

[lfromnj]

Pa legislature is also a pretty good job. 85k pay even in the huge state house.

[Catalyst138]

The faithless elector thing is really only an issue in a 269-269 tie, or 270-268. In this case, even without faithless elector laws, Trump would have to get at least 37 people to defect to him... Do people really think this is a possibility?