On what date will Trump conceed? Place your bets.

[Magooglie]

He won't. Electors will meet. Inauguration will happen. After inauguration Trump will still be saying he won the election.

 

[Philo-Publius]

.

 

[HydraCap3]

Hopefully he never concedes and turns this bitch into a full blown military takeover and declares all out civil war to defend this nation from the fucking liberal traitors.

 

[StoneColdSteveAustin]

somebody coping..

Is that what he thinks trump supporters look like?

 

[KnightTemplar]

Hopefully he never concedes and turns this bitch into a full blown military takeover and declares all out civil war to defend this nation from the fucking liberal traitors.

 

[minute bull]

I dunno what day it's gonna be but it's probably gonna go a little something like this:

 

[KnightTemplar]

Serious question: what is the longest any President has waited before conceding? Because I can see Trump setting a new record.

 

[curryjunkie]

Is that what he thinks trump supporters look like?

in his tiny mind..

 

[StoneColdSteveAustin]

in his tiny mind..

Take a few teeth out and add on an old biker goatee then it might start to look more like them

 

[Prefect]

The PA judge doesn't dictate what happens. It will be decided between the Supreme Court and the PA legislature. PA judges have no say in the end. The Constitution is clear about what government branches have jurisdiction.

You and I have no possible way of knowing what evidence Trump's legal team may have (or not have), but we both know it is mathematically possible to produce 200,000 fraudulent ballots when far more than that were mailed out to voters unsolicited.

LOL. Every clown thinks that everything will just be appealed al the way up to the supreme court. Take a look at the constitution. It says nothing about how states manage their electoral affairs. That is why it various from state to state. The supreme court isn't going to get involved in something that isn't a constitutional issue.

 

[LikeItIs]

I'm putting my money on him Epsteining himself honestly.

He's not gonna like the world not being President.

 

[BFoe]

Antonin Scalia didn't exactly win any points with the left, did he?

That is clearly not what I said. I said the Supreme Court could be the mechanism for forcing the state legislature to resolve the election regularities (likely with a legislative vote).

If no one wants to resolve the fact that GOP observers were physically prevented from doing what they had a legal right to do (observe) it is either because they gained from it, or they are afraid of getting in the crosshairs of the "you must be a Russian asset" crowd.

GOP had observers. This has been demonstrated repeatedly.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/07/...servers-were-blocked-from-counting-rooms.html
No, Scalia didn’t win points, as we wanted to see Gore win. But Scalia didn’t reverse any state result. What you are talking about doesn’t even make sense: the Supreme Court would somehow “force” state legislatures to hold votes? That’s silly. Regardless, states cannot make election law that violates other constitutional tenets, which is what is being proposed here. Numerous cases have upheld this.
https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/article-i/clauses/750
I generally find you a lot more reasonable than many other conservative posters here, so I’ll just say this. What is being spread on social media regarding SCOTUS, Election Clause and state legislatures is straight up false. This is the type of stuff that we try and explain is false, and then when the court cases go exactly as we say, we hear a chorus of “It was the activist judges!” and all of that nonsense. So mark my words and feel free to ask me to eat crow if I’m wrong, but the SCOTUS will not be forcing any state legislature votes, the SCOTUS will not overturn any state result, and state legislatures can’t appoint new electors for this election anyhow.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

Antonin Scalia didn't exactly win any points with the left, did he?

That is clearly not what I said. I said the Supreme Court could be the mechanism for forcing the state legislature to resolve the election regularities (likely with a legislative vote).

If no one wants to resolve the fact that GOP observers were physically prevented from doing what they had a legal right to do (observe) it is either because they gained from it, or they are afraid of getting in the crosshairs of the "you must be a Russian asset" crowd.

How were they physically prevented, the Dem observers followed the same protocol as the GOP observers; these were all done in accordance with state election law and the decision of the state judge. How will this be brought to the SCOTUS as a case?

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

lol yeah, he'll never concede.

I was reading today that GWB called an congratulated Biden and said that he was a good man.. even called Kamala to congratulate her. Bush went on to talk about how the election was legit and fair.

Just shows you, even if you hated Bush as POTUS.. he actually has class and respect compared to Trump.

Trump is the best thing to ever happen to Bush.

 

[terrapin]

i don't think he will concede in any definitive way that is not left open to interpretation that benefits him and his ego. what form that takes i have no idea and could run the gamut from mealy mouthed acceptance of his loss combined with double speak about fraud to a more outright direct statement about the illegitimacy of the election.

i think he will go on to tacitly encourage an insurgency through his double talk and lies (without ever being directly connected to it) and that there will be violence and low level terrorism in the streets over it. i think we are going to see a slow but steady rise in violence and insurrection coming from the right and encouraged, at the very least tacitly, by trump.

i think is is very possible our problems have just begun in this country.

if anyone listened to biden's speech it was one of his best but if you pay attention it is clear that his words of unity and forgiveness were not met with enthusiastic cheering but with an uneasy silence. this is because the core reasons for our division were not addressed in any real why in that speech and it sounded like 4 years of typical leadership which has already failed and opened the way for trump.

i think the democrats have missed the message once again and will try to run a typical administration and i don't think that will satisfy anyone from any side. i think people whether they know it yet or not are done with sold out corporatist policy and a sold out democratic party.

i think the middle and lower class will continue to lose their foothold economically, not helped at all by this pandemic and that this inequality will create anger and frustration and lead to more division and problems on the left and the right.

i think we may be in for a long slip into a fractured america with violence acted out by various extremist groups unfortunately. we can never go back to the way things were and our leaders don't have the stomach or will to make the changes we really need to heal the nation.

 

[J.M.M]

His lawsuits are obviously going no where. I’m sure there will be a couple recounts, but they will change nothing. He will leave office without resisting, but will continue to say the vote was stolen. Does that count as conceding?

 

[Armbars]

My guess?

If the GA recount sways in his favour(which it wont) - he will demand a recount in Nevada which if it sways in his favour(which it wont) will then drag this Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Boockvar supreme court to high hell and back in the hopes he gets something from it(which he wont)

My guess is, as soon as the recount in GA shows its blue he'll concede.

 

[tdluxon]

He’s in the White House bathroom calling countries to see who will grant him asylum before he is indicted for fraud or tax evasion. Then he’ll leave the country and spend the rest of his life claiming he was cheated and really won the election.

 

[Philo-Publius]

LOL. Every clown thinks that everything will just be appealed al the way up to the supreme court. Take a look at the constitution. It says nothing about how states manage their electoral affairs. That is why it various from state to state. The supreme court isn't going to get involved in something that isn't a constitutional issue.

I just quoted the Constitution. It says that the state legislature in the branch that oversees elections.

 

[Prefect]

I just quoted the Constitution. It says that the state legislature in the branch that oversees elections.

So what the hell makes you think the supreme court is going to over rule the states?