Judson Phillips: TEAverines!

Via Paul Constant, Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation, (Wikipedia: “the only Tea Party-affiliated group to be listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center”) refuses to go quietly. From Politicus USA:

On November 19, Phillips wrote [WND link],

Is there a way to stop this? Yes, there is….

According to the 12th Amendment, for the Electoral College to be able to select the president, it must have a quorum of two-thirds of the states voting. If enough states refuse to participate, the Electoral College will not have a quorum. If the Electoral College does not have a quorum or otherwise cannot vote or decide, then the responsibility for selecting the president and vice president devolves to the Congress.

The House of Representatives selects the president and the Senate selects the vice president.

Since the Republicans hold a majority in the House, presumably they would vote for Mitt Romney, and the Democrats in the Senate would vote for Joe Biden for vice president…

As PoliticusUSA goes on to explain, this is factually incorrect — even World Nut Daily eventually published a correction. Which, needless to say, didn’t slow down the ‘blaze’ of far-right-wing chain emails promoting this totally legal and not at all chickenshite theory, because President Obama remains stubbornly… a Democrat.

Just before the election, Roll Call reported that “Disgruntled Activists May Target Electors“:

The 538 members of the Electoral College do not officially cast their votes until Dec. 18, leaving them the target of intense pressure from campaigns to influence the race for the White House after all votes are cast and the winner declared….

In 2004, about 30 percent of electors said they had been contacted to change their vote. Four years later, as online political organizing became increasingly effective, that number rose to 80 percent, Andrews found.

The campaigns often center around a particular cause. In 2000, for example, when Republican nominee George W. Bush won the electoral vote, but lost the popular vote, election reform activists urged electors to abstain in protest of the system.

In 2008, conservatives who argued that then-Sen. Barack Obama was not born in the United States targeted hundreds of Democratic electors.

Sam Spencer, a 2008 Democratic elector in North Carolina, said he received at least 30 letters questioning Obama’s eligibility and urging him to change his vote.

“It was electoral voter suppression; they were trying to suppress the vote,” Spencer said in an interview with Roll Call. “I got an odd package that had a petition and I’m thinking in the back of my mind, ‘this is the one they probably put anthrax in.’ ”…

I assume the Secret Service is on this astroturfed ‘activism’ like ugly on Rush Limbaugh, because with the GOP’s failure in both the electoral and the popular vote to reclaim “their” White House, that ‘targetting’ image may go beyond the metaphorical. As Constant correctly points out:

… Teabaggers, who remind us very frequently that they care so very much about the Constitution, are trying to use the Constitution to overthrow the results of an election. Let’s repeat: 47% of Americans voted for Mitt Romney. That’s the will of the people. What they’re talking about, in their adorable little outraged language, is basically a coup.

116 replies
  1. 1
    Schlemizel says:

    because President Obama remains stubbornly… a Democrat NICLANG!.

  2. 2
    SFAW says:

    What they’re talking about, in their adorable little outraged language, is basically a coup.

    Sedition (noun): incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government.

  3. 3
    efgoldman says:

    @Schlemizel: You know, I was mildly astonished that nobody (at least, that I know about) actually rang the ni-clang bell running up to the election.

  4. 4
    Anonymous says:

    It’s hard to believe that the GOP has the chutzpah to criticize anyone for wanting “entitlements” when they think that they’re entitled to presidential power despite uncontestedly getting less votes (popular and EC) than the other guy, but there it is.

  5. 5
    dmsilev says:

    Wikipedia says that we’ve averaged one faithless elector per two or three cycles. Once you subtract out things like accidentally voting for Edwards/Kerry instead of Kerry/Edwards, the most recent actual faithless elector appears to have been in 1948. The last time there were enough faithless electors to actually change the result of the (VP) election was 1836:

    The Democratic Party nominated Richard Mentor Johnson of Kentucky as their vice presidential candidate. The 23 electors from Virginia refused to support Johnson with their votes because of the fact that he had previously lived with and fathered children with an African-American woman. As a result, although the Democratic presidential nominee Martin van Buren won a majority of electoral votes, no vice-presidential candidate won a majority. The decision was therefore made by the U.S. Senate. The Senate elected Johnson as the Vice President, including votes for Johnson by both of Virginia’s senators.

    Not exactly high up on the “likely threat” list.

  6. 6
    Punchy says:

    You’d have to flip a LOT of electors to get RMoney in da Black Haus…

  7. 7
    jl says:

    Politics is getting to be just one cliff hanger after another. Just when we thought it was safe to come out from under the bed.

    I guess if enough state legislatures could meet right away and repeal their procedures for the electors’ meeting, and no one got 270, that would do the trick…. hey, wait a minute. I smell a best selling political thriller here. Just need to work in some sex and drugs and Soviet spies, and there we go.

    So, everything above is copyrighted. Remember that.

    Now, here is a good one.

    TPMDC
    Anchor Accuses Top House Progressive Of Tanking Markets By Appearing On CNBC
    Evan McMorris-Santoro

    ” At around 3:30 PM Eastern Tuesday, CNBC anchor Michelle Caruso-Cabrera noted a sell-off in the stock market, an entirely unremarkable occurrence in the course of the financial network’s daily coverage. But what separated this particular sell-off from others, according to Caruso-Cabrera, was that it could be traced directly to the appearance of one of the House’s top progressives on her show.

    Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) tanked the market, she said, by refusing to budge on his contention that Medicare cuts should be off the table in negotiations surrounding the so-called fiscal cliff. ”

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.....a-cnbc.php

    The crazy walk among us. They are everywhere. Watch out!

  8. 8
    Baud says:

    @dmsilev:

    The 23 electors from Virginia refused to support Johnson with their votes because of the fact that he had previously lived with and fathered children with an African-American woman.

    That’s old school ni-CLANG.

  9. 9
    Original Lee says:

    @jl: Logical thought, how does that happen?

    On a positive note, we get this beauty from Texas, of all places:

    Saying “that it is permissible for a factfinder to make third grade math useful,” Judge Gregg Costa of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas ruled that plaintiff qualified as a seaman for purposes of pursuing Jones Act damages for injuries from a fall. An employee must spend about 30 percent of his or her time as a seaman to qualify under the Jones Act. The plaintiff spent 29.8 percent of his time on an inland barge.

  10. 10
    PeakVT says:

    The words “unnecessary complexity” come to mind every time I re-read the XII Amendment.

  11. 11
    dmsilev says:

    @Baud: Look on the bright side. The GOP today could use the same excuse to refuse to vote for Obama.

  12. 12
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @jl:

    Financial Analyst : Stock Market :: Mayan high priest : rain spirits. The only difference that I can see is that the analysts have a more tactful wardrobe.

  13. 13
    Citizen_X says:

    @Baud: Well, that fact is also true of Obama, so there you go!

    ETA: Argh, beaten to the punch.

  14. 14
    jl says:

    @Original Lee:

    ” Logical thought, how does that happen? ”

    I guess it could happen if patriotic Amercians got their state legislators in gear. Like they will in my new political thriller coming out next years. Enough hawt chicks could get GOP legislators in gear, I bet.

    Actually, I do not know how it could be done. I am spekkelatin’ here. I know the states are in charge of arranging the mechanics of the electoral college meeting in each state, and transmitting the results. But I dunno if effing up the mechanics would legally nullify the vote.

    Dude, this thriller will write itself. I will be watching you people if anything comes out before I get mine done.

  15. 15
    TheMightyTrowel says:

    @Spaghetti Lee: and arguably fewer people can see you on CNBC than could see you on top of a Maya pyramid.

  16. 16
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @jl:

    I’m thinking Tommy Lee Jones as Phillips in the movie? http://www.google.com/search?c.....038;tab=wi

  17. 17
    jl says:

    @PeakVT: Thanks for the text of the twelfth amendment. IANAL, but looks to me like each state is constitutionally mandated to hold an electoral college vote.

    Teaverines are weeping. Or would weep if they could find their way back to reality.

  18. 18
    PsiFighter37 says:

    @jl: Even by CNBC standards, Michelle Caruso-Cabrera is a fool. She repeats everything she learned from that assclown Larry Kudlow.

  19. 19
    JPL says:

    @jl: Well that’s a mistake. Earlier today Marketwatch online blamed Reid. Will we never know who tanked the market?

  20. 20
    Soonergrunt says:

    They’re so cute. I have one of these idiots at work. Believes every right-wing conspiracy or loony idea that he comes into contact with, and the loonier it is, them likely he believes it.
    The Facility CIO had to call him into her office and counsel him about the Hatch act. Winger’s officemate told me that he thinks I complained to the FCIO about him. Officemate also told me that he pointed out to Winger that I would never do such a thing. Not because I wouldn’t smack around a law breaker* but because, Officemate told him, that I was getting a kick of out his increasingly desperate and silly behavior, and I’m not interested in ending the free comedy show anytime soon.

    *(I would turn somebody in for Hatch Act, but only if they were soliciting money or doing campaign work–just BSing around isn’t worth the trouble.)

  21. 21
    NonyNony says:

    @Spaghetti Lee:

    The only difference that I can see is that the analysts have a more tactful wardrobe.

    Vile slander.

    Mayan high priests had a far better understanding of modern meteorology than CNBC “analysts” have of the stock market.

  22. 22
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    Let them continue. Obama can then win 332-54. MANDATE!

  23. 23
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @JPL:

    Reid as in Andy? I’d believe it.

  24. 24
    jl says:

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent):

    Excellent observation. I see, dear commenter, that you can think things through. You could make some money advising the reactionaries. You’d have to persuade them not to burn at the stake for being a demon first. But, might work.

  25. 25
    PeakVT says:

    @jl: “The Electors shall meet in their respective states…”

    Seems pretty definitive to me.

  26. 26
    Mr Stagger Lee says:

    According to (not so)Free Republic, there are calls for patriots to march on the Electoral College, but I think that they will be playing University of I Don’t Where(Glenn Beck’s school)that week in the Toilet Bowl.

  27. 27
    SP says:

    @jl- I’m thinking some kind of action thriller based on this clause:
    “which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate.”
    So a bunch of tea party activists try to intercept enough certified letters that Obama fails to reach 270 votes by the deadline, but in a stunning twist they can’t add properly and in the final scene, while celebrating their apparent victory are appalled to learn that Obama actually has reached 270. “But we had The Math!”… fin.

  28. 28
    Baud says:

    @SP:

    If Nicolas Cage isn’t cast for the lead in that movie, I’m done with Hollywood.

  29. 29
    👽 Martin says:

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent): What’s more, the penalty for what they are proposing is that they have their representation stripped in the House, so not only does Obama get a (larger) mandate but Dems win back control of the House.

    How can we help them?

  30. 30
    Suffern ACE says:

    Hmmm. Wouldn’t they be better off just having the electors arrested a few states that they control but Obama won thereby denying him 270? Iowa, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida. Sure there might be backlash. But five is easier than 17.

  31. 31
    Craigo says:

    I don’t know how one would march on the electoral college, since such a thing does not actually exist.

    Electors meet in their states; they have never convened as a body, ever.

  32. 32
    r€nato says:

    since teabaggers are highly susceptible to believe chain emails, couldn’t we circulate one that advocates mass suicide as a highly effective way to prevent or protest Obama’s 2nd term?

  33. 33
    👽 Martin says:

    Oh please, oh please, oh please, make it so!

    The RedState post, which laid out the conservative case in full against Chambliss, read a lot like a campaign manifesto, which maybe it was: Erickson said Tuesday evening on his radio show he’d been approached “by serious people” to consider a primary challenge and is giving it “prayerful consideration.”

  34. 34
    NonyNony says:

    @👽 Martin:

    I don’t think that the Flying Spaghetti Monster loves me enough for Erick Son of Erick to mount a primary challenge against Saxby Chambliss.

  35. 35
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @👽 Martin: Can we get Obama to give a press conference on how the Electoral College works? That should be enough to get them to do the exact opposite of what they should do.

  36. 36
    PurpleGirl says:

    @Craigo: These are teabaggers, people who do not know the mechanisms of government. They don’t even know that Medicare is, indeed, a government program. You know, morans.

  37. 37
    Jinchi says:

    This shows a sad lack of imagination on the part of the Tea Party.

    They want to throw the election to the House of Representatives so that they can elect Mitt Romney? Why would they waste a brilliant coup like that on a RINO like him?

    They should be planning to have Boehner and Co. elect Todd Akin.

  38. 38

    Does this mean we have to burn down Atlanta again? And the Eagles are having such an awesome season …

  39. 39
    NonyNony says:

    @r€nato:

    since teabaggers are highly susceptible to believe chain emails, couldn’t we circulate one that advocates mass suicide as a highly effective way to prevent or protest Obama’s 2nd term?

    I’ve been trying to come up with one that suggests that liberals get incredibly pissed off when conservatives take their money out of the US and move to Somalia, where they could create their own country founded on the principles of the free market and unlimited gun ownership rights.

  40. 40
    Yutsano says:

    Never give up! Never surrender! WOLVERINES!!

    BTW is anyone else as amused as I am that the lead actor in the remake isn’t American?

  41. 41
    dmsilev says:

    @👽 Martin: That would have to be absolutely hilarious to watch.

    Condolences to the poor folks in Georgia who would have to live through it.

  42. 42
    slippy says:

    @👽 Martin: God-damn that would be satisfying to see asshole Chambliss primaried by his own lapdogs on the right for the crime of impurity.

    They really are just going to gobble their own party down to nothing, aren’t they?

  43. 43
    Raven says:

    @dmsilev: How do you think it would differ from any other day here?

  44. 44
    r€nato says:

    Electors are chosen by their respective parties, it is an honor bestowed on very loyal and hard-working party members. In 2000, an elector from DC cast a blank ballot to protest the district’s lack of representation in Congress. But the idea that an elector would actually switch their vote from Dem to Rep or vice versa is EXTREMELY far-fetched. There are some examples in modern history of faithless electors who cast a vote for a small third-party candidate.

    Basically, teabaggers are being childish idiots once again.

  45. 45
    Raven says:

    See here how everything
    Lead up to this day
    And it’s just like any other day
    That’s ever been
    Sun going up and then
    The sun going down
    Shine through my window
    And my friends they come around
    Come around, come around

  46. 46
    👽 Martin says:

    @slippy:

    They really are just going to gobble their own party down to nothing, aren’t they?

    Yep. But god damn if that last Republican in Congress won’t be the purest motherfucker ever! And then Americans will fully appreciate conservative ideas. And then victory!

  47. 47
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @👽 Martin:

    For the record, Jim Martin only lost to Chambliss by 90,000 votes in 2008 (he eventually went on to lose the runoff by a bigger margin.) Of course, he’ll be almost 70 years old in ’14. Georgia Dems have anyone else?

  48. 48
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @r€nato: We could use that: Convince the baggers that if they get their electors to vote for Santorum, God will change the votes for Obama.

  49. 49
    Suffern ACE says:

    @BruceFromOhio: the Eagles can’t end their season quickly enough and their fans would not mind it. I think you mean the falcons.

  50. 50
    dmsilev says:

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent): That’s thinking small. Obama should give a press conference, no a whole series of press conferences, on the dangers of drinking bleach and licking live power outlets.

  51. 51
    Paul says:

    This is rather amusing when you think about it. According to the GOP propaganda outlet known as FoxNews, Obama is our worst President ever. They have said it so many times I have lost count.

    Yet, the only way to apparently get him out of office apparently is with some kind of a coup since 53% of the American people disagreed with them. It kind of makes one wonder who the real Americans are. The majority that voted for Obama or the small minority of self-described “patriots” who want to do an unconstitutional coup when they disagree with what most Americans think.

  52. 52
    Jon says:

    I’ve been a lurker here for a long time, but I wanted to share the fact that 1) this guy is my (estranged, because he is a shithead) dad and 2) this:

    Wikipedia: “the only Tea Party-affiliated group to be listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center”

    made my night.

    On the one hand, I’m sorry that the rest of the country has to deal with him, but on the other, at least I’m no longer alone in my misery.

  53. 53
    1badbaba3 says:

    Whaddaya know, colossal dick St. Santorum was right. The GOP really won’t get the smart people.

    Being right about one thing gives him a leg up on the growing field for 2016.

    Frothy/As yet unknown VaginaRepublican ’16!

  54. 54

    @Suffern ACE: DERP. Indeed, Falcons. Too much stout, not enough brain cells, and mea culpa to Iggles fans everywhere.

  55. 55
    Michael2 says:

    Ah, sweet, blissful historical ignorance. The remarkable thing is that these Teatards never once thought _”Gee, why hasn’t anyone tried this before?! Those South Carolina fireaters didn’t need to secede, they could have just prevented The Black Republican Abraham Lincoln from being certified and then we’d still have slavery! Oh, happy day!”_

    Like Alexander Stephens or Jeff Davis never would have considered that as an alternative. MORANS.

    And as someone noted, yes, exactly, what they are proposing is a minority takeover of government – a coup.

  56. 56
    Suffern ACE says:

    I’m going to guess that all you need to do is send Judson $50 and this will happen like magic.

  57. 57
    1badbaba3 says:

    @Michael2: Oo’er, a coup! And here I have nothing to wear.

  58. 58
    NotMax says:

    It involves numbers and it involves reality, so of course the right-wingers’ proposal is absolutely, completely, totally, incontrovertibly wrong.

    It’s a given.

    What next? Mitt petitioning to legally change his name to Barack Hussein Obama so he can claim electoral votes?

  59. 59
    hueyplong says:

    Anyone else get the idea that Judson is going to come with a totally valid, surefire reason why the levying of taxes on him for the year 2012 is unconstitutional?

  60. 60
    The Red Pen says:

    A post on Daily Kos (front page) nutpicked some really choice comments. There was the one (mentioned earlier) that suggested that activists “occupy the campus of the electoral college” in order to pressure them to change their votes.

    My favorite was one that suspect that the electoral college was siding with Obama because he was a professor and all those college types stick together.

    Damn book learnin’.

  61. 61
    Chris says:

    @Michael2:

    And as someone noted, yes, exactly, what they are proposing is a minority takeover of government – a coup.

    Back in Obama’s first two years, I remember more than a few wingnuts fantasizing about the military removing Obama from office, and drawing explicit and approving comparisons between such a move and Pinochet’s overthrow of Chilean democracy. “A coup is not an ideal solution, but the course we are on as a nation is not acceptable,” I think was the way it was phrased.

    I have to say, I do thank God for the military’s obedience to civilian authorities. There are many, many countries where given the current levels of animosity, Obama would have already been deposed.

  62. 62
    Yutsano says:

    @hueyplong: Oh don’t tease me. I lurves me some cases like that. Gives me great opportunity to give Burnsie heartburn!

  63. 63
    Jason says:

    And as someone noted, yes, exactly, what they are proposing is a minority takeover of government – a coup.

    Jesus, as I keep on pointing out, a coup is exactly what the teahadist set have been gearing up for these past 15 years or so. They are losing and they know rigging the electoral system can’t stem the tide of changing demographics in the country. They have been more and more explicit with their eliminationist rhetoric and now the Ron Paul set are talking about how secessionism is the highest form of patriotism. The Bush years were a period when the White House was captured by Krugman’s “revolutionary power” that simply did not regard the existing system as legitimate.

    This kind of talk is more dangerous than most liberals are willing to realize. They cannot possibly win but they can do a lot of damage to the body politic with these sorts of shenanigans, and the Democratic party establishment has been rolling over and letting them rape the system, starting with the coup in 2000 and onwards into the “filibuster-proof is the new majority” standard and the budget deficit ceiling.

    To paraphrase George Bush, the Republicans never tire of trying to find ways to exploit the loopholes in the system, and they will eventually succeed unless the Democrats start getting tough and retaliating in kind, for example, invoking the nuclear option, using recess appointments, and so on.

  64. 64
    Jon says:

    @hueyplong:

    In all seriousness, it’s not just 2012 – he’s believed shit like that for a long, long time. The saddest part is that he’s a lawyer (although not a very good one).

  65. 65
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @r€nato:

    Basically, teabaggers are being childish idiots once again.

    It’s what they do. It’s their niche. It’s what they’re all about, not the Hokey Pokey.

  66. 66
    Chris says:

    @Jason:

    I don’t buy the notion of them seceding. They’re too addicted to the federal gravy train.

    I do buy the notion of them keeping up as many legal shenanigans as they can. Voter suppression, most especially.

    And once it finally sinks in that the Reagan coalition’s day is over, I expect a wave of terrorism from the militia types – political movements often seem to spawn these things when they’re on their way out.

  67. 67
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @dmsilev:

    “My fellow Americans,” Obama entoned, “one thing that really pisses me off is when people drink Drano. It upsets me no end. People who do that make me lose control and turn into your stereotypical angry black man.”

  68. 68
    BillB says:

    We need to start the Public Works Jobs again and build the “Great Wall Of Sanity”. A thirty foot brick wall from the top of Virginny to the shores of Texas. The Tea-Tards can get on down there in god’s country, and have at it. BONUS , I won’t have to hear about how much better SEC football is than the entire rest of the country. GOOOO DUCCKKKS !
    Hey it worked in china…

  69. 69
    Redshift says:

    @Paul:

    Yet, the only way to apparently get him out of office apparently is with some kind of a coup since 53% of the American people disagreed with them. It kind of makes one wonder who the real Americans are.

    Isn’t it obvious? White people.

  70. 70
    Steeplejack says:

    @dmsilev:

    The 23 electors from Virginia refused to support Johnson with their votes because of the fact that he had previously lived with and fathered children with an African-American woman.

    But, but–Obama has lived with and fathered children with an African-American woman!

    OMG! Now it all makes sense to me.

  71. 71
    TheMightyTrowel says:

    @Redshift: WASPs

  72. 72
    👽 Martin says:

    @Chris:

    I have to say, I do thank God for the military’s obedience to civilian authorities.

    It is presumed that because the enlisted ranks are so heavily populated with minorities (relative to the general population) that Obama likely won that vote. Officers would have gone for Romney.

    That would be a difficult military coup to pull off.

  73. 73
    Citizen_X says:

    @Jon: Wow. Brave of you to come forward.

    You have our sympathies.

  74. 74
    Dee Loralei says:

    @Jon: HI Jon, welcome to the vitriolic assholes club! Glad you jumped in to commenting! Sorry your dad is such an douchhead to you. but I’m enjoying his shenanigans for the most part.

  75. 75
    Jon says:

    @Citizen_X:

    Thanks, but really, there’s only so many times you can see discussions like this from my perspective before the urge to shout “OMG YOU HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA” uncontrollably takes over. It’s not bravery, it’s just a way to deal with the existential weirdness of having one’s hateful asshole of a father repeatedly inject himself into national discourse.

  76. 76
    Citizen_X says:

    @Jon: Could be worse. Your name could be Santorum.

  77. 77
    Jon says:

    @Dee Loralei:

    Oh, no, they’re worth enjoying! For my money, Chris Matthew’s humiliation of him over some birther emails is one of the best moments in television history. Tweety may have his faults, but I’ll always have a soft spot for him for that.

  78. 78
  79. 79
    Ash Can says:

    @Jon: That is truly unfortunate that he’s your father. Yeesh.

  80. 80
    honus says:

    @r€nato: I think it was in 1972 that a faithless elector cast his vote for the Libertarian candidate. The elector was Roger McBride, who was the Libertarian candidate in 1976. I can’t remember who the candidate was in 1972.

  81. 81
    honus says:

    @Suffern ACE: I was listening to a sports radio show this week and they pointed out that the Phillies had last won more recently than the Eagles.

  82. 82
    liberal says:

    @Jason:

    The Bush years were a period when the White House was captured by Krugman’s “revolutionary power” that simply did not regard the existing system as legitimate.

    I really love the “revolutionary power” paragraphs from that preface by Krugman. It so correctly describes what we’re dealing with.

    …the Republicans never tire of trying to find ways to exploit the loopholes in the system, and they will eventually succeed unless the Democrats start getting tough and retaliating in kind, for example, invoking the nuclear option, using recess appointments, and so on.

    Completely agree. It’s an iterated prisoner’s dilemma, and the Republican f*cks are defecting repeatedly. The fact that the leaders of the Democratic Party (though I doubt the rank and file agree with it) keep cooperating is just infuriating.

  83. 83
    RSA says:

    As PoliticusUSA goes on to explain, this is factually incorrect—even World Nut Daily eventually published a correction.

    I’d have thought understanding the Constitution would be straightforward for Phillips, a lawyer. He could at least have asked one of his colleagues.

  84. 84
    Mornington Crescent says:

    I think there was a vote for Lloyd Bentsen in 1988, iirc.

  85. 85
    Mark S. says:

    God, I have “Wonderful Christmas Time” going through my head. Fuck you Paul McCartney.

  86. 86
    Origuy says:

    Is anyone surprised that an Idaho state senator is buying into this plan?

    Sen. Sheryl Nuxoll, R-Cottonwood, sent an article out on Twitter headed, “A ‘last chance’ to have Mitt Romney as President in January (it’s still not too late).”

  87. 87
    Jon says:

    @Ash Can:

    Thanks, although I haven’t talked to him in over a decade now, so apart from when he says something stupid enough to get him some media attention, it isn’t that big of a deal.

  88. 88
    Jon says:

    @Origuy:

    I like the description from that constitutional scholar at Boise State, though. It’s not totally constitutional… It’s just “a radical, revolutionary proposal that has no basis in federal law or the architecture of the Constitution.” Which is almost like being constitutional.

  89. 89
    Smiling Mortician says:

    @Jon: I would pay good money to watch you pummel your dad on national TV. Rhetorically, of course.

  90. 90
    opie jeanne says:

    @Jon: OH man, I’m so sorry.

  91. 91
    Craigo says:

    @Jon: I love the state senatr’s response. “Well, that’s one lawyer.”

    Speaking as one, you don’t need to be a lawyer to read and understand simple English. But it helps to not be crazy.

  92. 92
    jwalden91lx says:

    @Baud: I believe they call that the Clayton Bigsby.

  93. 93
    trollhattan says:

    @r€nato:

    Basically, teabaggers are being childish idiots once again.

    I’m a little concerned this could be construed to mean there was a time, a moment, when they were not exactly that. “Assumes facts not…”

  94. 94
    Uncle Cosmo says:

    At the risk of sounding like a complete idiot, let me admit that I am rather disturbed by the following scenario:

    Electors from 17 or more states that voted for Romney “meet in their several States” but decline to comply with the procedures set forth in the 12th Amendment & send no ballots to Congress.

    Congress counts the ballots that are received & certifies the reelection of Obama and Biden.

    Someone files suit in Federal Court to annul the certification because more than 1/3 of the states did not participate in the EC & therefore there was no quorum, therefore the election should be decided by the House per the Amendment.

    Judge denies suit; plaintiffs appeal. Suit again denied. Etc.

    Finally the appeal reaches the Supreme Court.

    Now–considering that 5 of the 9 sitting Justices of SCOTUS have already intervened once in a Presidential election to secure the result they desired, what would stop them from doing the same thing today if they had the opportunity? IMHO Bush v. Gore made it completely clear that those bastards have no problem violating all laws of logic & reason if it gets them what they want, & I don’t think a one of them gives a rat’s arse for any “legacy.” And once they rule, that’s the ball game–no appeal possible.

    I guess what I’m asking is, what’s to prevent a de facto coup via a bullshit SCOTUS ruling that throws the election into the House?

    (Again, apologies if this seems a stupid question, but IANAL & I’ve been racking my brains trying to find a way out of this that wouldn’t require someone like Anthony Kennedy actually wanting to do the right thing.)

  95. 95
    Punchy says:

    @honus: As have the KC Royals have won more recently than the KC Chiefs…

  96. 96
    Jon says:

    @Smiling Mortician: Trust me, it’s something I’ve long fantasized about doing – rhetorically, of course.

    @opie jeanne: Thanks. Shockingly, not everyone in the world understands how… gross, for lack of a better term, it is to have not just a crazy right-wing relative, but one with a national profile. I really appreciate that everyone here seems to.

    @Craigo: Well, she has a point, that constitutional scholar is just one lawyer.. And that lawyer’s biased opinion is clearly balanced by the legal acumen of Judson Phillips, esq. Of course, he failed at gave up the practice of law to pursue his true calling of (embarrassingly incompetent) demagoguery, but he still counts, right?

  97. 97
    PsiFighter37 says:

    @Uncle Cosmo: Sounds like a plan borne of acid spiked with wingnut tears.

  98. 98
    Punchy says:

    @Uncle Cosmo: Read the link that Origuy supplied. A quorum is NOT necessary for EC votes. This Phillips clown mistook the need for a House quorum in the case of a EC tie and thinks the quorum is needed for EC votes. Nope.

  99. 99
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Uncle Cosmo: O.K. calm down. Think of it this way. The consequences of Bush v. Gore were George Bush was in the White House. The consequences of the intervention you describe is that every election from now on will be routinely decided by which faction controls the House of representatives, which is not at all what the Constitution says. If it wanted a President appointed by the House, it wouldn’t have bothered with all those parts on how the President is supposed to be selected separately and all that. Egads. SCOTUS does that and we might as well find a King and be like the English.

  100. 100
    YellowJournalism says:

    @Jon: We all have one or more relatives who embarrass us for their racist, ignorant, and/or crazy extremist views, but thank god for most of us that we don’t have to deal with them on a national stage! I had a grandparent who wrote crazy letters to the editor about Jesus tellin him about the end times and to vote Republican. That was bad enough! Probably best for him and the editorial board at our hometown paper that he died before 2008.

  101. 101
    Craigo says:

    @Uncle Cosmo: It’s completely different. Thanks to bass-ackwards ballot design and registration purges, Bush led in the tally when it reached the Court. All they had to do was stop the recount right there, and Bush would win based on the results certified by Katherine Harris – so they did, and he won. Institutional inertia was completely on their side.

    Not so here. Obama will be certified by more than enough states to win, since none of the vote totals are nearly close enough to challenge (and nobody is). Even if some crazy ass secretary of state decides not to certify, the Obama slate of electors will still meet and send their votes to Congress, since the Constitution says precisely fuck all about guys like Jon Husted actually having anything to do with this part.

    Now, Republican electors totaling one third of the states boycott, and never send their votes.

    Who gives a shit? The Twelfth Amendment specifies that the winner needs an absolute majority of the total electors. It could be 270-0; nobody cares.

    The quoroum requirement is only for the contingent election in the House that would result if no candidate received 270 votes. Like I said above, it’s in plain, simple English. The plaintiff is not making a claim upon which relief can be granted.

    (By the way, even if the red states try to boycott a contingent election? Only one representative per state needs to show up to count as present. That means that, say, Sheila Jackson-Lee could cast Texas’ vote all by her lonesome if no one else decided to show up.)

    The dirty little secret of Bush v. Gore is that it was very good, substantively, on matters of equal-protection. It really was unlawful to use different standards of counting in different counties. This decision is regularly cited by Federal courts today.

    There was an obvious solution – provide a uniform standard and count every vote. But five Justices said “Fuck it,” decided that a statutory Florida deadline trumped the Fourteenth Goddamned Amendment, and halted the recount. It was like a referee correctly explaining a series of complicated penalties, only to halt the game with five minutes left to play because his favorite team was ahead.

    You remember back in 2000, when everybody was pissed because no Senator would object to Florida’s electoral vote during the counting? Again, inertia was in Bush’s favor – since his slate had been submitted, Gore needed a majority of both houses to exclude it (and even then, there would have been a contingent election that Bush would have won, since Gore did not submit his own slate and neither man would have had 270). I think we all know that the Republicans would have no trouble finding one Senator to object – but they’d need 51 to exclude Obama’s votes.

    The game’s being played in his court, and he’s clearly winning. Referees can only steal it when it’s close.

  102. 102
    YellowJournalism says:

    @Mark S.: And now I have it in my head by the mere mention, so fuck you. ;)

  103. 103
    Geoduck says:

    @Uncle Cosmo:

    I don’t think a one of them gives a rat’s arse for any “legacy.”

    True of Scalia and Thomas, but Roberts.. yeah, it’s pretty clear he cares.

  104. 104
    ruemara says:

    @Jon: We welcome you and hope that he has massive change of personality in the future.

  105. 105
    Jon says:

    @ruemara: thanks for the welcome! I’m not holding my breath for any changes on his end (he’s only gotten more extreme in the almost 30 years I’ve known him) but hopefully he does come around, if for no other reason than so that he’s not in the news anymore.

    @YellowJournalism: Yeah, 2008 seemed to break a lot of already delicate right-wing psyches. I’m likewise glad that my racist-but-otherwise-they’re-good-people-really grandparents didn’t make it that long either. I’d just as soon remember them fondly. The worst thing about the Internet is that it allows, though bad luck or the perverse humor of the gods, the crazy letter writers we all know and in some cases love to achieve national prominence.

  106. 106
    jefft452 says:

    @Uncle Cosmo: “I guess what I’m asking is, what’s to prevent a de facto coup via a bullshit SCOTUS ruling that throws the election into the House?”

    How many division does the pope have?

  107. 107
    NotMax says:

    @Uncle Cosmo

    I guess what I’m asking is, what’s to prevent a de facto coup via a bullshit SCOTUS ruling that throws the election into the House?

    The Constitution.

    There are a total of 535 electors, and a simple majority of that total (whether electors cast a vote or not) is all that is required.

    Any proposed lawsuit participants would have to establish standing for claiming injury because their electors didn’t vote. Chances of a court granting standing in such a circumstance are nil, as the Constitution does not prohibit an elector from withholding a vote.

  108. 108
    NotMax says:

    Duh. Innocent typo. 538 electors, not 535.

  109. 109
    low-tech cyclist says:

    What they’re talking about, in their adorable little outraged language, is basically a coup.

    Fortunately, this time it’s just a little deuce coup, rather than the sort of coup attempt you’d have to take seriously.

    But it does tell us that they give exactly two shits about democracy, when it yields what they regard as the wrong result.

  110. 110
    Patricia Kayden says:

    @r€nato: Thanks for that explanation. Makes sense. Why don’t the T’Baggers know this?

  111. 111
    debbie says:

    I say, just stand back and let them continue. Like that Monty Python sketch, they’ll all get so worked up that their heads will explode. The world can then move on.

  112. 112
    Humanities Grad says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    Um. Because most of them are really stupid?

    SATSQ

  113. 113
    NCSteve says:

    Pretty sure this would be within the FBI’s jurisdiction, not the Secret Service’s, but yeah.

  114. 114
    Bulworth says:

    From the article in the linky:

    Phillips misread the 12th Amendment. The quorum rule only applies to the House of Representatives, not the Electoral College.

    What? That can’t be so. The Teabagging Front of America misread the U.S. Constitution? Gosh. If you can’t trust Patriotic Teabagging Americans, just who can you trust?

  115. 115
    SFAW says:

    @Humanities Grad:

    Um. Because most of them are really stupid morans?

    Fixed because … well, just because they ARE …

  116. 116
    fuckwit says:

    @NotMax: Yes, hence why 538.com is named that.

Comments are closed.