I was an election monitor in Egypt in 2018. The election was conducted in a verifiably secure and honest manner, as well it could be since they’d disallowed all opposition. The only other candidate was the President’s best friend, who — I am not making this up — ran on the promise that if he won he’d resign immediately in favor of said President.
If you’re losing as obviously as they are, and you feel as they do that this is the biggest threat facing humanity, I guess you go all the way. ‘Our side can’t win, so let’s not play the game.’
For a scholarly discussion of this question, here’s Eugene Volokh. UPDATE: A counterargument by Lawrence Tribe and J. Michael Luttig. I think Volokh is stronger on the merits, but consider both views.
1 comment:
Using better logic than did the Colorado Supreme Court--i.e., making stuff up and concluding the claim before it's even been made--that same 14th Amendment, albeit via a convenient stretch, offers a remedy for the State Supreme Court's action, should it stand up through the general election.
The number of registered voters in Colorado are, roughly, 25% Democrat, 25% Republican, and 50% some form of independent.
Assuming, naively, that roughly half those independents would have voted for Trump were he on the ballot, then the State's action will have disenfranchised roughly half the voters of Colorado. The second article of the 14th is quite clear on this point: Colorado's representation in the Federal Congress must be reduced by half.
Eric Hines
Post a Comment