... what are the legal ramifications? Where does he have a chance of stopping counting/overturning a vote, etc., from a legal standpoint?

I must admit I'm a bit fuzzy on all the Gore v Bush details, but as I recall that particular decision was so Florida-centric that I'm not sure it could be used as precedent. But hey, I'm no lawyer. And it's true that Trump never let anything as trifling as a law stand in his way before... and he and his minions appointed a lot of the judges in the lower courts. Let's just hope that despite their political affiliation, they have a shred of integrity.

I think he will leave.

The courts can't save him.

I should have been more clear--we know he will contest every state's results until he has no options left...

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel:
The courts can't save him.

His long-standing last-ditch hope - that his "loyal" SC appointees would rise to his defense if the present Election scenario occurred.
Not even Comey.

He can't grasp even those whose careers he "made" might retain scruples, after all.
Also that they might have to follow the laws.

Is there any possibility of bribing electoral college votes??

Yes, in some states from what I understand. There is the so-called "faithless elector," an electoral college voter who refuses to cast a vote based on the outcome of their state. But it gets more complicated, because some states have now written laws that their electoral college votes must go 100% to their state's victor, while other states IIRC have laws allowing or requiring proportional electoral college votes. So if Candidate A received 50%, Candidate B received 40% and Candidate C received 10% of the votes, the electoral college votes must follow that distribution. Some of these laws have strict consequences (elector is replaced, vote doesn't count) while others seem to just say, oh shoot, too bad, try better next time, 'kay?


Faithless elector laws by state

quote:

Originally posted by Nina:
... what are the legal ramifications? Where does he have a chance of stopping counting/overturning a vote, etc., from a legal standpoint?

I must admit I'm a bit fuzzy on all the Gore v Bush details, but as I recall that particular decision was so Florida-centric that I'm not sure it could be used as precedent. But hey, I'm no lawyer. And it's true that Trump never let anything as trifling as a law stand in his way before... and he and his minions appointed a lot of the judges in the lower courts. Let's just hope that despite their political affiliation, they have a shred of integrity.

Bush v. Gore was decided as an equal protection case. Some counties were doing one thing with respect to the ballots and the recount, others were doing another.

That is totally not what it happening this year.

Many judges were appointed by Trump. He has served his function. The GOP will now abandon him, it is not like they care.