General Discussion

That I bet they're doing it to test what happens, how people react if they just refuse to sit a Democrat who's been duly elected. See how long they can get away with it, who does what, etc. For the purpose of it being a trial run for next January when they get their asses kicked. I wouldn't doubt they'd consider TRYING it, esp. if it's like 1 state that makes the difference. But I think courts will say uh-uh. That ain't how it works. Even this SCOTUS won't go for it. It opens the door to Democrats doing the same thing, based on some excuse they've come up WRT to why a GQP victory is tainted. Like too few polling places or dropboxes or too many bomb threats from Russian operatives on election day or overly stringent ID requirements or whatnot.

None of this shit in the Constitution, and neither side would get away with it. Not in the end, anyway.

Not to mention none of the bullshit excuses this idiot writer is coming up with are things that actually happen anyway. 95% of people who get caught voting illegally are voting for the GQP. We just saw some red-state small city mayor get convicted of it earlier this week.