this post was submitted on 06 May 2025
164 points (100.0% liked)

New York Times gift articles

904 readers
11 users here now

Share your New York Times gift articles links here.

Rules:

Info:

Tip:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ernest question, are there any examples of judges having to force election boards to seat, Republicans in contested seats?

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well there was this one presidential election...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Fair enough, but I don’t recall it being so much contested (or Gore refusing to concede) but rather that SCOTUS stepping in before the recount was complete.

Ensuring close elections are accurately called is understandable, simply refusing to accept the results is not.

I haven’t yet read the article, but my money is on the latter in this case.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Ensuring close elections are accurately called is understandable

They weren't doing that, they lied to you about Bush winning.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

Which they alluded to. They mentioned it was called before the recount was complete

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

I perhaps did not separate my points well.

Point one is challenging the results in a very close elections is acceptable and even important because it ensures the accuracy of the results. I take no issue with anyone, of either party, doing so in earnest.

Point two is that SCOTUS stopped the legitimate recount of the close results on Florida but it wasn’t because Gore/the recount was unreasonable.

What I see with these Republicans in contested races is simply to ignore the results and stubbornly refuse to accept results, often even after recounts.