NationStates

San Lumen wrote:

Napkizemlja wrote:And given the closeness of this election, it's perfectly legitimate to contest it. Happens quite often in close races.

why? There is zero evidence of fraud.

San Lumen wrote:

Napkizemlja wrote:And given the closeness of this election, it's perfectly legitimate to contest it. Happens quite often in close races.

why? There is zero evidence of fraud.

San Lumen wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:No nap is advocating for a runoff and a recount. He’s not saying that Bevin should be automatically made Governor.

And as I already told you there is no provision in the state constitution for a runoff election as it merely requires one get the most votes.

Thermodolia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:why? There is zero evidence of fraud.

It was close. That’s enough of a reason for a recount

Napkizemlja wrote:

San Lumen wrote:why? There is zero evidence of fraud.

Then surely there is nothing to fear from the state legislature investigating things. :^)

Zurkerx wrote:

San Lumen wrote:And as I already told you there is no provision in the state constitution for a runoff election as it merely requires one get the most votes.

I'm pretty sure if this was the other way around, you would be calling for a recount and for a run-off election. While that's the current law there, lawmakers should at least implement in future elections that a runoff is required if no candidate gets a simple majority. Sounds simple I think.

San Lumen wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:It was close. That’s enough of a reason for a recount

Ok and Bevin has to pay for the recount. It is very doubtful you'd overturn a 5000 vote lead in a recount. But if he wants more by all means proceed.

San Lumen wrote:

Napkizemlja wrote:Then surely there is nothing to fear from the state legislature investigating things. :^)

They are strongly hinting at overturning the result.

Zurkerx wrote:

San Lumen wrote:

Napkizemlja wrote:Then surely there is nothing to fear from the state legislature investigating things. :^)

They are strongly hinting at overturning the result.

Zurkerx wrote:
I'm pretty sure if this was the other way around, you would be calling for a recount and for a run-off election. While that's the current law there, lawmakers should at least implement in future elections that a runoff is required if no candidate gets a simple majority. Sounds simple I think.

No I would not. I would accept the outcome unlike Republicans in Kentucky

Napkizemlja wrote:

San Lumen wrote:They are strongly hinting at overturning the result.

Well it is within their powers to do so, if they feel the election results came about illicitly.

Thermodolia wrote:

USS Monitor wrote:If people wanted to vote for Bevin, they would have voted for Bevin instead of the Libertarian.

The Libertarians draw from both sides of the aisle, as well as attracting people that might otherwise sit out. The majority of their base are right-leaning, but unless you poll the Libertarians and ask them who their second choice is, you can't know how those votes would split. If you want to use "but the Libertarians would have chosen our guy as their second choice!" as an excuse, then you need to implement ranked choice voting and let voters actually give you that information.

Or you do what France and Georgia (US state) do and run another election with just top two candidates

San Lumen wrote:

Napkizemlja wrote:Well it is within their powers to do so, if they feel the election results came about illicitly.

What evidence is there to suggest that?

Des-Bal wrote:EVIL Republicans commit BRAZEN THEFT by STEALING ELECTION in SILENT COUP by SEEKING RECOUNT IN CLOSE RACE.

San Lumen wrote:

Napkizemlja wrote:Well it is within their powers to do so, if they feel the election results came about illicitly.

What evidence is there to suggest that?

San Lumen wrote:

Zurkerx wrote:
I'm pretty sure if this was the other way around, you would be calling for a recount and for a run-off election. While that's the current law there, lawmakers should at least implement in future elections that a runoff is required if no candidate gets a simple majority. Sounds simple I think.

No I would not. I would accept the outcome unlike Republicans in Kentucky

Thermodolia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:No I would not. I would accept the outcome unlike Republicans in Kentucky

Right because that’s why you posted about how the EC should block Trump from becoming president in 2016

San Lumen wrote:https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/06/beshear-vs-bevin-legislature-could-decide-race-senate-president-says/4174103002/

Republicans in the Kentucky legislature are considering outright stealing the Governor election they just lost according to the Senate President. They re making the claim that the Libertarian candidate was a spoiler and Bevin would have won if not for him and might attempt to declare Bevin the winner according to the Senate President Steve Stiver. Bevin has not conceded to Beshear.

If this plot succeeds I hope there are mass protests in Frankfort and these people are forced out of the capitol building. Hopefully a court will stop this coup. Gov elect Beshear isnt going to let them get away with it.

I think its quite clear at this point Republicans see Democracy as an annoyance.

Your thoughts NSG?

Napkizemlja wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
What evidence is there to suggest that?

Well that's what the investigation is for, of course.

The East Marches II wrote:

Napkizemlja wrote:Well that's what the investigation is for, of course.

San Lumen always goes on how innocent people shouldn't resist that sort of thing! I'm sure the governor elect won't object. It'll only make him look like a criminal.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Take this moment to seize the state capitol, dissolve the legislature and executive, and establish a federation in Kentucky to rule by consensus rather than procedure.

Thermodolia wrote:

The East Marches II wrote:
San Lumen always goes on how innocent people shouldn't resist that sort of thing! I'm sure the governor elect won't object. It'll only make him look like a criminal.

Is San Lumen Devin Nunes?

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Take this moment to seize the state capitol, dissolve the legislature and executive, and establish a federation in Kentucky to rule by consensus rather than procedure.

San Lumen wrote:

Camelone wrote:There doesn’t have to be fraud for there to be a mistake, note that the results were within the margin of error as Fahran noted.

Margin of error? Are you making the suggestion that several thousand votes were miscounted? Very doubtful

San Lumen wrote:Its probably not going to overturn the result but Jill Stein has raised almost 6 million dollars to pay for a recount in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. I hope it does change the result but the odds are very low. As a candidate she has the legal right to ask for a recount if she pays the fee because the margin is outside what would trigger a automatic recount. I still hope the electoral college comes to its senses and overturns the result in favor of the popular vote winner.

San Lumen wrote:there should be a recount in Florida and North Carolina too and in every future election only paper ballots used.

San Lumen wrote:

Reedian wrote:She is backing a recount that will prove her wrong. She claims it might be hacked or rigged, yet despite the fact Obama and Trump agree it was not rigged.

Nothing wrong with double checking

USS Monitor wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Take this moment to seize the state capitol, dissolve the legislature and executive, and establish a federation in Kentucky to rule by consensus rather than procedure.

That would be.... Different.

The East Marches II wrote:

Napkizemlja wrote:Well that's what the investigation is for, of course.

San Lumen always goes on how innocent people shouldn't resist that sort of thing! I'm sure the governor elect won't object. It'll only make him look like a criminal.