Pennsylvania governor's race

#126

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-AA144oWW

(Reuters) - Republican Doug Mastriano conceded defeat on Sunday in his run for Pennsylvania's governorship in a statement that contrasted with the far-right candidate's sharp, divisive rhetoric during the race.

"Josh Shapiro will be our next Governor, and I ask everyone to give him the opportunity to lead and pray that he leads well," Mastriano said in a statement posted on his Twitter feed.

In his page-long message, Mastriano also thanked his wife and followers and pledged to work on election reform for Pennsylvania from his seat in the state Senate.

New Turtle · #127

I'm glad most of them have conceded. It will put the ones who don't out on an island if they have no real chance to win.

Sam the Centipede · #128

Does it really matter or make any difference whether probable/definite losers-to-be concede or not? Obviously all losing candidates must accept the result and avoid "fake election" nonsense, but I don't understand why public concession before completion of the count is so highly valued by many for US elections.

Elsewhere (i.e. other countries) my impression is that losers will concede if they can see that the result is definitely not going their way, but there's little pressure to pre-emptively concede; all candidates are entitled to wait until the final official result is posted. Saying "let's wait, then I'll comment" is acceptable.

The only obvious advantage to concession that I can think of is that the loser's statement or speech will be reported while they are likely to be ignored after the result is final, when they become yesterday's man/woman … or is there something else?

Of course, with multi-stage elections perhaps concession can avoid unnecessary humiliation in a run-off and expense and effort for campaigners, but that's a different phenomenon.

#129

Sam the Centipede wrote: ↑Mon Nov 14, 2022 9:30 am Does it really matter or make any difference whether probable/definite losers-to-be concede or not?

The only importancemi see is that it puts a note of finality to the election and lets people know there won't be a long, drawn-out fight over who won. That may not seem like much, but look at what trumps not conceding has led to. If he'd conceded, he couldnt keep pressing the Big Lie.

#130

There was a time, not too long ago, when it was just the expected thing to do.

#131

AndyinPA wrote: ↑Tue Nov 15, 2022 11:14 am There was a time, not too long ago, when it was just the expected thing to do.

When no one would have thought to do more than ask for a recount if it were close.

sugar magnolia · #132

pipistrelle wrote: ↑Tue Nov 15, 2022 12:45 pm
AndyinPA wrote: ↑Tue Nov 15, 2022 11:14 am There was a time, not too long ago, when it was just the expected thing to do.
When no one would have thought to do more than ask for a recount if it were close.

Down here it doesn't even matter if it's close. Brian Flowers is asking for a recount in his race against Bennie Thompson. Thompson won with 60%.

#133

They better say no! Ridiculous.

#134

OK, so this isn't Governor but it is PA. Warning: This is hugely geeky but found it an interesting read.

Along with the ridiculous Brunson v Adams which is on the SCOTUS deadlist, in conference 1/6 and will be denied 1/9, MAGAts also have huge hopium for a case called:

No. 22-414
Title: Timothy R. Bonner, et al., Petitioners
v.
Leigh Chapman, in Her Official Capacity as Acting Secretary of Pennsylvania, et al.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.asp ... 2-414.html

Here's the SCOTUS Petition, which includes the two previous decisions (recommend reading the PA Supreme Court ruling, appendix A first). It's an interesting look back at mail-in ballot history back to 1776: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... tition.pdf

This petition asserts that PA mail-in voting, and Act 77, are unconstitutional under the PA Constitution. You may recall Act 77 was championed and passed by REPUBLICANS and allowed unlimited mail-in voting. However, in 2020 when the twice-impeached loser was going to lose, then the GOP ran to court to try to get their own Act declared unconstitutional. Denined. But then in 2021, they started up again. This case is consolidated with a challenge from a county official's lawsuit. The Commonwealth Court actually agreed that Act 77 was unconstitutional, but the PA Supreme Court reversed. So that's the history.

Undaunted, they filed for cert. Idiots like David Clements and Gateway House of Boys are trumpeting that this SCOTUS decision will STOP ALL MAIL-IN VOTING NATIONWIDE and make everyone have to vote only on election day. They are grifting off this and ginning up the MAGAts just like with #BrunsonvAdams. Just like with Brunson, on Monday when there's a one-line denial, MAGAts will be wailing, screaming fraud, and in shock and disbelief because they don't understand how this works and keep getting told it's another SLAM DUNK.

Be looking for the hastags on Monday, it will be lots of fun.

Brunson: https://twitter.com/hashtag/BrunsonvAda ... htag_click

Lawyer for Bonner et al, 1st round win:

Hopium:

#135

#136

Can anyone explain to me how mail-in voting, with the checks that we've all outlined, is unconstitutional?

Frater I*I · #137

pipistrelle wrote: ↑Sat Jan 07, 2023 11:15 pm Can anyone explain to me how mail-in voting, with the checks that we've all outlined, is unconstitutional?

Because it favors Dem voters of course.....

bob · #138

pipistrelle wrote: ↑Sat Jan 07, 2023 11:15 pm Can anyone explain to me how mail-in voting, with the checks that we've all outlined, is unconstitutional?

Only the Legislature yadda yadda yadda....

#139

Frater I*I wrote: ↑Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:00 am
pipistrelle wrote: ↑Sat Jan 07, 2023 11:15 pm Can anyone explain to me how mail-in voting, with the checks that we've all outlined, is unconstitutional?
Because it favors Dem voters of course.....

and Ben Franklyn never said nutin about the post having to carry ballots.

#140

Act 77, championed by Republicans until they lost, stays in place.

But GOP voters MUST NOT use mail-in voting, that's a Commandment from the twice-impeached, disgraced loser.

OrlyLicious @Orly_licious 1m
0-2. Not only was #BrunsonvAdams denied by the Supreme Court, but also the MAGA hopium/grifter case #BonnerVChapman, seeking to invalidate ALL mail-in voting in PA, was Denied. #Bonner was more serious; #Brunson was fantasy. Bonner's defeat means #Act77 stands in PA. Good day.

: Mail In Denied.JPG (109.57 KiB) Viewed 2619 times