What if Trump loses but refuses to leave office? Here's the worst case scenario

Introversion · Jul 27, 2020

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/27/trump-loses-election-what-happens-possibilities

The Guardian said:
...

Consider the following scenario: it’s 3 November, 2020, election day. By midnight, it’s clear that former Vice-President Biden enjoys a substantial lead in the national popular vote but the electoral college vote remains tight. With the races in 47 states and the District of Columbia called, Biden leads Trump in the electoral college vote 252 to 240, but neither candidate has secured the 270 votes necessary for victory. All eyes remain on Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and their 46 electoral college votes.

In each of these three states, Trump enjoys a slim lead, but the election-day returns do not include a huge number of mail-in ballots. Some states, such as Colorado, have been counting their mail-in votes from the day they arrived, but not Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. These states do not allow elections officials to begin the task of counting the mail-ins until election day itself. It will take days, even weeks, for the key swing states to finish their count. The election hangs in the balance.

Only not for Trump. Based on his November 3 leads, Trump has already declared himself re-elected. His reliable megaphones in the right-wing media repeat and amplify his declaration, and urge Biden to concede. Biden says he will do no such thing. Biden knows that the bulk of the mail-in ballots have been cast in heavily populated urban areas, where voters were unwilling to expose themselves to the health risks of in-person voting. And he is keenly aware that urban voters vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Indeed, this phenomenon, in which mail-in and provisional ballots typically break Democratic, has been dubbed “blue shift” by election law experts.

The count of the mail-in ballots in the three swing states is plagued by delays. Overworked election officials, slowed by the need to maintain social distance, struggle to process the huge volume of votes. Trump’s lawyers, aided by the Department of Justice, bring multiple suits insisting that tens of thousands of votes must be tossed out for having failed to arrive by the date specified by statute. All the same, as the count creeps forward, a clear pattern emerges. President Trump’s lead is shrinking – and then vanishes altogether. By the time the three states complete their canvass of votes nearly a month after the election, the nation faces an astonishing result. Biden now leads in all three. It appears he has been elected our next president.

Only Trump tweets bloody murder. All his most dire predictions have come to pass. The mail-in ballots are infected with fraud. The radical Democrats are trying to steal his victory. The election has been rigged, he says.

Now things take an ominous turn. Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania all share the same political profile: all three states are controlled by Republican legislatures faithful to Trump. And so Republican lawmakers in Lansing, Madison and Harrisburg take up the fight to declare Trump victorious in their state. Citing irregularities and unconscionable delays in the counting of the mail-in ballots, state Republicans award Trump their states’ electoral college votes.

Yet all three of our crucial swing states also have Democratic governors. Outraged by the actions of Republican lawmakers, the Democratic governors of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania announce that they will recognize Biden as having carried their state. They certify Biden as the winner, and send the certificate cast by his electors on to Congress.

It is now January 6, 2021, the day on which the joint session of Congress opens the states’ electoral certificates and officially tallies the votes. Normally this is a ceremonial function, but not today. Suddenly Congress is confronted with the astonishing reality that Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania have each submitted conflicting electoral certificates –one awarding its electoral college votes to Trump; the other, to Biden. The election hangs in the balance.

Seems far-fetched? And yet the nation faced a nearly identical crisis in the notorious Hayes-Tilden election of 1876, when three separate states submitted conflicting electoral certificates.

...

cbenoi1 · Jul 27, 2020

'Second in line' Nancy Pelosi: Trump may have to be 'fumigated' out of the White House
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...y-have-to-be-fumigated-out-of-the-white-house

Pelosi insisted that there is a concrete system for the presidency that must be respected and noted that she is second in line for the highest office.

"I'm second in line to the presidency, and just last week, I had my regular continuation of government briefing," Pelosi said. "This might interest you because as I say to them, this is never going to happen — God willing, it never will — but there is a process. It has nothing to do with if a certain occupant of the White House doesn't feel like moving and has to be fumigated out of there — because the presidency is the presidency. It's not geography or location."

Weeeeeee The People...

-cb

Introversion · Jul 27, 2020

You know it won’t be that simple if the author’s scenario happens. It’s different if the electoral college results are clear and unambiguous.

AstronautMikeDexter · Jul 27, 2020

I honestly can't bring myself to play these scenarious out. If Joe Biden wins, it's going to be a very messy transition no matter how it goes. I'd love to be surprised and have the in-person votes in several states go overwhelmingly to Biden, same for mail-in ballots, so that there's no question as to the result. But, if 2020 has taught me anything it's that anything that can go wrong will go wrong.

Marian Perera · Jul 27, 2020

AstronautMikeDexter said:
I honestly can't bring myself to play these scenarious out.

I read an article (can't remember where it was from, I'm afraid) by someone who actually did play out that scenario in a group. Article writer was on Team Trump, therefore declared he'd won. That caused protests and riots, which caused further delays in counting the mail-in ballots. The whole point was to get the decision escalated to the Supreme Court, in the hopes that the conservative majority would hand the election to Trump (a la Bush vs. Gore).

Not sure how realistic this is, just thought I'd mention it.

Brightdreamer · Jul 27, 2020

AstronautMikeDexter said:
I honestly can't bring myself to play these scenarious out. If Joe Biden wins, it's going to be a very messy transition no matter how it goes. I'd love to be surprised and have the in-person votes in several states go overwhelmingly to Biden, same for mail-in ballots, so that there's no question as to the result. But, if 2020 has taught me anything it's that anything that can go wrong will go wrong.

+1

I don't know how many ways they have to signal that they're going to lean on every possible lever, shrink every possible voting option, discount every possible vote in order to win before people believe them. Even now, the USPS is being actively sabotaged and slowed down as the WH occupant continues to discredit the validity of mail-in ballots (which have been a thing since at least the Civil War, IIRC), and the shrinkage of available polling places is essentially criminal if one honestly considers voting to be a right and not a privilege. Nothing is off the table. From his attitude and actions, it's pretty clear that the WH occupant has no intention of going anywhere, and his enablers are not giving him any reason to think otherwise (because they still want/need him for their own Agenda.)

regdog · Jul 27, 2020

I'm not sure there would be much of a problem if he loses. At his core, Donald Trump is a coward. On Inauguration Day the Constitution strips the sitting president of all power. If Biden is sworn in, he now control the military and has access to federal law enforcement. The Secret Service protects the president. Trump will rant, bluster, rave and pound his chest but if the Secret Service, FBI, and other federal law enforcement come after him to remove him from the White House, he'll run. The only group who may defend his claim is Blackwater and that is only if he pays them enough. And let's face it, those thugs wouldn't stand a chance against a real military force, they only like going up against unarmed civilians.

Brightdreamer · Jul 27, 2020

regdog said:
I'm not sure there would be much of a problem if he loses. At his core, Donald Trump is a coward. On Inauguration Day the Constitution strips the sitting president of all power. If Biden is sworn in, he now control the military and has access to federal law enforcement. The Secret Service protects the president. Trump will rant, bluster, rave and pound his chest but if the Secret Service, FBI, and other federal law enforcement come after him to remove him from the White House, he'll run. The only group who may defend his claim is Blackwater and that is only if he pays them enough. And let's face it, those thugs wouldn't stand a chance against a real military force, they only like going up against unarmed civilians.

His big strength is blustering on ahead as if his version of reality is actual reality (see: "alternative facts", the whole COVID-19 response, innumerable other examples); I could very well see him deciding that he's won and just acting like it... especially as there is potential legal trouble waiting for him the moment he steps out of the protection of his official office. And the TeaOP seems ready, willing, and able to enable his delusions of reality because it aligns with/provides cover for their Agenda.

After four years of replacing the disloyal and installing "acting" heads that answer to nobody but him, and institutional purges for devotion to the regime, I don't think we can rely on the institutions that used to provide checks and balances to kick in if he simply doesn't leave without it getting very, very ugly...

Kalyke · Jul 27, 2020

Maybe another thing?

I don't know. I am more worried about the embarrassment of the scene that you sometimes see in totalitarian governments of guards picking up the old president who acts like a toddler stamping his feet and whining how unfair the world is. I think by now, except for his true believers, everyone knows that Trump is not above that.

On the 20th of January, the president is no longer the president and the vice president is also no longer the vice-president. So the answer is simple. They and their luggage are put on the curb.

But the question here is what if the electoral college certificate is different (does not match) on the 10th of January.

If no president is selected by that time, the presidency (intrum) goes to the next in line which is the President Pro Tempore of the majority house of the Senate. (Chuck Grassley R-Iowa). If the Democrats win the majority the President Pro Tempore is Patrick Leahy.

The election committees know that there will be far more write-in ballots this year. They should be hiring personnel and getting counting machines ready. If they are not then they are most likely looking to be fired. Quite a lot of trouble has been caused by the various state’s election commissions-- so there is your weakest link.

July 6, 2020, the Supreme court voted unanimously for what is called the "Faithless Elector" law. So in states which have the Faithless Elector law (33) the elector must vote for the person who they said they would vote for when they were elected.

"In the 18 states currently without faithless elector laws, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact would operate in a manner identical to the system that they have been using for over 200 years. In these states (which currently use the state-by-state winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes), the presidential electors are chosen by the political party whose presidential candidate receives the most popular votes inside the state, and there are no additional requirements placed upon the elector" (Brookings).

In cases of electors who vote in a deviant manner, that is, do not vote as they pledged, for whatever reason there are lawsuits and fines aplenty. There have usually only been one "grandstanding (deviant) elector per election.

In 2016 however, there were 7 grandstanding electors. In other words they switched their vote -- not necessarily for Trump as there were about 5 parties running, many who were not on the ballot-- which is also pathetic.

Says Brookings: "Having seven faithless electors in one year (2016) was unusual. All of the faithless electors in 2016 were well aware, at the time they voted, that their vote would not affect the outcome in the Electoral College because everyone knew that Donald Trump had won 36 more electoral votes than required for election" (232 Clinton, 306 Trump). The switched votes were not just sneakily put in the bucket with everything else. They were counted as switched votes and the electors were fined or censured. Also, the discrepancy occurs here. Hillary Clinton had more popular votes but not more electors. The electors (except the 7) all voted for who they said they would vote for (reflecting the majority of the people in their areas).

And the overall result of the activities of the 7 grandstanding electors according to the Brookings Institute: "Given the amount of publicity received by the grandstanding /faithless electors in 2016, each political party can be expected to be extremely careful in 2020 about vetting the people they nominate for the position of presidential elector. If the political parties do their job carefully and well, faithless electors cannot have any effect on the outcome of a presidential election—under either the current system or the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact".

Can something else go wrong? Of course it can. Will being "careful" also potentially lead to malfeasance? Potentially. If, for instance, your Republican states decide to go out of their way to hire electors that will change their vote. I remember something like this happening in Nebraska while I was there. The area under the elector voted for one person (the democrat) but the elector said "screw this, I am voting for X (the republican). This could only happen in the area without the faithless elector law because the law says that the electors must vote what the majority of voters said (popular vote) 33 states. (These are laws against faithless electors, not for them). In the case of switching votes, the electors are subject to a lawsuit and fined for breaking their pledge.

The part about Trump tweeting "unfair" is possibly going to happen. He's a crybaby and not much of a man.

He is in big trouble if he loses actually-- unless Uncle Joe ends up pardoning him. Because Muller did not refer him for prosecution, allowing for future prosecution (ect., ect., we know all this).

The thing we should actually be more worried about was the havoc he can do between the 3rd of November and the 20th of January. He will need to be carefully watched.

Introversion · Jul 27, 2020

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/07/25/nation/bipartisan-group-secretly-gathered-game-out-contested-trump-biden-election-it-wasnt-pretty/

Boston Globe said:
On the second Friday in June, a group of political operatives, former government and military officials, and academics quietly convened online for what became a disturbing exercise in the fragility of American democracy.

The group, which included Democrats and Republicans, gathered to game out possible results of the November election, grappling with questions that seem less far-fetched by the day: What if President Trump refuses to concede a loss, as he publicly hinted recently he might do? How far could he go to preserve his power? And what if Democrats refuse to give in?

“All of our scenarios ended in both street-level violence and political impasse,” said Rosa Brooks, a Georgetown law professor and former Defense Department official who co-organized the group known as the Transition Integrity Project. She described what they found in bleak terms: “The law is essentially ... it’s almost helpless against a president who’s willing to ignore it.”

Using a role-playing game that is a fixture of military and national security planning, the group envisioned a dark 11 weeks between Election Day and Inauguration Day, one in which Trump and his Republican allies used every apparatus of government — the Postal Service, state lawmakers, the Justice Department, federal agents, and the military — to hold onto power, and Democrats took to the courts and the streets to try to stop it.

If it sounds paranoid or outlandish — a war room of seasoned politicos and constitutional experts playing a Washington version of Dungeons and Dragons in which the future of the republic hangs in the balance — they get it. But, as they finalize a report on what they learned and begin briefing elected officials and others, they insist their warning is serious: A close election this fall is likely to be contested, and there are few guardrails to stop a constitutional crisis, particularly if Trump flexes the considerable tools at his disposal to give himself an advantage.

“He doesn’t have to win the election,” said Nils Gilman, a historian who leads research at a think tank called the Berggruen Institute and was an organizer of the exercise. “He just has to create a plausible narrative that he didn’t lose.”

...

cbenoi1 · Jul 27, 2020

Then Trump gets infected, falls hopelessy ill and Pelosi takes over.

-cb

Roxxsmom · Jul 27, 2020

This is something that's been worrying me for a while, and I am keeping my fingers crossed that Trump loses soundly and both houses go the the Democrats.

It could still be ugly, though, and it's very possible he would still claim fraud cost him and other Republicans their victories. And even if Trump eventually concedes, or is forced to, approximately 1/3 of Americans will insist he didn't really lose and was the victim of massive fraud or conspiracies. I suspect some of them would occupy government buildings, commit domestic terrorism, take to the streets brandishing (and possibly using) rifles. We already know that local police are sympathetic to these people and will, at best, look the other way. At worst, some may join them. The military would probably be less inclined to support right-wing rioters, if they take their oath to uphold the Constitution seriously, but it could get really ugly.

Even if street violence dies down or is averted, the "red-hatters" are going to continue to be thorns in everyone else's sides. They've tasted what it is to be "mainstream," and they probably won't be crawling back under their 8-chan rocks any time soon.

Biden will have his work cut out for him, as will the rest of us.

Ari Meermans · Jul 27, 2020

Kalyke said:
I don't know. I am more worried about the embarrassment of the scene that you sometimes see in totalitarian governments of guards picking up the old president who acts like a toddler stamping his feet and whining how unfair the world is. I think by now, except for his true believers, everyone knows that Trump is not above that.

On the 20th of January, the president is no longer the president and the vice president is also no longer the vice-president. So the answer is simple. They and their luggage are put on the curb.

But the question here is what if the electoral college certificate is different (does not match) on the 10th of January.

If no president is selected by that time, the presidency (intrum) goes to the next in line which is the President Pro Tempore of the majority house of the Senate. (Chuck Grassley R-Iowa). If the Democrats win the majority the President Pro Tempore is Patrick Leahy.

The election committees know that there will be far more write-in ballots this year. They should be hiring personnel and getting counting machines ready. If they are not then they are most likely looking to be fired. Quite a lot of trouble has been caused by the various state’s election commissions-- so there is your weakest link.

July 6, 2020, the Supreme court voted unanimously for what is called the "Faithless Elector" law. So in states which have the Faithless Elector law (33) the elector must vote for the person who they said they would vote for when they were elected.

"In the 18 states currently without faithless elector laws, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact would operate in a manner identical to the system that they have been using for over 200 years. In these states (which currently use the state-by-state winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes), the presidential electors are chosen by the political party whose presidential candidate receives the most popular votes inside the state, and there are no additional requirements placed upon the elector" (Brookings).

In cases of electors who vote in a deviant manner, that is, do not vote as they pledged, for whatever reason there are lawsuits and fines aplenty. There have usually only been one "grandstanding (deviant) elector per election.

In 2016 however, there were 7 grandstanding electors. In other words they switched their vote -- not necessarily for Trump as there were about 5 parties running, many who were not on the ballot-- which is also pathetic.

Says Brookings: "Having seven faithless electors in one year (2016) was unusual. All of the faithless electors in 2016 were well aware, at the time they voted, that their vote would not affect the outcome in the Electoral College because everyone knew that Donald Trump had won 36 more electoral votes than required for election" (232 Clinton, 306 Trump). The switched votes were not just sneakily put in the bucket with everything else. They were counted as switched votes and the electors were fined or censured. Also, the discrepancy occurs here. Hillary Clinton had more popular votes but not more electors. The electors (except the 7) all voted for who they said they would vote for (reflecting the majority of the people in their areas).

And the overall result of the activities of the 7 grandstanding electors according to the Brookings Institute: "Given the amount of publicity received by the grandstanding /faithless electors in 2016, each political party can be expected to be extremely careful in 2020 about vetting the people they nominate for the position of presidential elector. If the political parties do their job carefully and well, faithless electors cannot have any effect on the outcome of a presidential election—under either the current system or the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact".

Can something else go wrong? Of course it can. Will being "careful" also potentially lead to malfeasance? Potentially. If, for instance, your Republican states decide to go out of their way to hire electors that will change their vote. I remember something like this happening in Nebraska while I was there. The area under the elector voted for one person (the democrat) but the elector said "screw this, I am voting for X (the republican). This could only happen in the area without the faithless elector law because the law says that the electors must vote what the majority of voters said (popular vote) 33 states. (These are laws against faithless electors, not for them). In the case of switching votes, the electors are subject to a lawsuit and fined for breaking their pledge.

The part about Trump tweeting "unfair" is possibly going to happen. He's a crybaby and not much of a man.

He is in big trouble if he loses actually-- unless Uncle Joe ends up pardoning him. Because Muller did not refer him for prosecution, allowing for future prosecution (ect., ect., we know all this).

The thing we should actually be more worried about was the havoc he can do between the 3rd of November and the 20th of January. He will need to be carefully watched.

[Bolding mine]

Kalyke, please cite your sources—particularly for the statements I placed in bold. You also seem to be quoting from Brookings in a couple of places but there are no attribution links for those, either.

What if Trump loses but refuses to leave office? Here's the worst case scenario

Introversion

Pie aren't squared, pie are round!

cbenoi1

Introversion

Pie aren't squared, pie are round!

AstronautMikeDexter

Marian Perera

starting over

Brightdreamer

Just Another Lazy Perfectionist

regdog

The Scavengers

Brightdreamer

Just Another Lazy Perfectionist

Kalyke

Introversion

Pie aren't squared, pie are round!

cbenoi1

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido

Ari Meermans

MacAllister's Official Minion & Greeter