No. Simply correcting your position.
I'll never understand the tribe mentality. Even when I quoted
@Joe Fan 's post, you still attribute his position to me. WTF? It's a complete alternate reality.
Then you would understand incorrectly. There can be a number of reasons why amici can be just as strong as being part of a plaintiff class, not the least of which is the bogging down that could easily occur in a case such as this. But people like you would LOVE to see it get bogged since that precludes an effective review of the issues.
I fully understand bogging it down. So what are the
benefits of being a Co-Plaintiff which would fall under permisible joinders, right? After all, the claims would fall under a common question of law or facts, right? Would the benefits be more resources, the weight and
perception of many plaintiffs, each of the parties having a common cause in the outcomes?
For amicus briefs, you and I could submit them. This relegates the State of Louisiana's brief to our level. It's up to the court to weigh amicus briefs differently.
What really puzzles me is how the left can ignore that there are clear irregularities that occurred and that SHOULD be reviewed. Even if they don't impact THIS election and the final tally, they are irregularities that should NEVER have occurred or had the ability and opportunities to have occurred.
I don't speak for the "left" and would readily admit this election wasn't perfect. I'm not sure any election has
ever been perfect. For something that occurs every 4 years after action reports from Secretary of State's should be the norm, if they aren't already.
That's not what's being proposed when talking about irregularities though. One Trump Campaign lawsuit cited
2 voter in rural Pennsylvania that weren't given the option to cure their ballots. The remedy? Throw out the election and name Trump the winner.
Seriously? Why not figure out why the rules were implemented differently and make them uniform for the next election? That's a rational viewpoint but overturn the election based on
2 disenfranchised voters? Crazy town.
I could get on board with trying to evaluate and fix "irregularities". Unfortunately, so much literal ******** has been thrown out in hopes to overturn the election that we've lost site of any true "irregularities". Not a single claim of voter % rate above 100% has held up to even the most miniscule amount of scrutiny. Dominion changing votes or adding thousands of votes? Come on! That's not
irregularity but fantasy.
Mixing facts with ******** deteriorates the credibility of the facts. If we could have simply said, yep...democracy shows Trump lost even after recounts now lets look at fixing any election problems for the next election then we'd all get on board. Instead, Trump started with the "FRAUD" months before the election even started. Then his supporters picked up on the Roger Stone created meme "Stop the Steal" before any actual irregularities were known. With that, you should be able to see why most on the left don't think Trump and his supporters genuinely care about fixing irregularities but simply see it as a route to overturning an election.
