Comments on: Just How Bad Can It Get? http://www.leftist.org/haightspeech/archives/255.html Kyle and Anne Haight: Annoying People In Stereo Since 1971 Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:56:39 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Kyle Haight http://www.leftist.org/haightspeech/archives/255.html/comment-page-1#comment-1666 Kyle Haight Wed, 27 Oct 2004 00:49:10 +0000 http://www2.leftist.org/haightspeech/?p=255#comment-1666 Avenger: Well, yes. Obviously these kinds of breakdown scenarios, should they happen in real life, would be a major disaster. Resolving any kind of non-standard electoral outcome requires a basic level of trust between the two sides, and in the worst-case scenario that level of trust doesn't exist. The United States government is based on the consent of the governed; if a significant proportion of the governed withdraw their consent then a civil war is exactly what we'll have on our hands. I really hope that doesn't come to pass. The tone in my post was admittedly somewhat flippant, in a "what can you do but laugh" sort of way. But if this election does melt down into riots and revolution in the streets I definitely won't be laughing, and it won't be fun in any way. Avenger: Well, yes. Obviously these kinds of breakdown scenarios, should they happen in real life, would be a major disaster. Resolving any kind of non-standard electoral outcome requires a basic level of trust between the two sides, and in the worst-case scenario that level of trust doesn’t exist. The United States government is based on the consent of the governed; if a significant proportion of the governed withdraw their consent then a civil war is exactly what we’ll have on our hands.

I really hope that doesn’t come to pass. The tone in my post was admittedly somewhat flippant, in a “what can you do but laugh” sort of way. But if this election does melt down into riots and revolution in the streets I definitely won’t be laughing, and it won’t be fun in any way.

]]> By: Avenger http://www.leftist.org/haightspeech/archives/255.html/comment-page-1#comment-1665 Avenger Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:14:28 +0000 http://www2.leftist.org/haightspeech/?p=255#comment-1665 If by fun you mean civil war in a worst case scenario, then sure, lots of fun. If by fun you mean civil war in a worst case scenario, then sure, lots of fun.

]]> By: Kyle Haight http://www.leftist.org/haightspeech/archives/255.html/comment-page-1#comment-1664 Kyle Haight Tue, 26 Oct 2004 21:02:33 +0000 http://www2.leftist.org/haightspeech/?p=255#comment-1664 Of course, if the control of the Congress changed hands in the election, then you could get a situation where the new Congress denied that the Presidential selection by the outgoing Congress was valid. In the absence of clear Constitutional text supporting one side over the other, who would resolve the dispute? Of course, if the control of the Congress changed hands in the election, then you could get a situation where the new Congress denied that the Presidential selection by the outgoing Congress was valid. In the absence of clear Constitutional text supporting one side over the other, who would resolve the dispute?

]]> By: levi from queens http://www.leftist.org/haightspeech/archives/255.html/comment-page-1#comment-1663 levi from queens Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:52:38 +0000 http://www2.leftist.org/haightspeech/?p=255#comment-1663 Interesting question on which Congress. At the time the constitution was written, each Congress had three sessions. The newly elected Congress did not sit until the old one had finally adjourned. (This made more sense when the President was sworn in on March 4th). So it clearly would have been the old Congress which decided. The Lame-Duck amendment (#20) did away with the third session of Congress. It seems to me that if the current Congress can reach a conclusion, they will. If not, the incoming Congress will have to decide. Interesting question on which Congress. At the time the constitution was written, each Congress had three sessions. The newly elected Congress did not sit until the old one had finally adjourned. (This made more sense when the President was sworn in on March 4th). So it clearly would have been the old Congress which decided. The Lame-Duck amendment (#20) did away with the third session of Congress. It seems to me that if the current Congress can reach a conclusion, they will. If not, the incoming Congress will have to decide.

]]>