Comments by "SmallSpoonBrigade" (@SmallSpoonBrigade) on "Krystal and Saagar: Court Rules AGAINST Wis Dems In Absentee Ballot Case, PREVIEWING Bush V Gore 2.0" video.

  1. Perhaps they should have let the voters decide who the candidate would be. And perhaps they should have demanded that Garland be seated and RBG should have stepped down ahead of the election.
    1
  2. Bush V., Gore was never constitutional in any reasonable interpretation. It was written because corrupt judges wanted that result. They wouldn't let the Democrats get the time to recount all the votes in the state, but they also wouldn't let them count only those in districts that were affected. It was BS justification, making sure that the votes were counted isn't counting some more than others. And if it's unconstitutional for some votes to count more than others, you could make the same argument about how the electoral college is handled.
    1