/

These Members Of Congress Won’t Commit To Certifying The Election

2 mins read
Jamie Raskin
Photo Credit: Edward Kimmel from Takoma Park, MD, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Some prominent Democrats in Congress were hesitant to confirm that they would certify the results of the 2024 presidential election should Republican nominee Donald Trump emerge victorious.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) told to Axios that if the former president “won a free, fair and honest election, then we would obviously accept it,” but added that he “definitely” doesn’t think Trump will win fairly.

Trump “is doing whatever he can to try to interfere with the process, whether we’re talking about manipulating electoral college counts in Nebraska or manipulating the vote count in Georgia or imposing other kinds of impediments,” Raskin told the outlet.

He also claimed that “Democrats don’t engage in election fraud and election fabrication.”

Meanwhile, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) doesn’t “know waht kind of shenanigans” Trump is “planning,” but said that she and her Democratic colleagues would have to “make sure that all the rules have been followed” before cerifying the election.

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA), who serves as the ranking member of the House Rules Committee, said that the liberal lawmaker of Congress would certify Trump’s win, “assuming everything goes the way we expect it to.”

“We have to see how it all happens,” he added. “My expectation is that we would.”

Meanwhile, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries assured that “House Democrats are going to do everything necessary to … ensure that the winner of the presidential election is certified on January 6th without drama or consequences.”

Recent polls suggest that certifying a Trump victory could become a reality for Democrats whether they like it or not.

The former president is reportedly outpacing Vice President Kamala Harris among Hispanic male voters, according to an AP/NORC poll released on Friday.

Only 36% of Hispanic male voters believe Harris would make a competent president, whereas 42% favor Trump, the poll revealed.

Harris maintains her lead among Hispanic female voters, with 50% supporting the Democratic contender, while only 30% back Trump.

Overall, Harris remains favored by Hispanic voters, with 43% considering her a good presidential candidate, compared to 36% for Trump, while 53% do not favor Trump.

A recent Wall Street Journal poll showed a tight race between Trump and Harris across seven battleground states.

The survey, polling 600 registered voters in each state between September 28 and October 8, with a margin of error of +/-4 percentage points, found that Trump and Harris are neck and neck in North Carolina and Wisconsin.

In Arizona and Georgia, Harris holds a slight lead of 48%-46% and 49%-47% in Michigan.
Conversely, Trump has a significant lead in Nevada at 49%-43% and narrowly leads Harris in Pennsylvania by 47%-46%.

Trump leads Harris 46%-45% across all seven swing states, with voters trusting him more on economic management, inflation, and immigration and border security, whereas Harris is preferred on housing affordability, abortion, healthcare, and empathy in leadership.

47% of those polled think that Trump will better represent the American worker, compared to 45% for Harris, with nearly two-thirds of respondents describing the national economy as poor or suboptimal.

5 Comments

  1. They support Kamala over Trump on HOUSING AFFORDABILITY?
    I think someone misread the poll results on THAT one! She’s already made housing unaffordable for most Americans.

  2. The Dumbocraps are once again spewing out MISINFORMATION with their “DUMBOCRAPS DON’T DO ELECTION FRAUD”. With a governor that is the Secretary of State running for Governor at the same time she is in charge of her office and wins, tell me thats not FRAUD DUMBOCRAPS.

  3. I will put this as simply as I can. Every politician in an elected Federal Government position voluntarily swore an oath of service to the people.. That oath isn’t just a bunch of words they get to recite and that is the end. That oath IS A SACRED PROMISE / contract TO THE CITIZENS OF THE U.S.A. that they will honor the oath to fulfill every mandatory obligation they now have to perform their job as representatives of the people of America. They don’t get to chose which obligations they have been entrusted with to perform. Refusing to certify an election IS NOT AN OPTION BASED ON THEIR POLITICAL PARTY AFFILIATION, it is an obligation of the job. If they chose to break their contract as representatives of the people the people have not only the authority to remove them from office but the duty to remove them from office “forthwith”. This is a perfect example of what an “insurrection” is and Congress knows how close they are to being physically removed by an irate public. Taxation without representation is “tyranny” and traitors are susceptible to even more serious punishments. I dare them to try this. It will not go well for them at all.

  4. By virtue of this presidential race being so close, I can’t believe so many voters are so stupid about the issues that separate both candidates. If voters would do some research of their own, they’d realize which candidate is best for us and our country. Instead, voters cannot relinquish their racist views of the country, so they end up voting for the candidate with the same color skin as their own, or the same gender as their own. What STUPIDITY! This is the reason we need each voter to pass a civics test every four years before being certified to vote. Unfortunately, the liberals would undermine such a test as well, because that’s what they do. Liberals should NEVER be placed into a position of authority. They just have NO morals. they’d phuk their own mothers if they thought there was something in it for themselves! It’s also one of the key reasons this Republic will never survive.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Latest from Blog