"Given his need to win both states, Nixon knew there was no point seeking a recount in Illinois unless he also had a chance of prevailing in a Texas recount. But, as Nixon himself explained in his 1962 memoir Six Crises, 'there was no procedure whatever for a losing candidate to get a recount in Texas.' "

As I said, even if Nixon won in Illinois, he would have lost. Period. I've already read his 1962 memoir. Which you obviously hadn't or you wouldn't have made your nonsensical postings. Had I been able to vote in the 1960 election I would have voted for Nixon.

Argue it anyway you want, the loss is a fact, just as Trump's win in 2016 is. Citing the reasons doesn't change the fact Trump made another false statement.

How did LBJ enter a discussion about Trump making a false statement?

Read a book.

Hist post isn't nonsensical. What it points out is that since Texas had no provisions for a recount the cheating worked.

That's the whole point. The cheating this year appears to have worked as well. You are correct that contesting Illinois would not have given Nixon the election. But you are incorrect if you are trying to say that Kennedy didn't win fraudulently.

This election is very similar, including evidence of fraud existing, but no way to get courts to look at it or change the outcome.

You are right that elections have consequences. I can't speak for anyone else, only myself, but I am going to accept Biden as president, but will never believe the election was legitimate because as I read the Constitution almost all of the election rule changes that were made to accommodate covid were unconstitutional and they had a huge impact on the election.

I know that most people are arguing fraud. I don't know if there was fraud or not. I think there probably was, but I don't think it made as much difference as the election law changes. So, fraud or no fraud I don't believe it was a fair election and that isn't going to change. I just hope they clean up the rules prior to the 2022 midterm elections.

Remember that in the Rasmussen poll 10 percent of democrats believe that the election was unfair, it isn't just Republicans. Something very weird happened in this election. 19 of the 20 bellweather counties voted for Trump. Typically only one bellweather county is wrong or they are all right. That's why they are bellweather counties. Trump took Ohio and Florida. Republicans always win when they take those two states. So, there was a lot of weird stuff going on fraud or no fraud. Oh, and way fewer absentee ballots were thrown out for not matching signatures than usual. That is also odd as you would expect a bunch of first time mail in voters to make mistakes. So, really odd election results and I think that historically it will go down very much like the JFK vs Nixon election where there is still questions about who really won.

Article 1 section 4 gives the states the right to make and change election law as the see fit unless Congress passes a law which affects their law. Congress has passed much legislation but the only one that affects the elections directly is the Electoral Count Act. A rather opaque law it focuses on procedures for counting electoral votes. The rest of the legislation is about insuring that everyone eligible to vote can vote, including what counts as eligible.

It’s up to the states to decide how to run their election. A different state cannot sue another state on voting procedures - no grounds. The US justice department can sue states over claims of discrimination, voter suppression, equal access and the like but they cannot do so over procedures unless they are discriminatory.... The only venue is the state judiciary with the state law and constitution. So if they find that there was no fraud that’s it.


https://constitutionus.com/#a1s4

Hist post isn't nonsensical. What it points out is that since Texas had no provisions for a recount the cheating worked.

That's the whole point. The cheating this year appears to have worked as well. You are correct that contesting Illinois would not have given Nixon the election. But you are incorrect if you are trying to say that Kennedy didn't win fraudulently.

This election is very similar, including evidence of fraud existing, but no way to get courts to look at it or change the outcome.

Article 1 section 4 gives the states the right to make and change election law as the see fit unless Congress passes a law which affects their law. Congress has passed much legislation but the only one that affects the elections directly is the Electoral Count Act. A rather opaque law it focuses on procedures for counting electoral votes. The rest of the legislation is about insuring that everyone eligible to vote can vote, including what counts as eligible.

It’s up to the states to decide how to run their election. A different state cannot sue another state on voting procedures - no grounds. The US justice department can sue states over claims of discrimination, voter suppression, equal access and the like but they cannot do so over procedures unless they are discriminatory.... The only venue is the state judiciary with the state law and constitution. So if they find that there was no fraud that’s it.
https://constitutionus.com/#a1s4