What if the content of R_v_W isn't as significant as we think and it's moreso about states rights getting a SCOTUS precedent? I know some things are happening in AZ and TX where the GOP is rejecting the 2020 results so maybe this entire ruling was just to give more legal ammo to the states when they start challenging the results of 2020. That would explain why RvW gets the ball rolling finally and is the 113 marker. "Once 11.3 verifies as 1st marker" and why it "had to be this way". States rights needed to be brought to the fore before the election can be corrected.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (69)
sorted by:
It should 99% be states' rights. Remember the quote from National Treasure?
"Before the Civil War, the states were all separate. People used to say "United States are." Wasn't until the war ended, people started saying "The United States is." Under Lincoln, we became one nation."
The Founding Fathers meant for us to be separate states united federally. We were still one nation when threatened but each state took care of itself for the most part. There was no Federal nanny state.