Why hasn't one Democrat pointed out the obvious?

[jmowreader]

This is what the Constitution says about appointing electors:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The Constitution is very clear: the legislatures of the states are allowed to set up their own election systems. If the legislatures of the states want their Secretaries of State, or their Governors, or some randomly-chosen wino off Skid Row, to approve the results of the election, it's totally legal.

Hence, the Arizona objection is moot and so are the objections to the rest of the states' electoral slates.

[sinkingfeeling]

1. The GOP is arguing that AZ's SOS and/or governor and/or AZ courts violated that by extending

voter registration deadlines, etc. because of Covid-19.

[beachbumbob]

2. Gop argues that state has no right to set rules for their own state

Elections. The pure definition of magical thinking. Why all courts reject such evidence.

[sinkingfeeling]

3. The arguments I heard were that the state legislatures(GOP) did not approve extensions. Thereby,

violating the Constitution.

[beachbumbob]

5. They were approved in one manner or not and US constitution has no

part in how states do it.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. That point was made repeatedly in almost every one of the court cases

that Trump and his minions lost.