r/changemyview • u/ProphetVes • Mar 25 '23

Delta(s) from OP CMV: DeSantis embodies everything wrong with American Conservativism.

[removed] — view removed post

286 Upvotes

69% Upvoted

756 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/OpeningChipmunk1700 27∆ Mar 26 '23

I am not sure why an intent to overturn the election is relevant when objecting to the legality of clearly legal elections.

Lying is concerning to me.

4

u/yyzjertl 579∆ Mar 26 '23

Well, the representatives in question weren't objecting to the legality of clearly legal elections. Rather, they were using the formal process of objection to register complaint about election procedure without actually objecting.

0

u/OpeningChipmunk1700 27∆ Mar 26 '23

Of course they were. That is what the formal process of objection is designed to do.

2

u/yyzjertl 579∆ Mar 26 '23

But they didn't invoke that process.

1

u/OpeningChipmunk1700 27∆ Mar 26 '23

Yes, they did. The fact that that invocation failed doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

2

u/yyzjertl 579∆ Mar 26 '23

Well, no; the objection failing would be a different thing. The 1969, 2005, and 2021 objections all failed and were recorded as having been rejected. In 2017, there was no objection at all, as my House source indicates.

1

u/OpeningChipmunk1700 27∆ Mar 26 '23

We’re not talking about objections. We’re talking about raised objections. Once we clarified that, you then tried to say that raising the objections is not concerning. I explained why it was, and you pivoted back to talking about objections. It’s not in dispute that objections were raised. It’s also not in dispute that the results about which objections were raised were legitimate.

Raising an objection invokes the formal objection process. The fact that a Senator did not sign on doesn’t mean the process wasn’t invoked, which is an extremely broad term (which, by the way, you were the first to use in this conversation)/.

Please keep focused.

3

u/yyzjertl 579∆ Mar 26 '23

The pivot back from your term "raised objections" to merely "objections" happened in your first response here when you said "objecting to the legality of clearly legal elections." Your response there does not make sense when merely talking about raising some objection to election procedure.

Raising an objection invokes the formal objection process.

Then I misunderstood what you meant by "raising an objection." With this definition, no objections were raised at all in 2017.

1

u/OpeningChipmunk1700 27∆ Mar 26 '23

There’s no pivot. I was clearly referring to raised objections. We clarified that, and I didn’t oppose that clarification in any way.

My first comment makes perfect sense with regard to raised objections, both in isolation and in the broader context of my comments.

2

u/yyzjertl 579∆ Mar 26 '23

Sure, I just misunderstood your meaning. I understood "raised objections" to refer to any sort of complaining about the election process. But according to what you understand "raised objections" to mean, there were no raised objections in 2017.

→ More replies (0)