“Delay the Election”: Trump Fuels New Questions Over The Holding Of The Presidential Election

donald_trump_president-elect_portrait_croppedWe previously discussed a conspiracy theory from Vice President Joe Biden that President Donald Trump could unilaterally cancel or delay the election day.  We then dealt with a baffling statement by Jared Kushner that it was too soon to tell if the election day would be delayed — a statement that was as politically unwise as it was legally unsound. Now, President Donald Trump is fueling this controversy with a bizarre tweet that we may need to delay the election day. He is not suggesting that he can do it unilaterally, but it is another statement at odds with the constitutional and statutory foundation for the election day schedule.  Even if Congress agreed to a different day, it would only move voting a few weeks later. Anything more would require pulling up our controlling law root and branch.


President Donald Trump suggested delaying the November election until 'people can properly, securely and safely vote'

President Donald Trump suggested delaying the November election until ‘people can properly, securely and safely vote’

This claim has become the monkey’s paw of election theories — passed from one person to another and from one party to another with the same harmful consequences.  It makes all of its holders look ridiculous.

Trump does not state, as suggested by Biden, that he could unilaterally stop the election. Indeed, that is impossible. While any president can try to do anything, such a move would be quickly prevented by the Courts. Trump could also seek to barricade himself in his office or change his name to Joseph Biden if he lost. But none of that would make any difference. As stated in my earlier column, it does not matter what Trump may desire, it is a matter of what the Constitution would allow. As I said with regard to Biden, any such claim would need the approval of both houses (which is virtually impossible in the current Congress) and would only add a short period of additional time. However, even the suggestion of a delay of the election with the consent of Congress is as unlikely as it is unwarranted.

The Constitution mandates that President Trump’s term will end on January 20th.  Period. Thus, even if Congress were to collectively lose control of its senses and change the date for the election, it would gain only a few weeks — unless you want to quickly rewrite the Constitution as well.

There is a suspicion that this bombshell tweet was an effort to distract from the unsettling report that our GDP plummeted by almost 33 percent.  However, this is not a trivial shining object to toss into the national debate. It is casting doubt on the holding of one of the most consequential elections in history.

Our laws are designed to remove such doubts and assure voters that our elections will be held in a regular order.

The date of the election has been set since 1845 by Congress and it is statutorily set as statutorily set as “the Tuesday next after the first Monday in the month of November.”


There is actually a relatively short period between election day to get much done.  Under 3 U.S.C. §7:


Those votes must then be certified, submitted to Congress and counted by the first week of January.

Thus, the window is actually quite short. Even if Congress were to fiddle with these dates, it still has a hard stop on January 20.  The most that could be gained from this traumatic level of change would be a couple of weeks.

I have no idea why both parties remain obsessed with this idea. It is akin to constitutional quackery.

We have an election on November 3.  Count on it.

This tweet will also likely rekindle another alarmist theory that Trump may refuse to accept the outcome of the election in an effective coup. President Trump has the right to challenge the results of any given state as was the case in Bush v. Gore.  However, these challenges occur in a rigid time frame.  Again, electoral votes are certify and given to Congress. The election date will occur on November 3, 2020.  The state electors will cast their votes on the second Wednesday of December and those results are submitted to Congress and counted in the first week of January.

There is time for expedited challenges and Congress can address contested results from a given state.  The nightmare scenario is lingering litigation over the validity of electoral votes by Inauguration Day in January.  The Supreme Court sought to avoid that scenario in Bush v. Gore by effectively short circuiting further appeals in Florida.  However, it was ultimately shown that Al Gore likely won Florida, but it did not matter due to the acceptance of the electoral votes by Congress.  Notably, Democrats were enthusiastically supporting further challenges at the time. Thus, there is a certain hypocrisy in the current alarm expressed by Democratic leaders who pushed for challenges in the 2000 election.

What cannot happen is a President unilaterally refusing to accept the results. It is not up to President Trump and the country does not have to satisfy him that he has lost. Absent a court order enjoining or altering a tabulation, the acceptance of the electoral votes by Congress will effectively end the matter.  The Secret Service on Inauguration Day is under the direction of the new president. Upon the oath of office taken by any successor, President Trump becomes a guest in the White House. If he remains, he becomes an unwelcomed guest.  If he refuses to leave, he becomes an arrested guest.

So, here is the long and short of it.  On November 3, we will have an election. On January 20th, we will have either a new or reelected president. In other words, we would be better served focusing on who that should be than occupying ourselves with these baseless theories.

314 thoughts on ““Delay the Election”: Trump Fuels New Questions Over The Holding Of The Presidential Election”

  1. Jonathan, Biden said “Mark my words,” he said at a virtual fundraiser. “I think he is gonna try to kick back the election somehow, come up with some rationale why it can’t be held.””

    Just how is that as you said “We previously discussed a conspiracy theory from Vice President Joe Biden that President Donald Trump could unilaterally cancel or delay the election day.”

    Biden didn’t say that and you know it. I used to respect you but you have become just another RW hack.

  2. Anyone find anything in the Constitution that allows such a delay . No but then conventions themselves are a party deal and the political parties are no mentioned in The Constitution other than the first amendment rights. Nothing to do with government.

    Elections however are mentioned and I’ve yet to find a way short of a full amendment to delay or make such a change.

  3. John Lewis in today’s NYTs:











    1. Anon – press X for doubt. That is a long essay for someone who is dying. MLK spent a significant portion of his time keeping the communists (BLM) out of the Civil Rights movement. The Civil Rights movement of John Lewis was open to whites and blacks. Some staffer or ??? wrote this on his behalf or not and slapped his name on it.

      1. ML King employed Stanley Levison and Jack O’Dell, and continued to employ them after Robert Kennedy informed him that both had been Communist Party members.

      2. I gather Gainesville also uses ‘anonymous’ as one of his sock-puppets. That’s the second time he’s dumped that text wall in one of these threads.

    2. Thanks for posting, Book. Notice the people posting in response their McCarthy esque replies as if the guy they liked hasn’t been actively and publicly giving uncle Vlad a reach around. Just shows they know the power of Lewis’ words and know they are on the wrong side of history.

      1. Huh, seems to me that it’s uncle Xi getting a reach around via the media and some folks in Big Business.

      2. true, so true. the Dwindling few dimwits who remain on the day glo bozo titanic are again reduced to arranged the deck chairs. It would be sad except for the fact that the Republican Party needs to experience the utter rejection it will receive in November before it can begin to heal itself.

    3. Who the —- is John Lewis, 1/435th of the Congress?

      Who the —- cares?

      Is he yet another of those greedy parasites in search of “free stuff” and artificially provided status; a protected “untouchable?”

      Do the communist political officers require us to display our fealty to a comrade solely for the sake of the furtherance of communism?

  4. The election may be moved…by Congress.

    The American Founders required citizens to show their person at a polling place and be identified, they DID NOT conduct elections through the U.S. Mail, they did not suggest conducting elections through the U.S. Mail.

    Democrats have corrupted the vote since Lincoln unconstitutionally denied fully constitutional secession, conducted an unconstitutional war over fully constitutional secession and, through his successors, improperly ratified the “injurious” and unconstitutional “Reconstruction Amendments” under the duress of brutal post-war military occupation in a war-weary nation.

    Democrats have corrupted the vote through mass invasion as illegal immigration.

    Democrats have corrupted the vote by ballot harvesting.

    Democrats intend to fully corrupt the vote by mail-in ballot to transform the entire United States into a one-party communist dictatorship similar to California et al.

    The only question that remains to be answered is whether Americans will allow it.

      1. I want the drugs the American Revolutionaries were on.

        They said, “Enough of this monarchical form of dictatorship. We’re going to implement a restricted-vote republic as self-governance providing maximal freedom to individuals under a government, elected by people entitled by criteria to vote, which is severely limited and restricted to the provision of infrastructure and security.”

        Let me find the quote.

        1. I regret to inform you, weird sir, that none of the statements alleged in your post can be found in the text of the Constitution. So sorry for your loss, and your condition.

          this is to “please write letters to get me released from this hell of an in-patient treatment center” georgie / paulie

    1. Please keep doing you. The comedy refreshes my visits here.

      this is to “I had to trade the Friday pudding to the patient next door for his internet time” georgie / paulie

  5. It’s pretty clear already that States are not prepared to disseminate and process unprecedented numbers of mail-in ballots in any sort of secure manner. Even the usual MSM propaganda outlets (such as the New Yorker and Ari Berman on MSN) agree with this. Nor is the USPS ready to process a torrent of ballots. Throw in the shady “ballot harvester” racket, and all the ingredients are there for a violently disputed election.

    Likely the way this plays out is that there will be multiple challenges to the vote tabulations and declaration of state Electoral College delegates as well as down ballot winners. These cases will wind up on the expedited docket at the SCOTUS and with that, there will be a replay of the 2000 Election. Drump could be declared the winner just as Dubya was. Only this time the atmosphere is far more combustible. This will turn out to be a violent Election.

    The Dums brought this on by (deliberately) passing haphazard mail-in voting legislation. Drump is correct that this will be a very corrupt election under present circumstances. Won’t bother me personally, since I don’t vote out of principle. But this fiasco will kick of a slo-mo version of US Civil War II.

    1. Unfortunately, you’re an utter buffoon. I live in the Great State of Colorado, where we’ve had vote-by-mail for years. We’ve had no problems with it at all; unless of course you consider minorities and young people voting to be a problem. So sorry for your loss, and your condition.

      this is to “I have a new ‘hannity was here’ tattoo across my lower back” sara

Leave a Reply