The midterm Congress doesn't matter; it would be the Congress elected in 2024 that takes office on 3 January 2025

But yes, both chambers of Congress acting together have always had the power to install a President. See Hayes-Tilden 1876 https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1345423174910025729
Someone has to have the power. Would you rather it be the President? 5 justices of the Supreme Court?

It's functionally impossible to have an election where one party wins the presidency but neither chamber of Congress, and 218 Representatives + 51 Senators agree to toss results https://twitter.com/pogman42/status/1345625196695154689
The issue is who is responsible for counting the electoral votes and confirming they're legit. Congress exclusively has that power, and the sheer volume of people that have to be convinced to ignore the results confirms it's the right branch to have it
@Pogman42
If people want to abolish the Electoral College, go for it

But it requires 2/3 of the House + 2/3 of the Senate + 3/4 of state legislatures. It's not an attainable goal, and will not be an attainable goal in our lifetimes

Meanwhile, that energy could be better used elsewhere https://twitter.com/duva60/status/1345628983828869123
Likely unconstitutional, and unenforceable even if it were not https://twitter.com/traumphil/status/1345635244850909184
Elect better Congresscritters

There is no other solution until you're in a world where amending the Constitution to remove it is plausible https://twitter.com/donbob01/status/1345640707437039617
Since the modern two-party Dem-Rep system began in 1860, a new President of one party has taken office with both Congressional chambers controlled by the other party in:

➡️ 1969 (Nixon)
➡️ 1973 (Ford)

That's it. 2x in 160 years.

1/ https://twitter.com/dotcommodity/status/1345643546930364416
And in those 2x-in-160-years occurrences, there weren't majorities in both chambers to overturn the results

(Just like there aren't now even in a Republican-controlled Senate)

2/
@dotcommodity
That's as close to "functionally impossible" as you can get for a thing that can theoretically happen

3/3
@dotcommodity
https://twitter.com/uldihaa/status/1345679935072043013
No

Article V: "The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments" which "shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states" https://twitter.com/handysalmon/status/1345662992688455681
For the House, yes

There's nothing to gerrymander with Senate races though https://twitter.com/apiarymedicine/status/1345768550653423617
Only if you agree Democrats can never convince rural voters to support them

Which is quite an indictment of Democrats tbh https://twitter.com/randyjmacon/status/1345771123070423040
50%+1 of those in each chamber to reject electoral votes, yes

Any given session of Congress could make the threshold higher for that election, but unlikely it would be binding on future Congresses https://twitter.com/gortok/status/1345770624845819904
Binding future Congresses gets you into the wild and woolly world of "legislative entrenchment," which ranks among one of the most tedious/pointless areas of legal scholarship

2/2
@gortok
Yes, "being more racist" is the only way to convince rural voters to support Democrats 🤦‍♂️

How long was Tom Daschle in Congress? Wasn't he y'all's majority leader? https://twitter.com/conspiratorpres/status/1345774457969811458
https://twitter.com/jdyubergeek/status/1345774247193567233
There's not "more than one interpretation": you take the total number of electors appointed (538 this time), divide by 2, and if no one has more than that number when counting is done you have a contingent election

Ending state-based voting requires a constitutional amendment https://twitter.com/dynastyend/status/1345776450629115905
Tom Daschle lost in 2004

Heidi Heitkamp won in 2012 https://twitter.com/rpd158/status/1345778174446080000
And yet, as recently as 2004, all 4 Senators from the Dakotas were Democrats https://twitter.com/amarachi_e/status/1345780213687275521
Heidi Heitkamp won in 2012

I can't help it Dems as a party decided rural America was unimportant because their "Coalition of the Ascendant" was going to win elections forever https://twitter.com/sportsgeek42/status/1345782317944602624
Heidi Heitkamp won in 2012

Al Franken won in 2014

Tammy Baldwin won in 2012 and 2018

Amy Klobuchar won in 2012 and 2018

Jon Tester won in 2012 and 2018 https://twitter.com/jdseiglie/status/1345783010931699712
Him too, in 2010 and 2012 and 2018 https://twitter.com/jdraymon/status/1345784464102756352
I doubt any of the politicians were dumb enough to say it openly, but many of the strategists / pundits / voters did, yes

It's just the D version of Karl Rove's "permanent Republican majority" talk in 2004 https://twitter.com/rocknrocknrolli/status/1345784757054017538
In a 2-way race, that's generally true

The issue is in 12th Amendment's use of the words "electors appointed" and rejecting votes cast by validly-appointed electors

Those electors apply to the denominator, even if their votes are discarded and removed from the numerator https://twitter.com/hoppicopter/status/1345784629161287692
No clue, I'm not a Democrat or a political strategist

But saying "oh woe is us, it can never be done!" is a cop out https://twitter.com/bexleylister/status/1345786507517423619
You can follow @greg_doucette.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.