Colorado SC just disqualified Trump from the ballot using the Fourteenth Amendment Section 3 of the Constitution

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Zorba

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,613
11,255
136
eelw said:
Let’s pretend SCOTUS punts and says election is a state issue. Imagine the dominos falling in other states. Sure it would be mostly blue states that do the same. But it prevents the flipping of close states and impossible for orange monkey to get 270.
Click to expand...
Also probably really suppressed republican turnout for down ballot in those states.
 
IronWing

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,816
33,825
136
Fenixgoon said:
If the president isn't an officer of the United states, then WTF are they? (Uhh, and it is called the office of the presidency...)
Click to expand...
The Constitution says the Presidency is an office. Therefore, the President is an officer. Some definitions of officer limit the word to meaning "agent" but this limited definition doesn't work for how the word is used in the Constitution.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: DarthKyrie, trenchfoot, [DHT]Osiris and 1 other person
JTsyo

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
12,032
1,131
126
Reason article makes some good points for the outcome after the election if this stands.

In one scenario, Trump loses but his supporters are able to nurse a permanent grievance that the system wouldn't even let their guy compete. Not for the abstruse reasons that Trump's team tried to conjure up after the 2020 results came in, but because of something that's easy to understand and easy to see as a legitimate grievance.


In another scenario, Trump wins the Electoral College—remember, these states weren't likely to vote for him anyway—but with a far lower percentage of the popular vote. Indeed, the popular and electoral votes would be even more mismatched than in 2000 or 2016. In terms of democratic legitimacy, that outcome might be even worse for the future of the country.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: [DHT]Osiris
E

eelw

Lifer
Dec 4, 1999
10,334
5,487
136
Zorba said:
Also probably really suppressed republican turnout for down ballot in those states.
Click to expand...
This ties in to this. It was mentioned by legal expert after last nights news. Secretary of State must ignore any write in ballots for him.
 
Fenixgoon

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
33,273
12,837
136
eelw said:
This ties in to this. It was mentioned by legal expert after last nights news. Secretary of State must ignore any write in ballots for him.
Click to expand...
A coworker of mine asked me about this, and I told him I wasn't sure whether write-in votes for trump would count or not.
 
Indus

Indus

Lifer
May 11, 2002
15,964
11,108
136
The easiest solution to this is make a new constitutional amendment where the President is limited to ONE TERM and can't stay beyond his term limit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: [DHT]Osiris
Indus

Indus

Lifer
May 11, 2002
15,964
11,108
136
Brainonska511 said:
Why would this be a solution?

If Trump didn't care about election results, why do you think this would stop someone?
Click to expand...

It would solve so many problems you don't even know of all of them.

For example you elect someone and the opposition roadblocks till midterms. Then it becomes all about re-election.

If re-elected.. it's all about being a lame duck and getting nothing done without executive orders.

I'd much prefer Presidents to serve one non-extandable 6 year term!
 
Brainonska511

Brainonska511

Lifer
Dec 10, 2005
28,634
13,728
136
Indus said:
It would solve so many problems you don't even know of all of them.

For example you elect someone and the opposition roadblocks till midterms. Then it becomes all about re-election.

If re-elected.. it's all about being a lame duck and getting nothing done without executive orders.

I'd much prefer Presidents to serve one non-extandable 6 year term!
Click to expand...
Single terms would also be lame ducks.

The issue of oppositions being roadblocks would be better combated by expanding the house to better reflect total population and reducing the power of the relatively undemocratic Senate. You'd then remove some of the issue of competing electoral mandates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ivwshane, DarthKyrie and Zorba
D

dlerious

Platinum Member
Mar 4, 2004
2,118
932
136
Indus said:
It would solve so many problems you don't even know of all of them.

For example you elect someone and the opposition roadblocks till midterms. Then it becomes all about re-election.

If re-elected.. it's all about being a lame duck and getting nothing done without executive orders.

I'd much prefer Presidents to serve one non-extandable 6 year term!
Click to expand...
Experience says the opposition is going to roadblock as long as they're not in power. Maybe term limits on Congress would be better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: [DHT]Osiris
Brainonska511

Brainonska511

Lifer
Dec 10, 2005
28,634
13,728
136
dlerious said:
Experience says the opposition is going to roadblock as long as they're not in power. Maybe term limits on Congress would be better.
Click to expand...
Term limits are also bad. You'd just be handing power away to unelected bureaucrats and lobbyists, because there would then be no institutional experience from elected members. You also are taking away people's choice to keep electing representatives they like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaskalas, pmv, ivwshane and 5 others
IronWing

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,816
33,825
136
It's way off topic but I'm coming around to the idea of four year terms for the House and abolishing the Senate. I'm not a fan of term limits. If voters want to elect the same old, same old, okay. I am a fan of age limits, which would become effective term limits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie and dlerious
D

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
17,366
16,635
146
Brainonska511 said:
Term limits are also bad. You'd just be handing power away to unelected bureaucrats and lobbyists, because there would then be no institutional experience from elected members. You also are taking away people's choice to keep electing representatives they like.
Click to expand...
Then why not remove term limits for the executive? How is that different?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie
D

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
17,366
16,635
146
IronWing said:
It's way off topic but I'm coming around to the idea of four year terms for the House and abolishing the Senate. I'm not a fan of term limits. If voters want to elect the same old, same old, okay. I am a fan of age limits, which would become effective term limits.
Click to expand...
I'll see your crazy and raise you, 1/3rd of each house and Senate should be randomly selected citizens, 1y deployments like super jury duty. That should put a squeeze on all nonsensical legislation.
 
K1052

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,601
46,252
136
IronWing said:
It's way off topic but I'm coming around to the idea of four year terms for the House and abolishing the Senate. I'm not a fan of term limits. If voters want to elect the same old, same old, okay. I am a fan of age limits, which would become effective term limits.
Click to expand...

Get rid of the senate.
Move to proportional representation in the House with a floating cap based on the Wyoming Rule.
Eliminate the Electoral College, executive elected by popular vote.
Mandatory retirement at 70.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paratus, dlerious, soulcougher73 and 1 other person
Brainonska511

Brainonska511

Lifer
Dec 10, 2005
28,634
13,728
136
[DHT]Osiris said:
TBH term limits are probably the only thing keeping the US from being at perpetual war. Wartime presidents are rarely replaced.
Click to expand...
Nah, the crying about the Afghanistan withdrawal not being quite right is the thing that is going to keep us in perpetual conflicts going forward, since you don't get politically rewarded for doing the right thing, only politically harmed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dank69
JTsyo

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
12,032
1,131
126
Brainonska511 said:
Sure, let's remove the term limits for the executive too.
Click to expand...
We already tried it and didn't like it.

K1052 said:
Get rid of the senate.
Move to proportional representation in the House with a floating cap based on the Wyoming Rule.
Eliminate the Electoral College, executive elected by popular vote.
Mandatory retirement at 70.
Click to expand...
Expanding the house would fix the Electoral College too.
 
D

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
17,366
16,635
146
Brainonska511 said:
Nah, the crying about the Afghanistan withdrawal not being quite right is the thing that is going to keep us in perpetual conflicts going forward, since you don't get politically rewarded for doing the right thing, only politically harmed.
Click to expand...
The key is to have a perpetual enemy. If we were pulling troops out of Afghanistan to go fight 'terrorists in africa' nobody would have given a whit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom