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

[[DHT]Osiris]

They seemed to think (and I agree with them) that a statute should not be necessary any more than a state needs a statute to keep people under 35 off the ballot. Trump engaged in insurrection, therefore he is ineligible as per the Constitution. Michigan supreme court did say they could come back and argue for him to be kept off the GE ballot though, same as others have said.

So what do you do when the individual gets put on the ballot anyway? What's the mechanism keeping Democrats from putting a genius charismatic non-native born 30yo on the ballot, if not a legal one? Wait until they're elected then have the SC say they can't be president?

 

[fskimospy]

So what do you do when the individual gets put on the ballot anyway? What's the mechanism keeping Democrats from putting a genius charismatic non-native born 30yo on the ballot, if not a legal one? Wait until they're elected then have the SC say they can't be president?

I think Michigan's argument is more based around that he can't be denied the primary ballot, not the general election one. They (and other states) seem to be open to the idea of disqualifying Trump for the GE.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I think Michigan's argument is more based around that he can't be denied the primary ballot, not the general election one. They (and other states) seem to be open to the idea of disqualifying Trump for the GE.

That's a setup for general unrest then, if you permit them to be on the primary ballot at all but disqualify from the general, dumb fuckers are going to cry foul regardless of all the paragraph citations and graphs and historical whatever's, etc. It's going to be labeled as 'they won't let him be president'.

 

[eelw]

So what do you do when the individual gets put on the ballot anyway? What's the mechanism keeping Democrats from putting a genius charismatic non-native born 30yo on the ballot, if not a legal one? Wait until they're elected then have the SC say they can't be president?

Rules for thee. Not for me.

 

[fskimospy]

That's a setup for general unrest then, if you permit them to be on the primary ballot at all but disqualify from the general, dumb fuckers are going to cry foul regardless of all the paragraph citations and graphs and historical whatever's, etc. It's going to be labeled as 'they won't let him be president'.

Well they would do that anyway.

I think it's important to always ignore anything that Trump supporters might do in reaction to things. It will always be bad faith and those sort of threats just serve to stop people from doing the right thing.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Well they would do that anyway.

I think it's important to always ignore anything that Trump supporters might do in reaction to things. It will always be bad faith and those sort of threats just serve to stop people from doing the right thing.

Right, but it's more normalized/legitimized to say 'that candidate can't be president so they can't be on the ballot' vs 'i mean i guess throw your primary vote away if you want, fuck around and see what happens', followed by 'told you, can't be pres, D's win by default'.

 

[outriding]

Ftfy.

I disagree…


The game was lost fair and square on the field and the opposition asked for a review dozens of times and lost the dozens of reviews….

 

[HomerJS]

Has anyone answered the question who favors not eliminating Trump based on A14S3 given rationale for not allowing Barack Obama on the ballot? After all, the Constitution.

 

[Zorba]

They seemed to think (and I agree with them) that a statute should not be necessary any more than a state needs a statute to keep people under 35 off the ballot. Trump engaged in insurrection, therefore he is ineligible as per the Constitution. Michigan supreme court did say they could come back and argue for him to be kept off the GE ballot though, same as others have said.

Then they will pull some BS about how it is "too close to the election" to make the big of change or some other equally stupid reason.

 

[fskimospy]

Then they will pull some BS about how it is "too close to the election" to make the big of change or some other equally stupid reason.

Oh I'm fully expecting some Calvinball from the Supreme Court on this one.

I think the result from SCOTUS is nearly certain, the only question is how much they have to humiliate themselves and degrade their institution to do it.

 

[HomerJS]

Oh I'm fully expecting some Calvinball from the Supreme Court on this one.

I think the result from SCOTUS is nearly certain, the only question is how much they have to humiliate themselves and degrade their institution to do it.

SCOTUS avoided an express decision so they can do like you said, wait until the last possible moment and then score a Calvinball TD. They will even use a longer time than DOJ 60 day rule.

 

[sactoking]

My bet is, given what we know right now, USSC refuses to hear the appeal. Colorado is the only state that hasn't gone for allowing the unindicted co-conspirator on the ballot so far, and he really doesn't have a chance at winning that one. They can do nothing, not weigh in on the hot issue, and it has little practical effect (so far).

 

[HomerJS]

My bet is, given what we know right now, USSC refuses to hear the appeal. Colorado is the only state that hasn't gone for allowing the unindicted co-conspirator on the ballot so far, and he really doesn't have a chance at winning that one. They can do nothing, not weigh in on the hot issue, and it has little practical effect (so far).

I bet Dem SOS in other states don't move on Trump. The plaintiffs in CO were Republicans.

I can't think of many states that Trump can win will move to eliminate him. If Texas did that game over.

 

[pmv]

Oh I'm fully expecting some Calvinball from the Supreme Court on this one.

I'm agog waiting to see what they come up with. I hope it's something imaginative. The more contortions they have to tie themselves up in, trying to reconcile conclusions requiring contradictory arguments, the funnier it gets.

 

[soulcougher73]

Right, but it's more normalized/legitimized to say 'that candidate can't be president so they can't be on the ballot' vs 'i mean i guess throw your primary vote away if you want, fuck around and see what happens', followed by 'told you, can't be pres, D's win by default'.

I agree. They should be disqualified at the get go. Not later in the game after people are already invested in said candidate only to be told NOW that he doesnt qualify. That is just asking for unnecessary trouble that can be thwarted from the get go.

 

[MrSquished]

Personally I think every blue state should do this, because this is the conservative response. This is fantastic!

 

[brycejones]

Personally I think every blue state should do this, because this is the conservative response. This is fantastic!

View attachment 91087I

Oh no! Ignorant shitheads who won't respect the environment of Colorado will stay home. Don't throw Colorado in that briar patch.

 

[fskimospy]

Oh no! Ignorant shitheads who won't respect the environment of Colorado will stay home. Don't throw Colorado in that briar patch.

This is one of those things where people who live in bubbles think things will be far more effective than they are.

As a tip to people - don’t craft policies and messaging on what you like. Craft them on what you think your audience will like. Politics is a popularity contest!

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I agree. They should be disqualified at the get go. Not later in the game after people are already invested in said candidate only to be told NOW that he doesnt qualify. That is just asking for unnecessary trouble that can be thwarted from the get go.

What I really don't want to see is him excluded from all neon blue states, lawsuits in purple ones, and lawsuits to exclude Biden from Red ones, and a giant clusterfuck of an election that eventually gets just nullified/'decided' by the SC.

 

[Zorba]

Personally I think every blue state should do this, because this is the conservative response. This is fantastic!

View attachment 91087

Good, should be a lot less litter around next time I go.

 

[brycejones]

This is one of those things where people who live in bubbles think things will be far more effective than they are.

As a tip to people - don’t craft policies and messaging on what you like. Craft them on what you think your audience will like. Politics is a popularity contest!

Yeah the actual impact will be little more than a rounding error if that.

 

[pete6032]

What I really don't want to see is him excluded from all neon blue states, lawsuits in purple ones, and lawsuits to exclude Biden from Red ones, and a giant clusterfuck of an election that eventually gets just nullified/'decided' by the SC.

If the Supreme Court rules that he is disqualified under Article 14 Section 3, then he will not appear on any state ballot in the general election.

I cannot think of a reason Biden could be disqualified from any state's general election.

 

[HomerJS]

If the Supreme Court rules that he is disqualified under Article 14 Section 3, then he will not appear on any state ballot in the general election.

I cannot think of a reason Biden could be disqualified from any state's general election.

Since when has legitimate reason ever stopped those assholes?

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

If the Supreme Court rules that he is disqualified under Article 14 Section 3, then he will not appear on any state ballot in the general election.

I cannot think of a reason Biden could be disqualified from any state's general election.

I was more thinking the SC would rule in favor of Trump due to 'clear irregularities in voting procedures' or some such bullshit.

 

[Zorba]

I was more thinking the SC would rule in favor of Trump due to 'clear irregularities in voting procedures' or some such bullshit.

They won't say that, they have stayed way out of any of the election conspiracy BS. They will pull a "major questions" bullshit.