Will Trump be on your ballot?

If I was a democrat I’d hope Trump is kept on the states’ ballots.
I’d also hope a serious dem challenges Brandon.
 
Jarod said:
I don’t think so, because the 14th amendment is a part of the constitution. The framers of the 14th amendment said “participated in” not “convicted of”.

I would agree with you if it was a criminal penalty, but this is about qualifications for the office.
Click to expand...

What does the 14th amendment say about who decides when someone has "participated in" and what does it say about the criteria to use to make such a determination? I'm asking for a friend.
 
Yakuda said:
Well that's your problem, you're an idiot. I do care what crimes he's committed the thing is you haven't proven he's committed any crimes. You've accused him of committing crimes but I hope you recognize that's not the same as proving he committed any crimes. I suspect you aren't bright enough to see the difference.
Click to expand...

we can begin with rape!
 
ExpressLane said:
:laugh: There is lots of EVIDENCE. You are just waiting for a picture of Xi stuffing cash in Biden's pockets. Biden is a moron but even he is smarter than that.

1. The Biden crime family has multiple shell companies to obscure sources of payments from foreign countries that Biden managed..
2. At least 9 family members received money from countries that Joe Biden managed. What business or service did they sell.
3. Hunter took money from foreign countries that Joe managed and then complained he had to give half of his income to Joe Biden. Money that income tax was never paid on BTW.
4. Joe's lifestyle multiple homes etc. exceed his modest government income.
5. A credible government source says Joe received 5 million as a bribe.
6. Hunter held 10% of a deal with a Chinese company with STRONG connections with the Chinese Communist Party. Hunter held the money for the Big Guy. Joe Biden was identified as the Big Guy by two of Hunter's business partners and one of his bribers
7. Joe called into over 20 business meetings with Hunter's foreign business partners. Why?


and the list goes on.
Click to expand...

Wow, ok please share that evidence.. Id really like to see it.
 
anonymoose said:
Interesting question.
If enough Republican SoS’s keep him off the ballot, that opens the door for a Republican besides Trump to be the nominee. ANY Republican would beat Brandon except one… Trump.
Click to expand...

I think that is possibly true. I have hard time seeing Biden beat Nikki Haley.
 
Jarod said:
I’m willing to bet some secretaries of state are going to decide Trump is inelegance for the ballot due to The 14th Amendment prohibitions about people serving as president who have joined in conspiracy against the United States.

All State Secretaries of State might be asked to make a determination.

If that happens it will be decided by the Roberts Court!
Click to expand...

I honestly don't know the answer to that for sure,

but since I tend to be pessimistic with cause,

I'm guessing that the pigfucking orangutan will in fact be on my ballot.

Of course, he'd best not expect many votes on Massachusetts ballots.:laugh:
 
Yakuda said:
What does the 14th amendment say about who decides when someone has "participated in" and what does it say about the criteria to use to make such a determination? I'm asking for a friend.
Click to expand...

The 14th Says nothing about it, that is why it might come down to the Secretaries of State, they could believe (on other issues it is their job to decide who is elegable to be listed on the ballot) it is their job to decide who is elegable to be on the ballot. If even one decides that, the issue will go to the Courts.

It in fact might go to the courts because private citizens might sue to force the Secretary of State to disqualify him, claiming it is their job.

This is what the Republicans floated over trying to force Obama to release his birth certificate, but he produced it before any such cases were filed.
 
Jarod said:
The 14th Says nothing about it, that is why it might come down to the Secretaries of State, they could believe (on other issues it is their job to decide who is elegable to be listed on the ballot) it is their job to decide who is elegable to be on the ballot. If even one decides that, the issue will go to the Courts.

It in fact might go to the courts because private citizens might sue to force the Secretary of State to disqualify him, claiming it is their job.

This is what the Republicans floated over trying to force Obama to release his birth certificate, but he produced it before any such cases were filed.
Click to expand...

So it says nothing and you're claim is if a S of S doesnt like someone's hair color they keep them off the ballot because it's their job to decide such things. At least we're getting honest answers from you.
 
Yakuda said:
So it says nothing and you're claim is if a S of S doesnt like someone's hair color they keep them off the ballot because it's their job to decide such things. At least we're getting honest answers from you.
Click to expand...

I didn’t say that, and I think you know it. Secretaries of state get to decide who qualified to have their names on the ballot. How do you think it’s decided whose names get to appear on the ballot?

They obviously do not decide based on hair color, they decide based on the qualification requirements. The federal government has some qualification requirements, for example, you must be 35, and born in the United States, and the states themselves have requirements, some states require you to have a certain number of names on a petition, some require you have a major party, backing, and others may have other requirements I don’t know about.

If a person under 35 met the other requirements, most secretaries of state would have the authority not to put that person on the ballot because they are not qualified for the job. Just like that, a secretary of state may refuse to put someone on the ballot if they believe they participated in sedition, because under the 14th amendment they would not be qualified for the job.
 
Jarod said:
I didn’t say that, and I think you know it. Secretaries of state get to decide who qualified to have their names on the ballot. How do you think it’s decided whose names get to appear on the ballot?

They obviously do not decide based on hair color, they decide based on the qualification requirements. The federal government has some qualification requirements, for example, you must be 35, and born in the United States, and the states themselves have requirements, some states require you to have a certain number of names on a petition, some require you have a major party, backing, and others may have other requirements I don’t know about.

If a person under 35 met the other requirements, most secretaries of state would have the authority not to put that person on the ballot because they are not qualified for the job. Just like that, a secretary of state may refuse to put someone on the ballot if they believe they participated in sedition, because under the 14th amendment they would not be qualified for the job.
Click to expand...

So you're telling me they use a criteria and not personal opinion to decide who gets on the ballot? Fair enough but did I miss where you listed the criteria they would use to decide trump "participated in" treason, insurrection or whatever you nitwits have decided is trumps crime of the day?
 
Tinkerpeach said:
They can't unless he is convicted of insurrection.

That trial will not be done before the election.

If he is convicted it doesn't matter what they want, he will automatically be disqualified.

So it doesn't matter what they want.
Click to expand...

Congratulations. Every single statement you made is wrong.

They can make that decision if they choose to, regardless of Trumps status. It will be challenged in court, but there is nothing stopping any Secretary of State from denying Trump a spot on the ballot based on their interpretation of the 14th Amendment.

The trial will take place well before the election.

He is not automatically disqualified if he is convicted, because he is not charged with insurrection.

How did you get so utterly fucking lazy and stupid? Or were you born that way?
 
Jarod said:
I’m willing to bet some secretaries of state are going to decide Trump is inelegance for the ballot due to The 14th Amendment prohibitions about people serving as president who have joined in conspiracy against the United States.

All State Secretaries of State might be asked to make a determination.

If that happens it will be decided by the Roberts Court!
Click to expand...

I don't anticipate it happening, but if some knucklehead like Manchin or Cornell West does make a serious third party run, then I think it'll be essential to do this.
 
Concart said:
Congratulations. Every single statement you made is wrong.

They can make that decision if they choose to, regardless of Trumps status. It will be challenged in court, but there is nothing stopping any Secretary of State from denying Trump a spot on the ballot based on their interpretation of the 14th Amendment.

The trial will take place well before the election.

He is not automatically disqualified if he is convicted, because he is not charged with insurrection.

How did you get so utterly fucking lazy and stupid? Or were you born that way?
Click to expand...

They can file whatever they want but until it's settled they can't prevent Trump from being on the ballot.

That is just law and his constitutional right.

If what you were saying were true then any AG or governor could simply claim this to keep political opponents off their state ballots.

The only trial that will be concluded before the election is the New York one and that one is irrelevant. The others may start but they will be nowhere complete before the election with all the delays and whatnot that will happen.

Hell, there are people in jail right now who have been waiting over a year for a trial date.

And the only way to prevent him from running is exactly to charge him with insurrection per the constitution.

If he isn't charged with that then they can't keep him off the ballot.

It seems I'm not the idiot here.
 
Jarod said:
I’m willing to bet some secretaries of state are going to decide Trump is inelegance for the ballot due to The 14th Amendment prohibitions about people serving as president who have joined in conspiracy against the United States.

All State Secretaries of State might be asked to make a determination.

If that happens it will be decided by the Roberts Court!
Click to expand...
Yes, Trump will be on my ballot, whether I have to write his name in or not.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
They can file whatever they want but until it's settled they can't prevent Trump from being on the ballot.

That is just law and his constitutional right.

If what you were saying were true then any AG or governor could simply claim this to keep political opponents off their state ballots.

The only trial that will be concluded before the election is the New York one and that one is irrelevant. The others may start but they will be nowhere complete before the election with all the delays and whatnot that will happen.

Hell, there are people in jail right now who have been waiting over a year for a trial date.

And the only way to prevent him from running is exactly to charge him with insurrection per the constitution.

If he isn't charged with that then they can't keep him off the ballot.

It seems I'm not the idiot here.
Click to expand...

The January 6th trial will be the first, it will happen in the spring. That's why Smith undercharged and did not indict the other conspirators yet. You appear to know absolutely nothing. Maybe you should find a website that caters to lazy fucks who day drink and flunked sixth grade. You'd be right at home.
 
Concart said:
Congratulations. Every single statement you made is wrong.

They can make that decision if they choose to, regardless of Trumps status. It will be challenged in court, but there is nothing stopping any Secretary of State from denying Trump a spot on the ballot based on their interpretation of the 14th Amendment.

The trial will take place well before the election.

He is not automatically disqualified if he is convicted, because he is not charged with insurrection.

How did you get so utterly fucking lazy and stupid? Or were you born that way?
Click to expand...

So it's your opinion that a secretary of any state can decide trump, "...engaged in insurrection or rebellion..." and disqualify him from the ballot in their state. You know that will be shot down on appeal right? Maybe to save money we could do away with courts judges and juries and just have secretaries of states decide who is guilty of what.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top