If the rulings stand, 7 people will have now determined the presidential contest in three states

Five Supreme Court justices in Colorado, one unelected Secretary of State in Maine and one judge in Illinois have already decided the presidential outcome of the elections in their states. By removing Trump from the ballot, Joe Biden wins those states by default. He doesn't need to campaign or spend much money. It will be a one party race in those states.

The next time the progressives tell you that the Republicans are determined to end democracy in The United States, you need go no further than point this out. They will come back with some excuses, but the truth is clear.

The Democrat Party is determined to end our republic as it has been known throughout history.

 

Who said democrats weren't for a dictatorship.... Democrats keep proving they are, over and over and over again.

 

There were MORE than 7 people involved in passing the 14th A. But, if the ruling stands, THEY will have decided.

Wrong! The Democratic Party has NOTHING to do with any of this. This is a lawsuit brought by Republican and non-partisan groups.

So right here we see the partisan intent of this thread.

In fact, if you were to ask for MY opinion, I would say it's anti-democratic and that the 14th A should be repealed and that this ruling should be rejected. But if anybody believes the Constitution should be followed to the letter, then they will agree that Trump should be eliminated. However, members of the Cult of Trump (no reference to anybody in this forum) who used to believe this, now don't. Because now, it turns out, the Constitution is an inconvenience to THEIR deity.

I don't have that problem... because I don't think the letter is necessarily what needs to be followed. Whenever there is a conflict (like in this case) the INTENT, as stated in the preamble, is what should prevail.

 

Both Dems and Repubs in a number of states seek to have the Constitution enforced as it is plainly written. Funny how the Court took up the ballot issue in 2 days to make sure Trump's name appeared on them but is dragging its feet on the 1/6 case.

BTW, remember when Trump tried to get the NY criminal case moved to federal court on the grounds he is a former federal officer? Well, he pulled the appeal of the decision denying the transfer because he could not plausibly claim to be a federal officer in one case while claiming not to be one in the ballot question case. Showing he will make any argument no matter how specious if he thinks it will work.

 

Um....no, they are only removing him from the primary ballot. Besides, these are States which Trump does not need to win, and would not win in general election anyway.

PS The Dem party didn't do anything, the locals did, and they did it based on their understanding of the Constitution.

 

That is a poor excuse. Try again.

The courts have no business intervening in these cases.

 

Its not an excuse, it's the truth. None of them have removed him from the general election ballot. As for the courts, its their duty to uphold the Constitution.

Illinois judge kicks Trump off primary ballot
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68432465

Two other states - Colorado and Maine - have removed Mr Trump from their primary ballots for violating a 14th Amendment "insurrection" clause.

The final outcome will likely be decided by the US Supreme Court.

 

While I agree that these attempts to keep Trump off the primary ballot are braindead stupid, it should be noted that this only applies to the primaries, not the general election.

 

"Voter suppression ba'a'a'a'd"

 

If Trump is not fit to run in the primary, why would he be fit to run in the general election? The primary is more private than the general election since only Republicans are permitted to vote in it in many states.

Watch the same clowns push to take him off the general election ballot next.

 

That won't surprise me one bit. Even with eight years of practice, the left still hasn't figured out how to fight against Trump without trying to match his level of stupid.

 

trump isn’t being removed from the election — he is being removed from the primary ballot.

You can still vote for who you want.
Joe Biden does not automatically win and every decision has been immediately stayed until appeal.

So if their goal is to steal an election they are going about it the wrong way. Instead, they should partner with extreme left wing militant groups and conspire to have fraudulent electors ignore their states and cast a vote for Biden, then Harris can refuse to certify.

Or Biden can use his new immunity powers to simply bypass the election.

You don’t have an issue with that do you?

 

The head dicktater has already spoken about their communist ways..


Biden threatened Trump.... and he has turn his weaponized government against American citizens already...
Biden has weaponized the DOJ (through legitimate efforts of the Constitution).. it is one promise he has kept...
Listen to the man words... communist dictators say those sort of things
"We have to demonstrate that [Trump] will not take power if he does run. Making sure he under the legitimate efforts of the Constitution, does not become the next president again."
https://rumble.com/v34w72i-joe-bide...overnment-to-keep-trump-from-running-aga.html

 

@cd8ed

""You can still vote for who you want...""
Tell us how you do that...

 

Write it in. Unless you’re a Republican and can’t write.

 

Wrong again my liberal friend.... the Colorado Supreme Court ruling would not allow write-in votes for Trump in the state's GOP primary. However, the ruling has been stayed pending a U.S. Supreme Court decision.

 

You do realize the Colorado Supreme Court ruling would not allow write-in votes for Trump in the state's GOP primary. right?

 

Well if you'd stop nominating ineligible fascist criminals there would be no issue. If democrats someday become deadset on nominating somebody ineligible, like some charismatic 20 year old born and raised in Cuba, then you guys can do the same thing.

SCOTUS will likely give the power to congress, but then what. Will the party in the majority constantly try to remove the nominee of the other party...

 

Trump should be removed from the ballot and discarded if voted for. Lets just end the facade already. I'm happy to vote for Biden for another thirty terms even if he is a corpse being hauled out. This sham of a system needs to be dismantled from the roots.

 

You do realize the primary election means nothing when he's the only one left, right? You do realize that Trump worshipping rightists in Colorado can write their favorite mango traitor's name in the general, right?

 

Yes, you will vote for a corpse. Not surprising.

How about having the voters decide? Is that too much for you? Fascists and communists don’t want to mess with free elections after they gain control in the first election. You vote for communists and fascists once. After that, they are in control.

 

You do realize that your side wants one person on the ballot, like your hero, Mussolini? He is your avatar. My avatar is Lincoln.

 

Nope, sorry.

 

Illinois, Colorado have been decided already prior to any voting taking place. There’s no way Trump was going to win in those states whether he’s on their ballot or not. Trump isn’t going to win Maine either, but he could like he did in 2020 win the 2nd congressional district there. Maine and Nebraska are the only two states that aren’t winner take all, they award their electoral votes via congressional districts.


The reality of the situation is that there are only 6 states up for grabs. We know with at least a 95% possibility who’ll win the other 44 states and D.C. The bottom line is if Trump is on the ballot in 447 states, minus Illinois, Colorado, Maine he stands the same chances of winning as if he were on all 50 state ballots. When it comes to winning electoral votes, this isn’t a big deal. Now if this happened in a swing state, a tossup state, that would be different. This gets a ho hum out of me.


Besides, the SCOTUS will probably allow Trump back on the ballot anyway. Until the SCOTUS rules, I see nothing here to get excited about.

 

I have said it before, I don't think one person in any state, be it a secretary of state or judge, should be able to disqualify a candidate from the ballot. The SC will vote against this anyway, most likely unanimous, as the initial hearing has indicated.

Of course, Republicans are using this to make more political hay against Dems, even though the plaintiffs in CO, for instance, were Republicans and Independents.