Jump to content

Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty


Recommended Posts

Posted

Why are we assuming that him being off the ballot would cause him to lose the Colorado primary? I could see a groundswell of deplorables furiously memorizing how to spell Donald in line during their primary in the spring.

  • Haha 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Trump wasn't going to win CO in terms of the general so this does nothing to reduce his electoral votes. And it will just create more fuel to the fire that Trump is being unfairly persecuted.

In a literal sense, trump has been unfairly prosecuted - he has never once had to stand up to evidence of his malfeasance. The prosecution with respect to trump has ALWAYS had its hands tied behind it's back by the wise and mighty American political justice system. 

We wouldn't be in this position of incredible norms breaking if the republicans had not obstructed justice for half a goddamn decade

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
3 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

Why are we assuming that him being off the ballot would cause him to lose the Colorado primary? I could see a groundswell of deplorables furiously memorizing how to spell Donald in line during their primary in the spring.

I don't think a lot of people realize that they aren't directly voting for a candidate in their party primary to automatically get the Colorado votes at the national convention - it's the delegates, who can fuck around at the national convention. I think Colorado's GOP restricts their delegates in the first round from selecting anybody but the person who won the primary in Colorado, but after that it maybe fair game and Trump could then get those delegate votes, if they chose.  But it's Colorado.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Fuck around and find out. The Senate had the chance to disqualify him twice but let him skate. Maybe don’t plan and execute a coup attempt. 

It can work in the opposite direction as well. Colorado may find out that a meaningless gesture gives Trump PA, GA and AZ, and the white house. but hey, Biden will take CO with 95% of the vote for a moral victory.

  • Fuck You 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

It can work in the opposite direction as well. Colorado may find out that a meaningless gesture gives Trump PA, GA and AZ, and the white house. but hey, Biden will take CO with 95% of the vote for a moral victory.

You're still glossing over the ultimate failure of allowing a man to run for president who has already attempted a coup once and has said out loud he plans to be a dictator.

It's a fucking failure and indictment of our justice system that he's still a free man facing zero meaningful consequences nearly three years after a nationally televised literal attack on our democratic process

  • Hook 'Em 8
Posted
2 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

It can work in the opposite direction as well. Colorado may find out that a meaningless gesture gives Trump PA, GA and AZ, and the white house. but hey, Biden will take CO with 95% of the vote for a moral victory.

sounds like you're assuming Colorado will be alone here. I suspect there will be others

Posted
3 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

It can work in the opposite direction as well. Colorado may find out that a meaningless gesture gives Trump PA, GA and AZ, and the white house. but hey, Biden will take CO with 95% of the vote for a moral victory.

If enough people think, "well I don't like that ruling that limits democracy so I'm voting for the dictator" then we get what we deserve. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

It can work in the opposite direction as well. Colorado may find out that a meaningless gesture gives Trump PA, GA and AZ, and the white house. but hey, Biden will take CO with 95% of the vote for a moral victory.

The Colorado thing was processed through the courts, using the Constitution against Trump (and 12 other states had similar lawsuits, and so far 7 have been thrown out).  Biden has not actually done anything that would cause lawsuits to be filed to remove him from the ballot (and we are probably far too late in the process anyways - any new lawsuits filed now would take months to get through the courts).

Twicehorn or somebody else can correct me, but the state political parties set the rules for who is on their ballots - Republicans can't tell Democrats not to include Biden on their party's ballots, etc.  and nobody wants that to change.

Using your examples though, PA and AZ have Democratic governors, and the legislatures are split enough (PA has one (D) chamber) that a simple veto would take care of such legislative shenanigans.  Georgia....that's an excellent way to get serious riots going if the Republican legislature arbitrarily tried to remove Biden, and I don't think Kemp and the other GA leaders A) want Republican-created riots and B) want to carry Trump's water after he's made so many attacks against them.

I'm sure somebody will file a court case to get Biden removed (and may have already), but it will go nowhere, or else the Republicans would have already done so long before now.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

We could probably use some better laws to discourage a sitting president from attempting to steal an election. 

"Nah it's cool. You can run for president again. Just don't do it again, silly!". 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)

too many here are the mirror image of the GQP making libs cry.

It's not about showing up Trump and his followers. It's about winning in '24. Taking Trump off the general election ballot in CO only helps Trump. He is loving this situation. Some of you are treating the CO decision like a win for the good guys. 

Edited by Nice Guy Eddie
  • Fuck You 1
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

too many here are the mirror image of the GQP making libs cry.

It's not about showing up Trump and his followers. It's about winning in '24. Taking Trump off the general election ballot in CO only helps Trump. He is loving this situation. Some of you are treating the CO decision like a win for the good guys. 

Meh...it depends. 

If SCOTUS doesn't overturn it (big if there with those shitbirds)

Then let's say a couple swing states also disqualify him from ballot. How could he actually win the election then?

Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia. Any of those states have of chance of doing that?

Seems like Michigan or Pennsylvania have the easiest path

Edited by Neonmoon
Posted
6 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Meh...it depends. 

If SCOTUS doesn't overturn it (big if there with those shitbirds)

Then let's say a couple swing states also disqualify him from ballot. How could he actually win the election then?

Different states handle party delegates . . . differently.  Some could send delegates to their national convention with one primary winner but end up naming Trump as the candidate.  Others are more restricted by their own policy.

Posted
52 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Yep. I see a 9-0 vote in the Supreme Court where they're not going to allow a state to do this.

I'm a big proponent of "we'll see" when it comes to future-predicting.  But whatever happens, I'm reasonably comfortable in saying that it's not going to be 9-0.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, dcbc said:

I'm a big proponent of "we'll see" when it comes to future-predicting.  But whatever happens, I'm reasonably comfortable in saying that it's not going to be 9-0.

Given the language of the 14th, there's a ton of different ways it could go, because this right here is calvinball, it's make it up as you go along.

The Colorado Supreme Court did a pretty good job with it, though.

ETA:  Opinion here. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/colorado-supreme-court-rules-trump-is-disqualified-from-holding-presidency

Lawfare has a tracker of all these cases.  https://www.lawfaremedia.org/current-projects/the-trump-trials/section-3-litigation-tracker

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, dcbc said:

I'm a big proponent of "we'll see" when it comes to future-predicting.  But whatever happens, I'm reasonably comfortable in saying that it's not going to be 9-0.

Agree.  I will take any 9-0 bets, as that ain’t happening. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Given the language of the 14th, there's a ton of different ways it could go, because this right here is calvinball, it's make it up as you go along.

The Colorado Supreme Court did a pretty good job with it, though.

I haven't read the opinion, but since the President is the commander and chief of the military, and election to military office is precluded under Section 3, and we have a factual finding of insurrection from the trial court, I don't see how it could not apply to a Presidential candidate.

 

Yes, I realize it's calvinball, and any SCOTUS opinion will be base on external factors, but my appellate brain won't let me go there.  Some of us still do the job as intended.

Edited by dcbc
edited because I have my reasons
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Lurch said:

At this point the angry Trump voters can’t vote any harder. We’ve already been told that he’s been boosted by inflation, the border surge, the Fox verdict, the FBI raid, the first indictment, the second, the third, the fourth, the Carol verdict, the Rudy verdict… but now suddenly we think THIS is going to move the needle more? Fuck that noise

I guess I'm thinking of it beyond just its effect on the 2024 election. The ONLY way that we may be able to bring some of who aren't too far gone back to reality after Nov 2024 is by soundly defeating Trump. The completely brainwashed will cry fraud regardless, but some closer to the middle may realize, "Shit, I guess I'm not in the 'silent' majority. This guy is a fucking loser."

If Trump is declared ineligible nationally or in a few states and loses, all it does is push the narrative that the deep state is afraid of Trump and will stop him at all costs to keep their control over society. And further down the rabbit hole we all go. The extremism and conspiracies will only get worse.

But I will relinquish that it's not on the Colorado Supreme Court to take those things into consideration when making a legal ruling.

Edited by aggie08
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

the extremism and conspiracies will only get worse.

Honestly, I think this will happen regardless.  It's just a progression of disease.

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

It can work in the opposite direction as well. Colorado may find out that a meaningless gesture gives Trump PA, GA and AZ, and the white house. but hey, Biden will take CO with 95% of the vote for a moral victory.

How would that happen? lol. Where is he gaining these magical new voters from?

Posted
1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

too many here are the mirror image of the GQP making libs cry.

It's not about showing up Trump and his followers. It's about winning in '24. Taking Trump off the general election ballot in CO only helps Trump. He is loving this situation. Some of you are treating the CO decision like a win for the good guys. 

This makes no sense at all. This does not help Trump in anyway 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

too many here are the mirror image of the GQP making libs cry.

It's not about showing up Trump and his followers. It's about winning in '24. Taking Trump off the general election ballot in CO only helps Trump. He is loving this situation. Some of you are treating the CO decision like a win for the good guys. 

I don't agree with this. I think it was the right ruling, both legally speaking and as a political act. Fascism was allowed to grow because too many people in positions of authority were unwilling to exercise their authority to actually deter or punish fascists, because of basic cowardice. At this point it may be too late, but it's good that prosecutors at the federal and state level finally got around to prosecuting Trump for a few of the fucking thousands of felonies he's committed in his life, and it's good that a majority of judges on this court didn't buckle to their cowardice and instead issued a ruling that accords with what the 14th Amendment requires.

But specifically as to this ruling, it's going to be very easy for SCOTUS to overturn this. They won't have a problem finding a majority to say "what insurrection? he hasn't been convicted of any insurrection!"

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

While I agree with the CO move in principal, overall it's bad for America when a top President candidate is being disqualified from a state.

what_the.jpg.f29b91757737a211fa149f2cf8fe0f1c.jpg

of all the bovine fecal matter to ever be excreted onto the pages of this site, this platitude might very be the largest, stinkiest shit to ever come from a keyboard.

IF YOU CAN'T HOLD A GUY ACCOUNTABLE FOR ATTEMPTING TO OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT THEN NOTHING WE SAY WE STAND FOR MEANS ANYTHING

i don't care how popular he is. The fact that he's popular IS THE POINT of having these checks and balances. EVERY bastard who ever overthrew an elected government was among the most popular candidates!

Seriously, shove this fucking anti-democracy sentiment up your ass until it reaches your mouth, chew it up, and swallow it back down

Edited by Rimbo
  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

It can work in the opposite direction as well. Colorado may find out that a meaningless gesture gives Trump PA, GA and AZ, and the white house. but hey, Biden will take CO with 95% of the vote for a moral victory.

What, in everything Georgia officials and electorate have said and done in the past few years, makes you think they'd hand their state over to Trump?

You're an idiot.

Posted
2 hours ago, SimonBolivar said:

If enough people think, "well I don't like that ruling that limits democracy so I'm voting for the dictator" then we get what we deserve. 

Every democracy that fell had a great many of these people. What allowed them to succeed was the failure of their opponents to recognize what was happening and unite.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
15 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

The redness of a state does not always reflect the redness of its Supreme Court, although very often it does, with the longer it’s been red the more fucked up it is.  But as the 60 cases across the country decided against Trump show, the judiciary is not as robustly GQP as the legislature are, even when Trump appointees.   

Also, it is possible to have been a lifelong Republican and to be absolutely appalled at the Hitler wannabe who currently controls the GQP.   The difference seems to be how badly the politician wants to be elected again.    

And anyone with standing can bring the suit, red state officials be dammed. 

The Oklahoma Supreme Court is relatively sane because Oklahoma had a massive judicial scandal several decades ago so they changed how justices are appointed. The state bar association has a committee that nominates three people for the seat and the governor has to choose from those three. Since bar associations on the whole are rarely super right wing, including in red states, we've avoided having these lunatics on the court. The state supreme court refused to disqualify Medicare expansion and medical marijuana from the ballot despite hard right wing pushes to prevent the people from voting on those questions. They upheld vaccine mandates for public schools and military installations. I think they've even shot down some major abortion legislation before Dobbs. 

A part of me is a little worried about the precedent, that now all the red states will try to take Biden off the ballot because of Hunter's dong or something, but the constitutional provision is limited to insurrections, so the only close question is whether trump lying to his base which motivated them to attack the capitol meets the standard. I sure think it does, so I'm happy for this ruling. I think SCOTUS will deny cert and will be magas next targets. Whatever, I just hope he dies soon in a puddle of his own shit and vomit.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, 'stache said:

that now all the red states will try to take Biden off the ballot because of Hunter's dong or something,

To be fair, Hunter's dong is large enough to be justification for many, many things.  

Not the least of those things being the massive uptick in "Republicans" crying in their basement as they jack off to cuck porn.

Posted
55 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

The extremism and conspiracies will only get worse.

Nah, they peaked with Qanon and pizza gate and Oprah Winfrey drinking the fluids of children to stay young, and look where they ended up -  they discovered it was not about the journey but the friends they made along the way.

20 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

 

Star Trek GIF

Where is this GIF of Eric Trump from?

  • Haha 3
Posted
17 minutes ago, 'stache said:

 

A part of me is a little worried about the precedent, that now all the red states will try to take Biden off the ballot because of Hunter's dong or something, but the constitutional provision is limited to insurrections, so the only close question is whether trump lying to his base which motivated them to attack the capitol meets the standard. I sure think it does, so I'm happy for this ruling. I think SCOTUS will deny cert and will be magas next targets. Whatever, I just hope he dies soon in a puddle of his own shit and vomit.

The crazy thing about the US Presidential election system is that it doesn’t matter if Trump is on the ballot in blue states and Biden is on the ballot in red states. We really should only hold the election in the swing states. The Electoral College is extremely stupid in 2024.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)

At some point plain language has to stand on its own.  Absent a direct and contrary definition of "officer" within the Constitution, only an idiot or a bad actor would argue that POTUS is not a civil officer of the United States.  

I realize lawdogs love to torture the rest of us with semantics and "yeah but" and all that other shit, but in the end, Colorado got it right.  To somehow suggest that it would be better for the country going forward had they not done so because it sets a bad precedent is fucking lunacy.  To suggest that the founders carved out US Senators, US Representatives, electors of P/VPOTUS, state legislators, etc. but specifically did NOT want to carve out P/VPOTUS is so ridiculous it doesn't even deserve consideration.

If we can't follow our own laws then we don't deserve to exist as a sovereign nation.

Edited by jimmyjazz
  • Hook 'Em 9
Posted

Can someone explain why no one has filed a similar motion in other states alleging the same argument that as in Colorado?   Make each state go on record as yay or nay.   

Posted
6 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

Can someone explain why no one has filed a similar motion in other states alleging the same argument that as in Colorado?   Make each state go on record as yay or nay.   

I bet you start to see lawsuits filed to get biden off the ballot for some dumb reason. 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

Can someone explain why no one has filed a similar motion in other states alleging the same argument that as in Colorado?   Make each state go on record as yay or nay.   

Cases have been filed in other states. I believe the cases have been essentially dismissed in 5 states with cases pending in 12-15 others.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

Can someone explain why no one has filed a similar motion in other states alleging the same argument that as in Colorado?   Make each state go on record as yay or nay.   

They have, it's just that some were dismissed.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/12/20/trump-14th-amendment-heres-where-lawsuits-challenging-ex-presidents-candidacy-stand-after-colorado-disqualifies-him/?sh=5e95bf50f384

Posted
8 minutes ago, hornmpa96 said:

Cases have been filed in other states. I believe the cases have been essentially dismissed in 5 states with cases pending in 12-15 others.

At the very least, cases dismissed in Michigan and Minnesota are pending on appeal. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
23 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

Can someone explain why no one has filed a similar motion in other states alleging the same argument that as in Colorado?   Make each state go on record as yay or nay.   

There's one pending in almost every state.  See the lawfare link I posted above.  However, some are pro se (by idiots) and some are pro se by lawyers in proprio persona but probably not qualified to take it to the end.

Posted

 

I keep seeing this "noy appearing on the ballot" tossed around, and then talk of people writing him in on the Colorado ballot. 

So, this entire amendment is just to keep the insurrectionists' names off the ballot, but people can still write them in, and if enough do so, the electors can still give the insurrectionist their electoral votes?

 

What kind of shit is that?

 

Or does "not appearing on the ballot" mean that the insurrectionist cannot win Colorado's electoral votes?

 

 

Posted
14 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

I keep seeing this "noy appearing on the ballot" tossed around, and then talk of people writing him in on the Colorado ballot. 

So, this entire amendment is just to keep the insurrectionists' names off the ballot, but people can still write them in, and if enough do so, the electors can still give the insurrectionist their electoral votes?

 

What kind of shit is that?

 

Or does "not appearing on the ballot" mean that the insurrectionist cannot win Colorado's electoral votes?

 

 

apropos to nothing but I cannot read a post from you without getting the beasties in my head. anyway, carry on

  • Hook 'Em 1


×
×
  • Create New...