The Colorado Department of State warned that it would be “a matter for the Courts” if the state’s Republican party withdrew from or ignored the results of the primary.

  • Fades@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    If by the 14th he is not eligible for the presidency outside of 2/3rds of Congress voting to waive that, then why the fuck should he be on the ballot? It’s pointless.

    That’s like saying I’m banned from a venue but keeping me from getting in line to enter is unfair and unwarranted.

    Do you hear yourself? I guess you think you know better than the high courts lmao

    • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      If there’s one good thing to have come from Trump, it is that he has exposed how terrible at making laws, the politicians have been

      • slowwooderrunsdeep@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        that’s the part that irks me the most about modern American politics.

        30% of the current House and 51% of current Senators have law degrees. these are supposed “experts”; you’d think they would be able to write better laws…

    • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      why the fuck should he be on the ballot?

      Because the Republicans should be able to do whatever they want in their candidate selection process, all the way up to and including running a disqualified candidate. It’s their club and they can run it however they like.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        They should be allowed to choose the candidate but the state shouldn’t be forced to put him there. He’s disqualified. It should be equivalent to the party dropping out of the race if they pick him…

        • lingh0e@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s exactly what should happen.

          You want to nominate a dog to run for president? You want to nominate a fictional character to run for president? You want to nominate a dead person to run for president?

          Go ahead.

          The state is not obligated to put that nominee on the ballot because that nominee is 100% ineligible to hold the office of president.

          • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Although thinking about it, it WOULD be hilarious if he was on the ballot while being absolutely for-sure barred from office. At least unless he somehow won, then the evil Republicans would whip up the moronic conservatives and we’d have ourselves an actual civil war…

      • tory@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah, it’s more than just a social club electing a leader, though. It’s quite literally our nation sorting out our presidential elections. I think some legal boundaries outside the norm are in order for these two particular “clubs.”

        You go ahead and make Trump the leader of your rotary club, though.

      • dynamojoe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I reluctantly agree with this. If they want to nominate or even elect a candidate that cannot serve, so be it. When the time comes to take office, the person with the most votes that is qualified to serve should take the office.