The constitution says that an insurrectionist may not hold the office. The Colorado Secretary of State decided that means they may not be on the ballot for the primary election. I agree 100%, but do wonder if she did the politically apt thing. Interesting side note: Even though the candidate’s name is on the November ballot, the voters in each state are actually not voting for that person, but for a slate of electors who have agreed to vote for him in the Electoral College. So in some sense, assuming he gets the nod from the Republicans, he won’t even be on the ballot. Despite his name being there.
Unfortunately the argument is moot as long as we have 5 alt right tools on SCOTUS with a lame duck ultra conservative chief justice and only 3 voices of reason so that every vote of consequence is 6-3 with the occasional 5-4 outcome. The root causes of this go back to Moscow/KY Mitch at the end of the Obama administration refusing to even give Merrick Garland a vote but then subsequently allowed a stream of black-shirts (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett) to flip the court to the far right.
If the Dems had gone after Trump on the basis of the emoluments clause in the Constitution rather than the Russiagate nonsense they may not have had to worry about him now. But of course they didn’t because in that regard they’re as corrupt as a group as he is, Sen. Menendez being one of the more spectacular recent examples. What a dumpster fire of a political system you Americans have.
Ted, it’s very clear. Someone who is committed to ending democracy and has been shown to actively try to do so, doesn’t get the benefits of democracy, anymore than we should tolerate the intolerant. There are plenty of other Republican candidates out there. Why stick with this one?
Did Mr. Rall also happen to note that Trump has refused to honor the results of any election he doesn’t win and also refuses to say he won’t ask his followers not to become violent? The 14th Amendment sec 3 should apply to him!
The 13th removed slavery. That prisoners could be forced to work I don’t see as a problem. Prisons are expensive, and to give them decent food and reasonable amenities, not everything they want, like they are in a hotel and have more rights than their victims, have them be made to work for it. Somehow it has to be paid for, place the burden on those who have done the crime.
But is is undemocratic that someone born outside of America can’t run for president. It is undemocratic that a 5 year old can’t run for president. It is undemocratic that a cat can’t run for president.
There need to be criteria to qualify for the role before you end up on the ballot.
I think it was a bad idea to take him off the ballot for political reasons. The MAGA crowd aren’t going away any time soon, and doing this will just make Trump a martyr. And you know full well that they will work endlessly to find a way to remove democrats from the ballot… now that this door has been opened.
But saying that it is undemocratic is a weak argument, in my opinion.
Our Founders made our constitution amendable to serve the people when changes in mankind happen as they have throughout mankind’s history. Slavery was eliminated. Those who commit insurrection and sedition cannot be elected to office. Neither has been amended since. Until amended it is our Law.
Slavery was in the constitution. The USA fought a bloody war to correct that mistake in a land of the free.
Insurrectionists were not to run after the war, though their sympathizers were. There is a good reason not to allow those that would overthrow the USA’s government to be part of the government.
Those that think Putin is a better and stronger leader and would vote for them if he could, are more than welcome to move to Russia. You won’t be missed.
Tens of millions of voters support Trump, in spite of overwhelming evidence that he has committed multiple crimes, ranging from improper handling of classified documents to organizing and inciting a mob to attack the Capitol on January 6, 2022. These same voters believe, despite there being no credible evidence, that Trump won the election in 2020. A large number of these same voters also believe any number of other fallacies, ranging from anti-vaccination sentiments to the belief that our founders established America as a Christian nation to the contradictory belief that January 6 was not violent, but that the violence was perpetrated by FBI-planted provocateurs or Antifa agents.
We can not let the very important business of choosing who will be given the immense power of the office of the president be influenced by falsehoods. Yes, many voters will be unhappy if Trump is found to be disqualified from the ballot. I hope that the Supreme Court will base its decision on the law and the facts of the matter and not on the feelings of deluded voters.
Radish the wordsmith 5 months ago
The people who cram the second amendment down our throat totally ignore the 14th amendment.
Hello Everyone 5 months ago
“Was” being the operative word.
Concretionist 5 months ago
The constitution says that an insurrectionist may not hold the office. The Colorado Secretary of State decided that means they may not be on the ballot for the primary election. I agree 100%, but do wonder if she did the politically apt thing. Interesting side note: Even though the candidate’s name is on the November ballot, the voters in each state are actually not voting for that person, but for a slate of electors who have agreed to vote for him in the Electoral College. So in some sense, assuming he gets the nod from the Republicans, he won’t even be on the ballot. Despite his name being there.
TampaFanatic1 5 months ago
Unfortunately the argument is moot as long as we have 5 alt right tools on SCOTUS with a lame duck ultra conservative chief justice and only 3 voices of reason so that every vote of consequence is 6-3 with the occasional 5-4 outcome. The root causes of this go back to Moscow/KY Mitch at the end of the Obama administration refusing to even give Merrick Garland a vote but then subsequently allowed a stream of black-shirts (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett) to flip the court to the far right.
knutdl 5 months ago
“You say you’ll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all wanna change your head"
The Beatles
ddekreon 5 months ago
“Was”
GreggW Premium Member 5 months ago
If the Dems had gone after Trump on the basis of the emoluments clause in the Constitution rather than the Russiagate nonsense they may not have had to worry about him now. But of course they didn’t because in that regard they’re as corrupt as a group as he is, Sen. Menendez being one of the more spectacular recent examples. What a dumpster fire of a political system you Americans have.
GOGOPOWERANGERS 5 months ago
Yes WAS NOT ANYMORE
Thats not a reason why insurrection should be accepted
But ted doesn’t want that clearly
s49nav 5 months ago
Read Section 5 of the 14th Amendment, Ted. Not just Section 3.
DC Swamp 5 months ago
Even far left left California didn’t venture down this rabbit hole.
Motivemagus 5 months ago
Ted, it’s very clear. Someone who is committed to ending democracy and has been shown to actively try to do so, doesn’t get the benefits of democracy, anymore than we should tolerate the intolerant. There are plenty of other Republican candidates out there. Why stick with this one?
davidthoms1 5 months ago
Did Mr. Rall also happen to note that Trump has refused to honor the results of any election he doesn’t win and also refuses to say he won’t ask his followers not to become violent? The 14th Amendment sec 3 should apply to him!
rossevrymn 5 months ago
unbrilliant
Fern 5 months ago
The sentencing for Ray Epps proves he was an agent provocateur fed.
One year probation, none of you liars, who call Jan 6th an insurrection, can explain why Ray Epps is defended by democrats for any legitimate reason.
You are traitors
ShadowMaster 5 months ago
The 13th removed slavery. That prisoners could be forced to work I don’t see as a problem. Prisons are expensive, and to give them decent food and reasonable amenities, not everything they want, like they are in a hotel and have more rights than their victims, have them be made to work for it. Somehow it has to be paid for, place the burden on those who have done the crime.
ChristopherBurns 5 months ago
I don’t think Slavery was in the Constitution.
Aliquid 5 months ago
It is undemocratic.
But is is undemocratic that someone born outside of America can’t run for president. It is undemocratic that a 5 year old can’t run for president. It is undemocratic that a cat can’t run for president.
There need to be criteria to qualify for the role before you end up on the ballot.
I think it was a bad idea to take him off the ballot for political reasons. The MAGA crowd aren’t going away any time soon, and doing this will just make Trump a martyr. And you know full well that they will work endlessly to find a way to remove democrats from the ballot… now that this door has been opened.
But saying that it is undemocratic is a weak argument, in my opinion.
moondog42 Premium Member 5 months ago
“… but if we CHANGE the Constitution…”
“THEN WE CAN MAKE ALL SORTS OF CRAZY LAWS!”
charliekane 5 months ago
Foxes and chicken coops . . .
ncorgbl 5 months ago
Our Founders made our constitution amendable to serve the people when changes in mankind happen as they have throughout mankind’s history. Slavery was eliminated. Those who commit insurrection and sedition cannot be elected to office. Neither has been amended since. Until amended it is our Law.
GiantShetlandPony 5 months ago
Slavery was in the constitution. The USA fought a bloody war to correct that mistake in a land of the free.
Insurrectionists were not to run after the war, though their sympathizers were. There is a good reason not to allow those that would overthrow the USA’s government to be part of the government.
Those that think Putin is a better and stronger leader and would vote for them if he could, are more than welcome to move to Russia. You won’t be missed.
braindead Premium Member 5 months ago
“If it’s in the Constitution, it’s democratic.”
===
No, Ted, it is not necessarily.
That’s why it’s a democratic republic. It’s why there are representatives and not a vote every five minutes.
GaryCooper 5 months ago
Stumping for Trump again, Ted? What’s wrong with the 14th Amendment?
wildthing 5 months ago
No, that Trump is even on the ballot is un-Democratic. How obvious does a crime have to be?
jvscanlan Premium Member 5 months ago
No, slavery was not in the constitution, not until the 13th Amendment abolishing it.
IAMTHELAW Premium Member 5 months ago
Tens of millions of voters support Trump, in spite of overwhelming evidence that he has committed multiple crimes, ranging from improper handling of classified documents to organizing and inciting a mob to attack the Capitol on January 6, 2022. These same voters believe, despite there being no credible evidence, that Trump won the election in 2020. A large number of these same voters also believe any number of other fallacies, ranging from anti-vaccination sentiments to the belief that our founders established America as a Christian nation to the contradictory belief that January 6 was not violent, but that the violence was perpetrated by FBI-planted provocateurs or Antifa agents.
We can not let the very important business of choosing who will be given the immense power of the office of the president be influenced by falsehoods. Yes, many voters will be unhappy if Trump is found to be disqualified from the ballot. I hope that the Supreme Court will base its decision on the law and the facts of the matter and not on the feelings of deluded voters.