Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No problem, just as you should have no problem if some states decide to legally require him to produce them...
No I do, because election is a federal process. There are rules regarding what we can do regarding elections. They can try it although they will be sued and they will lose. And if on some chance the Supreme Court lets it stand, then fine. I won't claim that it was rigged. If nine justices look at it and say it's legal then I will defer to their judgment but so far as I can tell, they don't have a leg to stand on.
No I do, because election is a federal process. There are rules regarding what we can do regarding elections. They can try it although they will be sued and they will lose. And if on some chance the Supreme Court lets it stand, then fine. I won't claim that it was rigged. If nine justices look at it and say it's legal then I will defer to their judgment but so far as I can tell, they don't have a leg to stand on.
Better check your civics lessons. If being a presidential candidate was a federal process then why must candidates file in each state? There is no federal filing for office. Period.
As for the rest of your theory, it's all conjecture at this point (as you noted). You don't know any more than I do if there's a case to be brought or who or how it would be ruled on.
What is true is, at this point in time, states have the legal right to issue candidate qualifications in order to appear on state ballots. Unless that is overruled, deal with it.
Better check your civics lessons. If being a presidential candidate was a federal process then why must candidates file in each state? There is no federal filing for office. Period.
As for the rest of your theory, it's all conjecture at this point (as you noted). You don't know any more than I do if there's a case to be brought or who or how it would be ruled on.
What is true is, at this point in time, states have the legal right to issue candidate qualifications in order to appear on state ballots. Unless that is overruled, deal with it.
I will deal with it. That's why I said if the courts rule that it is constitutional then I am as eager to find out what's in them as anybody else, tbh, just not for the same reasons. But meanwhile you agree with me that it's a conjecture because it hasn't been litigated much to this point, how far states can go regarding elections and so it is anyone's guess how it will play out. Personally I think it would be a bad precedent and one that the justices would be cautious in staking out, if they even agree principally that it could be done. I think the president has a good case but we won't know if and until the states pass it and are challenged.
Now clearly the presidency does have federal stipulations, so contrary to what you've said it's not totally a state process. A state couldn't decide to put Arnold Schwarzenegger on the ballot, who was born in Austria, or Arnold Schwarzenegger's son, who is not yet 35. The states could put additional restrictions on who could register, but it's unclear why the Supreme Court would allow them to, since the Constitution has already determined the primary qualifications for who can run.
maybe the red states will required all Presidential candidates to release their college transcripts and medical records and drug used to be on the ballot......LMAO!!!
And their Astrological charts! We want to know: His Moon sign, his Mars sign, his Venus sign, his Mercury sign, his Ascendant, does he have a Neptune-Sun opposition?
Kicking the president off the ballot in blue states is going to annoy voters. It might happen anyway, but it is not going to help Democrats.
Instead I think they will do more deplatforming. Unlike a lot of other tactics from the left, deplatforming has been quite successful. By removing significant Trump supporters from social media, then they can control the message and destroy Trump.
No I do, because election is a federal process. There are rules regarding what we can do regarding elections. They can try it although they will be sued and they will lose. And if on some chance the Supreme Court lets it stand, then fine. I won't claim that it was rigged. If nine justices look at it and say it's legal then I will defer to their judgment but so far as I can tell, they don't have a leg to stand on.
If Dems had their way there would be 15 Justices - the other 6 being appointed the next time Dems have the ability.
There are actually only 4 states involved. All of them solid blue.
Now clearly the presidency does have federal stipulations, so contrary to what you've said it's not totally a state process. A state couldn't decide to put Arnold Schwarzenegger on the ballot, who was born in Austria, or Arnold Schwarzenegger's son, who is not yet 35. The states could put additional restrictions on who could register, but it's unclear why the Supreme Court would allow them to, since the Constitution has already determined the primary qualifications for who can run.
It’s very well established that states can keep presidential candidates off their ballots.
If they can keep a presidential candidate off the ballot due to failure to submit the required paperwork - and they can - why would requiring tax returns be different?
After all, you are not required to vote only for the candidates listed on the ballot. You can vote for anyone you damn well please, and your vote will be tallied for that person.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.