aggie93 said:
FireAg said:
LMCane said:
Your logic seems pretty faulty.
You say a Secretary of State in Michigan (a completely democrat controlled state) can't just unilaterally declare a convicted felon off their state ballot-
and at the same time the Vice President has the right to unilaterally declare Trump the President because a bunch of fake electors in Michigan claim Trump is the President.
what's the difference?
Umm...I've never said one word about what the VP has the right to do...perhaps you have me confused with someone else?
My argument about any state SoS actually removing a duly-elected presidential nominee from their state's general ballot is merely a comment that if such a stunt were tried, the argument of "rigged" or "stolen" election would have far more weight to it, and I think it absolutely could lead to significant violence in America's streets...
Here's the thing, though...the requirements for running for president mention nothing about criminal record...so I do not believe, the way the rules are written now, that a SoS would have the power to do such...even if a state rule were written and applied last minute, I think it would create a constitutional crisis... So no, I do not see any way a D SoS could change the general ballot in his/her state and eliminate a legally-elected nominee...short of that person's death (and even that hasn't been enough to someone from a ballot in several states...not sure if that applies to ALL states), I see no way that could be legally accomplished...
Strangely enough...the way presidential election rules are currently written, a president-elect could take office from prison and immediately pardon himself, and be immediately set free...
The Constitution only discusses eligibility for the office not who can be listed on a ballot, that's a state issue or at least it can be credibly argued as such. I mean I think it's crap but that's not really the point. The point is just to muddy the waters even more and maybe Trump gets on the ballot or not. They are going to use 1000 papercuts like this.
It baffles me how people can't see what a disaster it is going to be if Trump is the nominee, I mean it is just too easy for the MSM and Dems but some folks just refuse to learn the game. It's not about whether or not Trump is really guilty or right, it's that he is so damned sloppy it makes it easy as hell to blur those lines. Many Trump folks expect to get screwed as well so the outrage is the point not actually winning.
Each state has rules as to eligibility to be listed, no? I'd think they'd need to pass a law in each state to change those rules to meet their purposes (like NY did to go after Trump on an unrelated matter), no? Now I assume they could try to do that, but if it wasn't done before each state's respective primary, I don't see how SCOTUS is going to side with states changing their candidate eligibility rules after votes have already been cast…
I frankly think it's a hairy proposition to consider changing those rules during an election cycle to begin with, but I suppose a state could do so prior to their primary Election Day…just not sure they could it after…
As for whether or not you, I, or anyone else thinks a Trump nomination will be a "disaster" is irrelevant, honestly, but I do agree that a Trump nomination certainly seems to carry more perceived risks than say a DeSantis nomination…
I think the bigger question at hand is whether or not DeSantis and his campaign can make enough noise to show folks 1) the concern, and 2) that DeSantis is the potential "anecdote" to the problem, in the amount of time they have left, given (arguably, if you discount what the polls currently say, which is your right to do so) the size of the lead Trump seems to have built…
