Maine’s top election official has removed former President Donald Trump from the state’s 2024 ballot, in a surprise decision based on the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban.”
Okay cool, so you’re saying the ends justify the means and it has absolutely nothing to do with hindering your political adversary? So when your side is the one defying the constitution and the right takes antidemocratic steps to stop them, that will be justified and in no way will you complain?
It’s literally a constitutional amendment my dude. This is how the democracy is structured, at the very foundational level. If you try to attack the lawful transfer of power, you aren’t eligible for office anymore. If a Democrat tries to engage in insurrection, then they too won’t be eligible. That you think defying the constitution is just something that everyone does sooner or later is very very weird.
There have been plenty of Republican candidates that have never sought to interfere with elections. In fact, of presidential candidates, there has only been the one, as far as I know.
This isn’t a “tank the Republicans”, this is “we can’t abide Trump, specifically”. No one accused McCain, Romney, Bush, of anything like this.
It’s funny that you mention THOSE Republicans because I’m old enough to remember when all three were hailed as the second coming of Hitler by the left. Weird how that’s changed…
I’m old enough to remember and I don’t recall anything so severe as the second coming of Hitler. The worst I recall was Gingrich and Dick Chaney being considered pretty vile, and Bush Jr being seen as lacking competence.
Trump feels unique in how obviously corrupt he wants to go.
As a point of comparison, no one ever even broached the topic of impeachment with W Bush. As disappointed as folks were with facets of his presidency, currying personal favors and working to subvert elections were not anywhere in sight.
You’re suggesting the constitution isn’t totally democratic? That’s a shocker.
I’m not 100% sure I agree with the particular clause of the 14th amendment, but the beauty of the constitution is if we don’t like it, we can change it. Nevertheless, the amendment writers’ position isn’t baseless and Donnie proves it.
The other side takes anti-democratic steps all the time. If they kept them within the spirit and letter of the Constitution, that’d be a nice change.
Okay cool, so you’re saying the ends justify the means and it has absolutely nothing to do with hindering your political adversary? So when your side is the one defying the constitution and the right takes antidemocratic steps to stop them, that will be justified and in no way will you complain?
It’s literally a constitutional amendment my dude. This is how the democracy is structured, at the very foundational level. If you try to attack the lawful transfer of power, you aren’t eligible for office anymore. If a Democrat tries to engage in insurrection, then they too won’t be eligible. That you think defying the constitution is just something that everyone does sooner or later is very very weird.
Was Trump found guilty of insurrection? I must have missed that. My mistake.
The actual Confederates this was targeted against weren’t found guilty either. There’s a reason “convicted” doesn’t appear in this amendment.
It doesn’t say found guilty. It says he done it.
There have been plenty of Republican candidates that have never sought to interfere with elections. In fact, of presidential candidates, there has only been the one, as far as I know.
This isn’t a “tank the Republicans”, this is “we can’t abide Trump, specifically”. No one accused McCain, Romney, Bush, of anything like this.
It’s funny that you mention THOSE Republicans because I’m old enough to remember when all three were hailed as the second coming of Hitler by the left. Weird how that’s changed…
I’m old enough to remember and I don’t recall anything so severe as the second coming of Hitler. The worst I recall was Gingrich and Dick Chaney being considered pretty vile, and Bush Jr being seen as lacking competence.
Trump feels unique in how obviously corrupt he wants to go.
As a point of comparison, no one ever even broached the topic of impeachment with W Bush. As disappointed as folks were with facets of his presidency, currying personal favors and working to subvert elections were not anywhere in sight.
Meanwhile, I recall Obama being hailed as the anti Christ. What of it?
They could be, but did anyone try to disqualify them from the ballot based on things they didn’t do?
You’re suggesting the constitution isn’t totally democratic? That’s a shocker.
I’m not 100% sure I agree with the particular clause of the 14th amendment, but the beauty of the constitution is if we don’t like it, we can change it. Nevertheless, the amendment writers’ position isn’t baseless and Donnie proves it.
The other side takes anti-democratic steps all the time. If they kept them within the spirit and letter of the Constitution, that’d be a nice change.