Election 2024 & Presidential Cage Match: Dark Brandon 46 vs Felonious Farty 45

[hail2skins]

Don't see why people are giving Rdskns2000 such a hard time about the post. Yes, Stoddard is a Republican, and I personally don't think Biden stepping down for anyone else at this point is remotely in the cards, barring being driven out by some health condition (in which case Harris would be the nominee). However, I do appreciate that Stoddard is very afraid of Trump getting reelected, and, as you know, I agree with her that at this point it is a probability.

 

What I haven't read enough about is how a Trump win in 2024 would prevent a free and fair election in 2028. Yes, we know about the attempted shenanigans in 2020, and know that they can be attempted again. However, can the vote tallies be hidden? I wonder how much of a popular uprising there would've been if Pence had gone along with Trump's plan in 2020, or how much there will be if similar stuff is attempted (successfully) in the future.

[dfitzo53]

"Even a stopped 88Comrade2000 is right none times a day," as I believe the old saying goes. 

[Cooked Crack]

GOP donors: Tim Scott if you're gay, you have to tell us

[Captain Wiggles]

Quote

Scott told Axios in May that he had a girlfriend

 

Let me guess. She lives in Canada and no we don't get to meet her? 🤭

[The Evil Genius]

2 hours ago, hail2skins said:

Don't see why people are giving Rdskns2000 such a hard time about the post.

 

His doom and gloom political punditry hasn't even hit for the Mendoza line. 

[China]

25 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

GOP donors: Tim Scott if you're gay, you have to tell us

 

https://www.netflix.com/title/81580141

 

[Jabbyrwock]

34 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

GOP donors: Tim Scott if you're gay, you have to tell us

[The Evil Genius]

Conversely, Ted Cruz is married and that made top GOP donors worried too. 

 

[Renegade7]

7 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

GOP donors: Tim Scott if you're gay, you have to tell us

 

It's Lindsey Graham.

[Larry]

8 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

GOP donors: Tim Scott if you're gay, you have to tell us

However, the candidate was able to reassure the donors by telling them that he's actually knocked up two underage women, and paid for their abortions. Which the GOP is just fine with. 

[EmirOfShmo]

On 8/26/2023 at 11:19 AM, EmirOfShmo said:

AAAANNND WE'RE OFF!

 

Florida lawyer files legal challenge to disqualify Trump from 2024 presidential race

 

A lawyer from Palm Beach County has filed one of the first legal challenges to disqualify Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential race under a clause in the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment.

Boynton Beach tax attorney Lawrence Caplan filed the challenge in federal court in the Southern District of Florida citing the amendment's "disqualification clause" for those who engage in insurrections and rebellion against the United States. The amendment was ratified in 1868 after the Civil War, during Reconstruction, and also addressed the citizenship status of freed slaves and the re-integration of the defeated Confederate states back into the Union.

Applying the 14th Amendment's disqualification rule to Trump has been a rising talking point this month. Legal scholars, including from conservative corners, have advocated for it. And state elections officials have conceded they are having discussions about how they would respond if a challenge is lodged.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/florida-lawyer-files-legal-challenge-173819518.html

 

...not so fast

 

Judge dismisses 14th Amendment lawsuit against Trump, rules plaintiffs lack standing.

 

A federal court judge in Fort Lauderdale on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit challenging Donald Trump's 2024 presidential candidacy under the 14th Amendment.

The lawsuit, filed a week ago, questioned Trump's ability to appear on the Florida presidential primary ballot next year, owing to his alleged role in the Jan. 6 violence at the U.S. Capitol.

In her swift dismissal of the case, Judge Robin Rosenberg, who was appointed to the bench by President Barack Obama, did not determine the 14th Amendment's applicability in Trump's case. Instead, Rosenberg ruled that the plaintiffs, Boynton Beach attorney Lawrence Caplan and two others, lacked "standing" to bring the challenge.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/judge-dismisses-14th-amendment-lawsuit-192259495.html

[LadySkinsFan]

I think if one is a citizen of the US, their domicile is in the court's jurisdiction, and one has a voting record within the past election that one has legal standing to bring this particular lawsuit. Maybe a class action lawsuit would make a bigger impact.

[PleaseBlitz]

2 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

I think if one is a citizen of the US, their domicile is in the court's jurisdiction, and one has a voting record within the past election that one has legal standing to bring this particular lawsuit. Maybe a class action lawsuit would make a bigger impact.

 

The judge ruled that your first sentence is incorrect (just like individual taxpayers can't sue because they don't like how their tax dollars are being spent), and I don't think a class action would make any difference; if one individual voter doesn't have standing, then 50 individual voters don't either. 

 

Potentially, another candidate could bring a suit and argue Trump being on the primary ballot without the actual ability to hold office harms them by preventing them from winning when they can actually hold office, but who is going to bring that suit?  The obvious answer is Chris Christie, and I seriously doubt he'd do that. 

[LadySkinsFan]

7 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

The judge ruled that your first sentence is incorrect (just like individual taxpayers can't sue because they don't like how their tax dollars are being spent), and I don't think a class action would make any difference; if one individual voter doesn't have standing, then 50 individual voters don't either. 

 

Potentially, another candidate could bring a suit and argue Trump being on the primary ballot without the actual ability to hold office harms them by preventing them from winning when they can actually hold office, but who is going to bring that suit?  The obvious answer is Chris Christie, and I seriously doubt he'd do that. 

 

I'm taking issue with that ruling. We the People elect our ruling society. Thus we have a vested interest in who will rule us. This isn't anything like going after a tax law because we don't like it. 

[Die Hard]

9 hours ago, Captain Wiggles said:

 

Let me guess. She lives in Canada and no we don't get to meet her? 🤭

Its no wonder so many Canadian men are looking for love… all our ladies are in long-distance relationship with you yanks!! 😂😂

[PleaseBlitz]

25 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

 

I'm taking issue with that ruling. We the People elect our ruling society. Thus we have a vested interest in who will rule us. This isn't anything like going after a tax law because we don't like it. 

 

That's correct, and why I don't want every rando voter that doesn't like a candidate to sue to try to block a candidate I like from running based on their conspiracy theories.  Which is exactly what would happen because the MAGA base are so easily duped that they think Hillary is an actual murderer and Obama was born in Kenya and Biden is the head of an international organized crime syndicate. 

Edited September 1, 2023 by PleaseBlitz

[China]

1 hour ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

The judge ruled that your first sentence is incorrect (just like individual taxpayers can't sue because they don't like how their tax dollars are being spent), and I don't think a class action would make any difference; if one individual voter doesn't have standing, then 50 individual voters don't either. 

 

Potentially, another candidate could bring a suit and argue Trump being on the primary ballot without the actual ability to hold office harms them by preventing them from winning when they can actually hold office, but who is going to bring that suit?  The obvious answer is Chris Christie, and I seriously doubt he'd do that. 

 

Another candidate has brought suit:

 

Republican presidential candidate files lawsuit to keep Trump off New Hampshire ballot

 

As challengers for the 2024 Republican nomination struggle to dethrone Donald Trump as the clear frontrunner, a virtually unknown candidate is trying to get the former president disqualified.

 

John Anthony Castro, a Texas-based attorney running a longshot bid for the GOP nomination, filed a lawsuit in Merrimack Superior Court this week seeking an injunction that would force New Hampshire's Secretary of State to keep Trump's name off the ballot.

 

In the court filing, Castro argues Trump violated the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which bars anyone who engaged in or provided aid or comfort to an insurrection from holding office.

 

In an interview with News 9, Castro pointed to then-President Trump telling members of the Proud Boys to "stand back and stand by" during a 2020 debate ahead of the November election, and his messages posted to social media during the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, as instances of "providing comfort" to an insurrection.

 

"We had someone who was watching TV giddy as a school kid, seeing the U.S. Capitol getting attacked," Castro said. "He can't hold any office, local, state or Federal. He can't even get elected in the Palm Beach city council. That's how serious it is."

 

The lawsuit comes as other members of Trump's party, including some in New Hampshire, have raised the argument of Trump's potential ineligibility because of the 14th Amendment.

 

Click on the link for the full article

[LadySkinsFan]

1 hour ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

That's correct, and why I don't want every rando voter that doesn't like a candidate to sue to try to block a candidate I like from running based on their conspiracy theories.  Which is exactly what would happen because the MAGA base are so easily duped that they think Hillary is an actual murderer and Obama was born in Kenya and Biden is the head of an international organized crime syndicate. 

 

This is a disqualification just like not of age, not a citizen, or a citizen not a resident in the US for a specific number of years. Belief in or not of conspiracy theories isn't a qualification. The 14th Amendment contains specific disqualification.

[PleaseBlitz]

2 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

 

This is a disqualification just like not of age, not a citizen, or a citizen not a resident in the US for a specific number of years. Belief in or not of conspiracy theories isn't a qualification. The 14th Amendment contains specific disqualification.

 

This has zero to do with the 14th Amendment.  This is about standing to bring a case, any case.  US courts have very particular rules about who can bring a case so that they are not overwhelmed with cases brought by people who weren't harmed by something, they just don't like it.  This concept has been in our jurisprudence for 100 years, and is being correctly applied here. 

[Fan since a Fetus]

2 hours ago, Die Hard said:

Its no wonder so many Canadian men are looking for love… all our ladies are in long-distance relationship with you yanks!! 😂😂

Long distance relationships…. Why do you think they call us yanks?

[Cooked Crack]

Quote

“Do you believe that Trump violated the peaceful transfer of power,” the teenager asked the governor, “a key principle of American democracy that we must uphold?”

 

DeSantis dodged the question and said Americans shouldn’t get stuck in the past, but not before remarking—in a somewhat impressed, incredulous tone—on Mitchell’s age. “Are you in high school?” the governor asked. 

 

The moment went viral, with DeSantis’ non-answer encapsulating how even Donald Trump’s lead primary rival could not bring himself to acknowledge the former president’s efforts to undo the 2020 election. CNN even played it during an interview with Chris Christie to tee up a question to the Trump foe. 

 

For Mitchell, however, the exchange kicked off a series of events that deeply rattled him and his family. 

 

Speaking about it for the first time in an interview with The Daily Beast, Mitchell says that he was grabbed and physically intimidated by DeSantis security at two subsequent campaign stops, where the candidate’s staffers also monitored him in a way he perceived as hostile.

 

[Larry]

Kid's lucky they haven't taken over his school and banned all the books. 

[tshile]

14 hours ago, hail2skins said:

What I haven't read enough about is how a Trump win in 2024 would prevent a free and fair election in 2028. Yes, we know about the attempted shenanigans in 2020, and know that they can be attempted again. However, can the vote tallies be hidden?

I don’t have the time to lay it all out. But in the interest of answering an honest question, that wasn’t addressed already, I’ll point you in the right direction. I promise it won’t be hard to find the info. 
 

states have processed for running elections. Until recently, all the states had some sort of body of individuals that were responsible for overseeing their elections. With rules in place that determine things. Ultimately this is where trump failed. He failed to navigate those processes. Too many people along the way did their job and refused to throw out votes, or electors, or certify their results because there was no proof of the allegations. He took it to court to force it - and lost all but 1 time and I believe the only 1 win they had was about the distance rules between vote counters and the campaign lawyers overseeing recounts. It was something like the rule is 20 feet of distance and they got it changed to 15. So, super minor “win” with no impact on election results. 
 

following his failed attempt a number of GOP controlled states changed their rules. Different places did different things. But a basic example as to remove the oversight from whatever body had it, and put it in the hands of a single person - the state AG. Who is appointed by the governor. So now you have the whole process overseen by one person who is partisan and appointed by another person who is partisan. 
 

See the problem? They literally changed their rules to try to allow them to get away with it next time. 
 

will that hold up? Will it work? No idea. Not interested in finding out either. 
 

Start with Arizona. They did it. A few others did too, but start with them. 

[Renegade7]

17 minutes ago, Larry said:

Kid's lucky they haven't taken over his school and banned all the books. 

 

Most kids have smartphones these days, banning books in schools doesn't really hide them from anything.

[LadySkinsFan]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

I don’t have the time to lay it all out. But in the interest of answering an honest question, that wasn’t addressed already, I’ll point you in the right direction. I promise it won’t be hard to find the info. 
 

states have processed for running elections. Until recently, all the states had some sort of body of individuals that were responsible for overseeing their elections. With rules in place that determine things. Ultimately this is where trump failed. He failed to navigate those processes. Too many people along the way did their job and refused to throw out votes, or electors, or certify their results because there was no proof of the allegations. He took it to court to force it - and lost all but 1 time and I believe the only 1 win they had was about the distance rules between vote counters and the campaign lawyers overseeing recounts. It was something like the rule is 20 feet of distance and they got it changed to 15. So, super minor “win” with no impact on election results. 
 

following his failed attempt a number of GOP controlled states changed their rules. Different places did different things. But a basic example as to remove the oversight from whatever body had it, and put it in the hands of a single person - the state AG. Who is appointed by the governor. So now you have the whole process overseen by one person who is partisan and appointed by another person who is partisan. 
 

See the problem? They literally changed their rules to try to allow them to get away with it next time. 
 

will that hold up? Will it work? No idea. Not interested in finding out either. 
 

Start with Arizona. They did it. A few others did too, but start with them. 

 

Great explanation! And this is why we need to abolish the Electoral College. Popular vote for president and vice president should prevail and get these Game of Thrones and Hunger Games out of our Constitution.