You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
89 points

I mean, think of the chaotic implications of letting states determine who is eligible to be on their ballots by following a federal standard laid out in the constitution.

Dogs and cats living together! Mass hysteria!

permalink
report
reply
18 points

The problem is that Republicans will obviously abuse this. They’ve wrecked our justice system across all levels.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points
*

⬆️ This is the correct answer.

If they allow individual states to make their own “objective” legal determinations regarding what is or is not an insurrection then you will never have a democratic candidate on the ballot in any Republican majority controlled state ever again. They will take that as carte blanche authority to say that every single Democrat is a traitor to the Constitution, and is unfit to hold office.

Edit: I am following up because I realize what a contentious and controversial position this is, and I agree. However, the important thing to note is that this is the exact logic that was repeatedly broached by the Supreme Court itself. We can argue ad nauseum about the legitimacy of that body, but the bottom line is this: they are not going to allow Donald Trump to be unilaterally removed from the ballot. They are afraid of the ramifications of that decision, that much is clear. So, regardless of anyone’s personal feelings on the matter you need to make peace with the fact that the Supreme Court is going to all but destroy the protections of Article 3 of the 14th Amendment. That is just the reality, and that means it is more important than ever that we make sure Donald Trump does not make it back to the White House. If he does, that is going to be the beginning of the end of the United States for the foreseeable future.

The worst case scenario that nobody wants to talk about is Donald Trump being able to pack additional justices onto the Supreme Court that are in their late 40’s who will be on the bench for another 40 years, and guarantee the further erosion of civil rights in a way that will permanently destroy any chance for reform for the rest of your fucking life. This is not a game, this is not a drill, the Supreme Court has made it clear they are not going to do the right thing. The only remaining choice is collective action through voting or mass civil disobedience. Get ready…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I was thinking this too. But let’s suppose the Democratic run states decide to play dirty (I know, I know). Now nobody gets past the post in a presidential election… Now what?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

They would need proof.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Fine, then the civil war that’s been brewing finally kicks off and we can deal with fascists in the appropriate manner. That’s not a compelling reason to implicitly allow fascists to participate in elections after attempting a coup, which would be the message sent if this is denied.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points
*

No. You’re literally advocating for letting Trump do unconstitutional things because Republicans are threatening to do unconstitutional things if we don’t.

Making legal rulings based on obviously fallacious reasonings because of what Republicans might do or how they’ll abuse that ruling is morally wrong and absolutely unjust. What SCOTUS should do (assuming they want to find Colorado correct, which… Roberts’ Court 🤷) is issue the ruling saying Trump shouldn’t be on the ballot, then when GOP fascist states try to remove Biden, take those inevitable cases and judge them on their merits, upholding or overturning them as the facts allow.

They’re judges. This is their job.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Republicans straight up dont give a flying fuck about rules, laws or precedent. They will always do whatever the fuck they want to do. Damn the consequences.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Oh no they do. Their strategy is to push a precedent that fits their agenda little by little. Once they’ve got that president set they can carry out their designs more easily, and spend efforts setting other convenient precedents.

Like, they are going to continue breaking the rules. But that doesn’t mean the rules aren’t still slowing them down.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Ok I mean we can’t have no laws because some leader is corrupt.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

This is always such a spurious argument; Republicans will do what they’re going to do regardless of precedent. There was no precedent for their attempt to throw out the results of last election but they did it anyway.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points

Are you serious? So, every state in the country should just throw out whoever they wan.t…allowing their residents to ONLY vote for the people that the state government wants them too? Sounds very…communist.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Just so you know, that’s not what communist means.

permalink
report
parent
reply
67 points

And if leading a riot into the capital to overturn an election counts as insurrection, then anyone could be taken off the ballet!

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

I mean, you could exclude like half the Republican caucus. Imagine what a bunch of fresh blood would do to the place!

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Fixed it…

“I mean, you could exsanguinate like half the Republican caucus. Imagine what a bunch of fresh blood would do to the place!”

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 387K

    Comments