Maine barred Donald Trump from the primary ballot Thursday, making it the second state in the country to block the former president from running again under a part of the Constitution that prevents insurrectionists from holding office.

The decision by Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows (D) is sure to be appealed. The Colorado Supreme Court last week found Trump could not appear on the ballot in that state, and the Colorado Republican Party has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. The nation’s high court could resolve for all states whether Trump can run again.

Archive

53 points

When Republican states start doing this to democratic candidates for basically no reason, then democracy is completely over.

permalink
report
reply
-9 points

Thank you! This is an easy pill for some of us to swallow when these states are barring Trump, but blocking a candidate from the ballot for ANY reason at the state level sets a dangerous precedent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

Yeah, but straight-up ignoring the Constitution is also a big problem, so… Feels like maybe if your try to overturn an election you shouldn’t get to run for office.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I agree, but I also feel that decision should be made at the federal level thereby barring a candidate from ALL states rather than states selectively barring candidates they don’t like.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

There’s a reason that there is such a tiny list of reasons for justifying this. It’s supposed to be a near impossibility for anyone to have qualified for such a measure. And then there’s Trump who just blasted himself right past that hurdle.

Hopefully what comes out of this is a rigid set of standards that any state has to meet before resorting to this in the future. It remains to be seen whether those strictures will come down in favor of Trump or not. They may well decide that he’s met all the requirements for disqualification and he will be the benchmark (skidmark might be more accurate) going forward.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Except our constitution gives us 1 reason. Trump managed to break the 1 rule. Either we ignore the constitution or we follow it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

can you imagine that they won’t do this anyway, though? the house just passed an impeachment inquiry without even being able to articulate charges, out and out admitting that it’s a fishing expedition. no appeasement. we use every weapon in our arsenal to defend democracy from the terrorists.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-14 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
*

How does relieving the housing crisis lead to corporations buying cheap farmland?

And how’s any of that related to candidates being removed from the states’ ballots?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I think the commenter you’re replying to made some logical enough jumps.

Like it seems that they’re assuming people in Republican rural counties who start doing this to random candidates would move out, causing a localized housing crisis in that area that banks could come in and capitalize on like the vultures that they tend to act like. That would lead to the pattern that they’re painting in their comment.

So I can imagine how it’s all connected, but that said, I don’t claim to know the inner mind of this poster so I could be very wrong.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

we can’t ignore the law just because they will. we can’t fail to act in good faith just because they will act in bad faith. we can’t negotiate with domestic terrorists.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

they act as though as long as we give in to their demands the republicans will be reasonable and keep their promises. they won’t. they’re gonna press their political advantage by any means they can find, be it legal, extralegal, or just out and out terrorism and if we concede anything to them they’ll just have more leverage by which to bypass or end american democracy in their quest for full autocratic power.

permalink
report
parent
reply
107 points
*

If this picks up steam, we could very well see another Republican candidate (most likely DeSantis) win the nomination and become Joe Biden’s opponent.

On the other hand, the SCOTUS is Republican controlled. They already got Roe V Wade overturned and could very well rule in Trump’s favour.

Part of me truly worries that America will be the first to fall to a new wave of Fascism, and that this will spur further swings in Europe. (AfD are performing alarmingly well in East Germany, whilst Le Pen has been closer than ever before to winning the French presidency.)

permalink
report
reply
73 points

DeSantis would get fucking wrecked in a national race, Biden’s team would laugh their asses off, then get back to sending crib-seeking missiles to Netanyahu.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
*

You underestimate just how disliked Biden is, and how many Americans honestly believe that Trump had the last election stolen from him.

Also, the fact that Trump survived two impeachments, spurred an attempted insurrection and is only now starting to face state/federal charges that in any other democracy would have had him immediately struck off from the ballot is worrying. It’s set precedent that could allow a more sane, manipulative and competent candidate to commandeer the country.

The only possible good that could come out of a DeSantis nomination would be if Trump ran as an independent in protest and heavily split the right wing vote, which would guarantee a second Biden term.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I agree with everything that both of you said.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Careful, that’s exactly what we said about Trump.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Trump had charisma, DeSantis has anti-charisma. The more people see of him the less people like him. He pissed off big business with his Disney stuff.

There’s a reason his campaign is in hospice care.

If it isn’t Trump it’ll be Haley. She would have a real shot.

But it’s gonna be Trump anyway, so this is kind of moot.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Desantis would get wrecked in a cognitive dissonance race with trump.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I hate to say it, but the world is overdue for a new world war. Fascism seems to rise when the previous generation that experienced Fascism dies off. Nobody who went through it wants that to happen again, but like toddlers, we need to touch the stove to learn it’s hot.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Correction: the rich want another world war and are pushing for it. The brainwashing that has been going on for years wasn’t paid by your average joe.

And as usual, it will be paid with the blood of the poor

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-15 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
43 points

I always hate the “moving to Canada” thing. American hubris leads them to believe that they can just emigrate to whatever country they like without barriers. That’s not how it works.

Just like the USA, Canada isn’t going to grant citizenship to every rando who approaches their borders.

I will say this though, depending on where they’re coming from in the US, and what they’ve experienced in terms of threats and persecution, I could see there being a case for requests for asylum for LGBT+ people trying to escape to Canada. And that’s sad as hell for all of us.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

They didn’t in 2016, what changed?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Trump was unpredictable in 2016. He talked a big game, but we had no idea what laws he’d pass, what his policies would be, etc. Sadly many voted for him because he was seen as an “outsider” since people were tired of standard politicians.

Now we have a good idea what he’ll do, January 6th happened, and Trump has been vocal about trans genocide specifically.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

We have a bigot/ fascist lover here in Canada called Pierre Poilievre who’s in the lead in the polls. If something doesn’t change between now and 2025 Canada may fall to the far right as well.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Uh… What do you mean “if they win”? The LGBTQIA community here in Canada has dramatically expanded with Americans looking to apply for citizenship. LGBTQIA protections and civil rights are crumbling in the States even without the GOP strictly in power. The Exodus is already underway.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

There are more queers in America than there are people in Canada.

You ain’t seen nothing yet.

Going to be some absolutely amazing looking refugee tents at some point tho

permalink
report
parent
reply
54 points

If this picks up steam, we could very well see another Republican candidate (most likely DeSantis) win the nomination and become Joe Biden’s opponent.

That’s the entire point, isn’t it? To prevent the insurrectionist from being on the ballot, not “prevent the republicans from being on the ballot.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

More than that, some people will still vote for Trump as a write in, which will split the Republican vote and force them to lose

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

East Germany?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s like saying Southern California. It’s just a region within a larger state.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points
*

Yes. The former DDR part is commonly still called that. It still differs noticeably from the West in terms of culture and level of development. Unfortunately, the entire region has moved significantly to the right politically. So much even that an openly right-wing extremist party has a majority in multiple parts of it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I didn’t know Dance Dance Revolution got a party. Weird thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-57 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
-20 points

Then vote third party. The US will continue to get worse by voting “lesser of two evils” until people with functional neurons start voting for third.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

While I agree, maybe the time to vote third party is not when one of the major candidates has stated their interest in being a dictator (but just for “one day”).

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

People with functional neurons understand Duverger’s law.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-22 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

A vote for libertarians is effectively a vote for dems/reps, whoever you support the least. That’s the beautifully broken part with “the winner takes it all”-elections.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Refusing to vote just lets people who do vote decide your fate. Refusing to vote for either major party candidate as a protest just means that you’re okay with either one winning.

You might disagree philosophically, but I’m talking about the reality of what is going to happen. One of the two major party candidates is going to win. If your conscience tells you to vote third party, then sobeit. Just understand the potential consequences of that decision.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I didn’t even know that there’s radical left within the Democrats. I would start trusting AOC, Rashida and Alejandra Caraballo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

MFW my fart cloud finally hits my nose

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points
*

Then vote Dem and join a radical militia unless your actual goal is to just screech impotently online.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

nice dude yea that will show them for sure

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Its always some dude with an anime pfp

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Yes, American fascism will definitely help the Palestinian state

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

The Constitution doesn’t give the deciding power to the SCOTUS, it requires a 3/4 vote of Congress to resolve this.

It’s completely unconstitutional for the SCOTUS to be making the final decision. They should be the ones penalizing any state that doesn’t remove him from the ballot for violating the Constitution.

permalink
report
reply
0 points

That would only hold true if Donald trump was officially convicted of the crime of insurrection. A crime which so far he hasn’t even been charged with. Until he is charged tried and convicted of insurrection the 14th amendment isnt applicable here and I’d bet my money that’s exactly what the surpreme court is going to rule on.

If they are serious about wanting to remove him from the vallt then they should start there. By trying him for insurrection.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Let us know where the wording of the 14th requires a conviction. He’s being judged in COURTS by the state supreme courts. You are creating hurdles that simply aren’t present.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

constitution says absolutely zero about conviction, and 14th has been invoked in the past against people without convictions. but you’re right, scotus will ignore both the constitution and precedent because they’ve been hand selected to grant the presidency to the traitor.

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points

The 14th doesn’t require a conviction. It was written in the wake of the civil war, to prevent confederates from holding office without needing to convict them.

The union didn’t want to have to drag every confederate to court just to keep them out of office, because the union knew it would be impossible for the courts to handle and would run counter to reunification efforts. But they were afraid that the confederates would attempt to seize power via the elections once it became clear that the insurrection had failed. So they wanted a way to preemptively bar any former confederate from running for office.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I bet Zengen is right though. I bet if SCOTUS hears the case the majority opinion will pretend that a conviction is a necessary requirement to use the 14th amendment, even though it obviously isn’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

So it’s liberals for “states’ rights”, like in “Firefly” and SW Prequels?

(Not American, so you may consider this joke dumb.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Am american, not sure what you’re trying to say here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

scotus decides what the constitution means, though. and they’ll decide it doesn’t mean this, because they’re openly corrupt, bought and paid for with receipts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Are we going to pretend SCOTUS isn’t going to install him, like they did with Bush?

permalink
report
reply
3 points

Considering the court is currently stacked with his own judges, I’m definitely not optimistic about them ruling against him.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 511K

    Comments