-52 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
reply
2 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

We all saw everything that happened. The man tried to steal an election he lost and incited an insurrection. If you don’t believe that you’re captured by propaganda.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

You’re literally just ignoring the people who tell you he’s been charged with a crime. You posted a similar message in another thread yesterday, and just like this one you’re just posting and leaving.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Why do you think Trump did nothing wrong? He’s been charged with a bunch of felonies over his shenanigans.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

the man hasn’t been charged with a crime.

He’s been charged with 91 felonies and been found guilty of Insurrection in two courts in Colorado. He is not an innocent little snowflake.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/17/colorado-judge-rules-trump-engaged-in-insurrection-but-can-still-run-for-president-00127909

https://www.npr.org/2023/12/20/1220583273/trump-colorado-supreme-court-ruling

Pretending he has not been charged is misinformation, and I’m removing this comment based on that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Squeal, you filthy republican traitor swine!

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
*

Cry some more. The constitution was used to remove him. If you have problems with that, then take it up with the founding fathers. Per the 14th amendment, NO CONVICTION is required. Removing a proven insurrectionist from the ballot is DEMOCRACY.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*

Removing a proven insurrectionist from the ballot is DEMOCRACY following the rule of law in the United States. Exempting individuals from the rule of law is anti-democratic.

All people having representation and subject to the rule of law are fundamental principles of democracy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

Not if you’re a fucking insurrectionist. Refer to the 14th amendment. No conviction is required. Plain and simple.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Removing a proven insurrectionist from the ballot is DEMOCRACY following the rule of law in the United States. Exempting individuals from the rule of law is anti-democratic. All people having representation and subject to the rule of law are fundamental principles of democracy.

So, per your own logic, the fundamental principles of Democracy require people to have representation and are subjected to the rule of law. So, with Trump being removed from the ballot using the 14th amendment, which, in your own words he is being subjected to the rule law. Which makes his removal Democratic? No?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

If they challenge its use for 14th we can challenge it for the 2nd.

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points

It’s like the Paradox of Intolerance. In order to remain free and democratic, we need to disqualify candidates who would take away that freedom and would void our democracy. Not even counting all the myriad of crimes he’s been guilty of, just based on his words and his platform, he should be disqualified. We have to be intolerant of intolerance.

permalink
report
reply
19 points

Philosopher Rainer Forst resolves the contradiction in philosophical terms by outlining tolerance as a social norm and distinguishing between two notions of “intolerance”: the denial of tolerance as a social norm, and the rejection of this denial.

I think viewing tolerance as a social contract perfectly sums up this situation. We allowed Trump to run for president when he had said some crazy shit, but hadn’t yet tried to overthrow the government. As soon as that happened, the social contract was off. No do overs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Preach.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Right now, however, I worry that the supreme court’s rightwing supermajority, in its anticipated rush to prohibit states from kicking Donald Trump off the ballot, will turn the constitution into a suicide pact.

When the court considers that case, the six conservative justices might focus on their concerns about infuriating rightwing voters, their political soulmates, if they rule that the constitution requires that Trump be disqualified as an insurrectionist.

He unarguably gave “aid or comfort” to the January 6 assault on the Capitol, which was essentially a coup attempt that sought to prevent the rightfully elected president, Joe Biden, from taking office.

If the supreme court’s six rightwing justices allow Trump to stay on the ballot, they can do so only by turning their backs on the methods of constitutional interpretation that they have repeatedly trumpeted: textualism and originalism.

But the two constitutional scholars who led the way in arguing that Trump should be disqualified – William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen – are highly regarded conservative members of the Federalist Society.

In decades past, the US supreme court did not shrink from issuing decisions that offended and angered millions of Americans, whether it was enraging many white southerners by barring school segregation in Brown v Board of Education, or infuriating millions of women by overturning Roe v Wade, or angering a wide swath of Democrats by cutting short the vote count to deliver victory to George W Bush over Al Gore.


The original article contains 1,569 words, the summary contains 242 words. Saved 85%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

permalink
report
reply
2 points

People vote for him to see what happens. Show them what happens.

permalink
report
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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

  • 10K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 486K

    Comments