70d
@averagejoe1 saidUgh.
President Trump!!
Hey, you fellers cannot call this a MAGA Court anymore. It is coming at you from all sides!
70d
@wildgrass saidTell Suzianne, ....maybe a PM.
In a federal election, the crux seems to be the decisions of one state affect the voters in other states too. Not that trump was winning Colorado anyway, but theyre not going to allow states supreme court rulings to decide federal elections.
@wildgrass saidThen Mr. Hassan should have been allowed on the Presidential Primary ballot and, by extension, States are powerless to keep those under the Constitutional age limits for Federal offices off their ballots.
In a federal election, the crux seems to be the decisions of one state affect the voters in other states too. Not that trump was winning Colorado anyway, but theyre not going to allow states supreme court rulings to decide federal elections.
69d
@no1marauder saidInteresting.
Then Mr. Hassan should have been allowed on the Presidential Primary ballot and, by extension, States are powerless to keep those under the Constitutional age limits for Federal offices off their ballots.
Maybe there could be lawsuits based on that. And we end up with a presidential ballot that has 129 names on it.
@wildgrass saidYou certainly all are aware that before the advent of the huge liberal movement, that nothing like this was ever even thought of. Now they are taking over the world, a lot of change afoot. Oh boy.
Interesting.
Maybe there could be lawsuits based on that. And we end up with a presidential ballot that has 129 names on it.
Sure, 129 candidates is possible. Is this then where you fellers continue with what had been the framers’ intent,?
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 142507
69d
@no1marauder saiduummm…you ever hear of qualifying?
Then Mr. Hassan should have been allowed on the Presidential Primary ballot and, by extension, States are powerless to keep those under the Constitutional age limits for Federal offices off their ballots.
68d
@mott-the-hoople saidStates enforcing qualifications for Federal office would create a terrible "patchwork" which is completely unacceptable according to the SCOTUS decision you and others here are defending.
uummm…you ever hear of qualifying?
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 142507
68d
@no1marauder saidstates are not required to enforce anything, never have been.
States enforcing qualifications for Federal office would create a terrible "patchwork" which is completely unacceptable according to the SCOTUS decision you and others here are defending.
Why would you say that? other than a shytweasel response.
States follow fed guidelines, they cant make their own laws. If there is a problem fed courts will enforce.
You came out on the short end of the stick on this one. Don’t make it worse with incoherent babbling.
@mott-the-hoople saidStates can't make their own laws??????? LMAO!
states are not required to enforce anything, never have been.
Why would you say that? other than a shytweasel response.
States follow fed guidelines, they cant make their own laws. If there is a problem fed courts will enforce.
You came out on the short end of the stick on this one. Don’t make it worse with incoherent babbling.
You clowns are too stupid to "debate".
68d
@mott-the-hoople saidThe "Federal guidelines" for who qualifies and doesn't qualify for Federal offices are in the Constitution. Colorado did follow them in Hassan and was told that was perfectly acceptable by now Justice Gorsuch.
states are not required to enforce anything, never have been.
Why would you say that? other than a shytweasel response.
States follow fed guidelines, they cant make their own laws. If there is a problem fed courts will enforce.
You came out on the short end of the stick on this one. Don’t make it worse with incoherent babbling.
The State did the same thing here and was told that was unacceptable because States doing so would create a "patchwork" of different interpretations of those guidelines.
Some constancy would be nice.
@no1marauder saidMarauder feigns disbelief that Mott said that, knowing full well what he meant. This is an example of cluttering up posts.
States can't make their own laws??????? LMAO!
You clowns are too stupid to "debate".
I sure hope I don’t say race when discussing horses running, he and Sue will catch me too!
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 142507
67d
@no1marauder saidnot regarding fed elections…what with you being a lawyer and all it looks like you would know this…😂
States can't make their own laws??????? LMAO!
You clowns are too stupid to "debate".
you stepped in it on this thread 😂
67d
@mott-the-hoople said
not regarding fed elections…what with you being a lawyer and all it looks like you would know this…😂
you stepped in it on this thread 😂
https://www.npr.org/sections/biden-transition-updates/2020/12/14/946080856/who-are-electors-and-how-do-they-get-picked
How electors get picked varies by state, but in general state parties file slates of names for who the electors will be. They include people with ties to those state parties, like current and former party officials, state lawmakers and party activists. They're selected either at state party conventions or by party central committees. Each presidential candidate gets their own unique list of names on their slates.
Are they bound by the popular votes in those states?
In some places, yes; in others, no. Thirty-two states plus the District of Columbia have laws requiring electors to vote for the candidate the party has nominated, or they have to sign pledges.
Some states threaten electors with fines or even criminal penalties for going "faithless." In New Mexico, it's considered a fourth-degree felony; in South Carolina, they are subject to criminal action; Oklahoma holds out a fine of $1,000; it's $500 in North Carolina.
@no1marauder saidYou are right, mister attorney is wrong.
States can't make their own laws??????? LMAO!
You clowns are too stupid to "debate".
If Kansas did not make their own law making murder illegal, you could murder someone in Kansas
and "get away with murder" because there is no federal law against murder on (any) state land, no jurisdiction.
this is for the lawyer, mostly.
Who led the investigation into President John F. Kennedy's assassination? (who had jurisdiction?)
--------------------------------
The District Attorney of Dallas County
63d
@Mott-The-Hoople
Ah, so the fact Trump now owes a half bil to NY STATE means they have nothing to go by because they can't make state laws.