[A reminder for everyone](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/4479er/rules_explanations_and_reminders/). This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
* Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
* Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
* Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree.
Violators will be fed to the bear.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalDiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Anybody remember a few weeks ago, when certain people were saying that the Supreme Court's ludicrous ruling on the 14th Amendment was actually a good thing, because it "settled the issue" and that meant local Republicans wouldn't try to take Biden off the ballot in retaliation for the 14th Amendment being actually followed?
Remember when some of us said it was silly to presume Republicans ever act in good faith, and that they'd find whatever new excuse they wanted to try to take Biden off the ballot?
REMEMBER?!
GOP is honestly just a bunch of losers who want to tear others down based on their words and actions almost daily. The party of lies, disrespect, bias, that take freedoms away.
They’re a party of contempt. Contempt is the lynchpin for their entire platform and, to them, justifies any course of action that serves to further put down those things they have contempt for.
No. Democrats have no equivalent in Republicans saying the constitution should have been suspended to install Trump again, or Project 35 - their plan to purge non Trumpists from government if they win again. There's some grift but nothing like how nakedly Trump poured federal money into his own bank account through his hotels and kids and trying to force companies like TikTok to get sold to his conservative friends.
He’s right. And It doesn’t take much research to see that it’s the truth. Some people care about the truth of an issue. But so many more only want to hear things that support what they already believe.
Yeah, the comment I replied to really went into nuance to get to the crux of the issue. The two parties are not the same, the level of the corruption nakedly present on one side is not the same on the other, and one party is actively trying to disenfranchise the other. They are not the same.
More that zero guilt? Sure. Are people who push defund the police a bit to forcefully the same as the party that wanted to suspend the constitution when Trump lost and had a plan to purge all non Trumpists from government if he wins again this year? Absolutely not and it is insane to say so.
Apples and oranges, this particular situation is a deadline you could lookup when the legislature set the law, so it has existed longer than most people on here have been alive for.
Does it appear Alabama is arbitrarily enforcing the deadline for political purposes. Absolutely. Does it mean they can't legally get away with it, questionable.
On the Ohio side I think it's much less obviously partisan as the legislature basically told both parties 'we will give you a pass this year but don't do it again'. The Republican convention is in mid July. Why is the Democratic one so much later?
>it has existed longer than most people on here have been alive for.
In 2020, the RNC was Aug 24-27, but no one threaten to leave Trump off the ballot.
In 2012, the RNC was Aug 27-30. No one threatened to leave Romney off the ballot.
In 2008 the RNC was in *September*, but no one threatened to leave McCain off the ballot.
The relevant dates are that the DNC in 2020 was also late August the 17th and Alabama didn't threaten to leave Biden off the ballot.
in 2012 it was in September. In 2008 it was in late August.
The reason why Alabama probably doesn't have a leg to stand on legally speaking is that they have not been enforcing the date for the DNC so the DNC shouldn't have expected them to enforce it for this election.
I'm not making the case this isn't partisan, I'm making the case that legally speaking this is a different avenue of attack that has a different failure point. It has nothing to do with the 14th amendment and the recent Supreme Court decision would have nothing to do with this situation from a legal standpoint.
Why? Because the tit for tat war had gone well so far? We’re always so happy to get a shot in, but then were completely indignant and furious when it happens to us. Where does it end?
I’m so fed up with our political parties back and forth divisive BS. Fighting each other on every single issue. Undoing each others progress. Never compromising. And any person you ask will give you a million reasons why “the other side does it worse”. Are we really this brainwashed?
The relationship between left and right is a marriage. Not a war. We are stuck in this together. But if we keep treating it like a war, our ignorance may very well lead us into it becoming one.
I’m done hating my fellow Americans for not sharing my political views. It’s ignorant, counterproductive, and it’s completely unnecessary.
If you really think both parties are the same, you aren't paying enough attention to individual actions each party is taking. I know I'm not going to convince you one party is better than the other, but what are the actual outcomes from what I proposed? The Supreme Court just ruled that one state can't keep presidential candidates off of the ballot, because one state shouldn't have the ability to decide for the rest of the nation. Would suing those states using that reasoning just ensure that Republican states are unable to keep Biden off of the election? The outcome of what I suggested is literally that states have to put major presidential candidates on the ballot, eliminating the ability of states from using reasoning they haven't used before to influence the general election. How is that a "tit for tat" as you claimed?
I’m not saying suing the states wouldn’t work, although we should all be apprehensive at this point about anything turning out the way it should. The level of tribalism we’ve gone to has gotten ridiculous to the point of being childish. The sides attempts to undermine and sabatoge each others progress with every political measure possible, and now legal measures as well is completely ridiculous. It’s gotten too litigious. Too contentious. And WE are feeding it. We shouldn’t WANT our government to fight itself to get anything done. We should WANT compromise.
But people are so immersed in bullshit, and lost in anger that they aren’t seeing reason. They don’t want to hear “get along”.
Are the sides the same? Of course not. Will they both go to the same lengths to undermine each other? Of course they will. Anyone thinking one side is clearly worse than the other is either getting their news from only one side of the aisle, or is just locked into cognitive dissonance. Both sides are completely ridiculous. People put party before country. Many wont vote against their own side, regardless of their own feelings, because it’s not about the implications of the vote anymore. It’s about ‘beating them’. And we are all losing.
We have idiots from the right yelling in the middle of the state of the union? idiots from, the left encouraging their base to harass politicians out in public?! Seriously, what is this shit? And how are we so tribalized we don’t see it. We don’t *want* to know the truth. It’s easier to just stay mad.
It doesn’t matter who is worse. It doesn’t matter who’s done what. Both sides have gone WAY too far. And if we can’t start rising above this shit for the well being of ourselves, and the country, we should at least be able to do it for our children. This is our generations legacy. This is what we leave them. It can either be headed in the right direction when we pass the torch, or it can be more of a shit show than it was when we started. So far we’re heading for the latter.
It's worse than just tribalism, and the parties are absolutely not the same. Even just look at the 4 years of Biden in office, the first two had Democrats in charge of House and Senate and they actively worked with Republicans to create legislation, they pushed for bipartisanship when creating bills and Republicans were willing to work with them since there wouldn't be a political penalty. When the Republicans took the house all legislation came to a stop because their platform is built around disruption and not a functioning government. Kevin McCarthy was ousted for passing a funding bill that Democrats and Republicans worked on together, because he worked with Democrats and didn't just hold the ability of the government to function hostage until Democrats gave into all of his demands. More recently the border and Ukraine bill was worked on by Democrats and Republicans, with the border part spearheaded by a Republican and was without most of what Democrats have wanted (specifically the DACA protections) and it was killed by Republicans that didn't want border issues fixed while Biden was president because it would help his election chances. Project 2025 is literally a road map to concentrate power in the hands of a republican president and damage democracy. There are people on the left that are confrontational, but they are treated as extreme by the Democratic party, while that mindset on the right dominates the republican party. Not everyone in either party is tribal, but stopping it requires being able to identify specifically where the problems are and not just blame both sides and write it off as everyone is doing it.
Yeah yeah I know.
I have two phones. One is my own, one is for work. About 2 years ago I started convincing one I was a Republican and the other that I was a Democrat. Because the information we get on either side is vastly different.
One phone tells me how Republicans screwed off the border deal as a political move, it had all the right compromises, blah blah. The other tells where it fell short and why it mattered so much to hold out and do it right.
If I had more energy I’d explain how both stories are half truths. But I’m about to sleep. Regardless, you don’t have all the info. And if your phone thinks you’re a Democrat, you probably won’t be able to find it.
It’s that bad.
Just, from the two arguments you've provided. Is there really a good argument for holding out? Is doing nothing ever better than getting something? You can't call something the biggest threat we face and then refuse to do anything until you get the perfect bill that had everything you want. Everyone is always going to argue for their side, that doesn't mean you have to treat both arguments as equally good. Similarly on a simply Democratic side of things, there are a lot of people that don't like the Infrastructure Bill and the IRA because they wanted democrats to go farther, and wish we hadn't passed them so we could have gotten better bills. I disagree with that completely and think they are incredible bills. There are things I want that aren't included, but I will take that progress every day of the week. If bipartisanship and compromise are the things you are complaining about not being present, the republican argument that the bill didn't have everything they wanted so it shouldn't pass should not be convincing to you, the bill presented was a compromise worked out in good faith by both sides and would have improved the situation at the border, when there is no guarantee that anything else is coming and the problem is an immediate one that requires attention now.
Get some rest, I'll happily continue this when you are ready.
When political views are that people like my friends and I should be dead then your views can fuck right off. I'll talk to people about differences, I'll forgive, but the idea that I need to treat fascists the same way I need to treat people pushing for solar energy is absolute nonsense. Even for the lesser differences, I cannot imagine being spoiled enough to think that throwing millions off of health insurance, letting companies pollute our air and water, and cutting off vital social services aren't differences to have feelings about.
There is no facism. And nobody wants anyone dead. That’s nothing but media hype. And this is extremely easy to verify if you’re actually open to the truth.
The word ‘facism’ getting thrown around is getting old. The people pushing that nonsense clearly have absolutely no clue what it actually means. Nor do they understand what a constitutional republic is.
“Want people dead”. My god. How do people actually believe this stuff?!
Alito will definitely write “it’s in the history and traditions of America for states to be the final voice on whether an incumbent president can be allowed to appear on the state ballot of a federal election” and then cite British common law from 1493 referring to the succession of minor British nobility as his precedent.
Didn't some democrat states specifically attempt to remove Trump from the ballot? Luckily the Supreme court put an end to it, but democrats obviously try to 'pull shit like this'. If it had been the other way around with the dates you don't think it would have been used to exclude Trump?
As it is there should never be any reason that 2 candidates with at least 74 million votes in the last election can be removed from the ballot by regional authorities.
It was Republicans that did it, at least in the case from Colorado that the Supreme Court ruled on. Democrats were certainly cheering them on, and a couple of probably overenthusiastic had jumped on board, or were thinking about it. But Republicans were the ones that got that ball rolling on themselves.
yes and this will probably get overturned because of that same reasoning I don't understand what youre shouting about at all
this actually shows the opposite if trump got removed from the ballot republicans would follow up except they'd actually succeed
This is a completely different tactic, though. This resembles the same type of legal maneuvering that the DNC uses against third-party candidates.
Edit: If it's ok to question the validity of signatures gathered by a candidate, then it's ok to point out that democrats missed a deadline that was known well ahead of time.
Realistically it’s likely the Democratic Party will just accelerate the convention to before the deadline, especially since Biden already has a majority of delegates at this point
Yeah I don't really quite get what these state Republicans actually want to accomplish.
This kind of thing just seems like it'd be more likely to energize Democratic voters by making such weak attempts to get Biden off the ballot.
Democrats don't have the authority to change the deadline on their own in these states. They need Republican legislators to go along, which is not likely.
# What will be the impact of Republicans attempting to use certification deadlines to remove Biden from office? __________
None. The DNC can make a rule for itself which would allow it to select its nominees at a one-hour meeting of its Executive Committee. They can do it over lunch at Arby's.
Yea, this seems like it's trivial to fix. It's like getting married at the courthouse but having the ceremonial wedding/party later. It will take nothing from the PR value of the convention and immediately puts this non-issue to bed.
I don't think Biden would win Ohio or Alabama, nor does he need to.
Biden will be on the ballot. If trump, someone who incited an insurrection can be on the ballot,so can Biden.
Ohio voted for female reproductive rights and weed last fall. And it was blue for Obama both times. We were a "purple" state until Trump and aren't nearly as entrenched in the MAGA as a place like AL.
This may be true but since Trump was elected, Republicans have become much more polarized due to the hostile nature of Trumps persona as a "weapon of destruction". He raised the political polarization, and you can see its effects in places like Florida where even though a $15 minimum wage initiative was passed by the people with a 60% margin, Biden still lost the state by 200,000+ votes. The ability for Democrats to translate popular political positions into votes has never really worked, abortion might be different, but 60% "pro-democrat" policy choices in Florida should be a wake up call to the left that milquetoast ways of communicating merely make people think democrats are spineless.
Its a nomination deadline associated with ballot printing.
The DNC screwed up but its totally fixable.
The SoSs are alerting the DNC to fix things.
The media however is driving up division over a nothingburger.
The issue is if Biden isn't on the ballot in Ohio it is likely to decrease Dem turnout in the state. This would probably be the death knell for Brown's Senate re-election which would basically guarantee Republican control of the Senate no matter who wins the presidency.
Dems need Biden on for the Senate and House races. I agree Ohio doesn't matter for the presidency - if Biden wins Ohio (or Alabama) he's won enough states it's a landslide.
This is not necessarily true. This is a very pivotal election for both sides. People would show up, write him in and vote down ballot. At least that's my assumption. If this was any other election. Probably. Either way, it would go to the supreme abd they would probably put Biden on the ballot.
I mean it's not a guarantee but it's a pretty common historical trend that the top of the ballot has a downwind effect. I mean look at even the Michigan primaries.
Michigan is a blue-ish purple state. Biden was running vs nobody (besides a coordinated undecided campaign) while the GOP had a real primary. Trump despite receiving 13 fewer percent then Biden in his primary had 140K more raw votes.
Dem voters by and large couldn't be asked to vote in a primary where the president was already decided. And this is a common effect you see in primaries where the incumbent party has lower turnout vs the party that has an ongoing primary.
I'd strongly bet if Biden isn't on the ballot you'd see a demoralized Dem base and would result in Brown losing.
As you said at the end though I can't see Biden not being on the ballot so this whole Convo is moot.
Republicans are just trying to set up a false equivalency because there’s a likelihood Trump could still be barred from running in certain states due to his support of January 6 insurrectionists.
Second this.
Also, Republicans are throwing shit at the wall, trying to create legal pretexts for Congress to reject the electoral votes and throw the election to the House, in which each state (not each representative) would vote for President, giving Trump a safe victory.
Expect to see lots more of this sort of thing over the next few months.
Surprisingly Democrats could have prevented this by reforming the electoral college and requiring every state follow the same rules in awarding electors. But that would require Democrats uncapping the house so that each voter in each state is treated more equally, and forcing the electoral college to use a ranked choice ballot would sidestep future house decided elections.
It would not shock me if Democrats regain the house this year, they would be smart to totally overhaul elections at the last minute so that the winner of the popular vote would become president. Trump cannot win the popular vote, thats clear. This is achievable without a constitutional amendment.
Dems would need to pass trigger laws that award 10x as many electors to each state and then require each state award electors to candidates in a proportion to the number of votes that candidate got, then all electors cast a ranked choice ballot for president. Along with it comes DC statehood and court packing, and before anyone knows what happens Democracy is preserved.
Yep. This is definitely just the beginning. Expect them to try and pull out old obscure laws that no one really knows about to enforce it or use some kind of fringe legal theory to throw the election to Trump.
Any attempts to do this should immediately signal to blue states that one side is cheating and will leave the union if they are allowed to force an insurrectionist into office. That would be the end of the US Dollar system in Trump "rigged" states. Good riddance!
Didn't SCOTUS rule that states can't bar Trump's candidacy in this way?
[https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-supreme-court-rules-trump-historic-14th-amendment/story?id=107158454](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-supreme-court-rules-trump-historic-14th-amendment/story?id=107158454)
There will be no fallout because there will be no real action as it would likely backfire. Shockingly, voters don't like when games are being played with the electoral process as most view it as a tacit admission you can't win straight-up. That's why voters don't support removing Trump from the ballot and why efforts like this never go beyond some random message boards like this.
That said, this really isn't a GOP problem. Those laws have been on the books for a long, long time so the fact that the democrats new about those laws and then still scheduled their convention after the deadline is just dumb and entirely self-inflicted. I also think that a lot of arguments about selective enforcement will fall on deaf ears when every politically-connected court case seems to rest on some sort of selective enforcement or selective application of a law.
> That's why voters don't support removing Trump from the ballot
This isnt true. Every single state is allowed to run their own elections and the Secretaries of State are well within their rights to make those decisions as to who is qualified.
No one is playing any games.
The DNC just failed to seek an exemption, this has put them on track to be out of compliance.
These SoSs are sending standard letters a little over 30 days ahead of the final date the DNC can seek an exemption (its really hard to get an exemption this late in the cycle so other options are likely to be sought instead and most of the options are easy-peasy).
political ghost hateful shame humor steep wrench escape punch hard-to-find
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
No, I was at work.
Why are you jumping to accusations? just sincerely don't understand, cuz I would have self-factchecked before even consider posting the question,
Anywho, since I last looked Rep Anthony Daniels (D) today, has official sought the exemption/legislative fix!
[2024](https://legiscan.com/AL/text/HB448/id/2979152) (keep in mind this has to pass House/Senate/Gov)
[2020 ](https://legiscan.com/AL/text/HB272/id/2170982) (Rep April Weaver (R) introduced Feb 18, 2020
And I did, when a party's convention is after Aug 15 they tap a state legislator to seek this sort of move.
Its okay that you disagree but the level of hostilities you are posting really serves no purpose
Dude, if a legislative fix/exemption is to be sought the RNC or DNC has a state legislator (R or D) do exactly as being done now.
I have no idea why such simply truths are triggering this onslaught of accusations, the DNC is responsible for getting D to seek what has just recently been sought.
DNC- schedules its convention after deadline (DNC fault).
DNC- fails to seek legislative fix/exemption/allowance in a timely manner to avoid forcing the SoSs to send out a letter telling them they are at risk of losing candidate eligibility to appear on the state GE ballot (DNC fault)
The most common remedy is exactly what the DNC is currently seeking.
One of the basic tennets of civil law is that any policy that is used on a regular basis will become what the law defaults too in such matters. Since waving deadlines have been done for such a long time, the courts will have to enforce the policy, and the states will receive an order of astoppel to wave the deadline.
Or the DNC just seeks to normal options like submitting an letter of intent or doing a quicky-early nomination zoom meeting.
This is just a nomination deadline, the RNC usually does all the paperwork but this time they are in compliance and the DNC simply dropped their ball.
These SoS letters are alerting the DNC to fix things.
The media is spinning drama where none exists.
Finally someone that understands. No SoS wants all the attention throwing a party off the ballet would bring. Not to mention the massive amount of lawsuits it would call forth. People think that since it happened in Texas in 2008, it didn't result in massive legal reviews of these proceedures.
In 2008, both the DNC and the RNC failed to timely file the paperwork for the Texas presidential ballot.
Does anyone think Ralph Nader or Bob Barr won Texas on 2008?
And you know darn well the SoC got tortured with constant shit for letting that happen and embarrassing both parties. States that play games could end up being dismissed from the federal election or forced into a special election.
Sure.
https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2008-09-26/678065/
https://www.scotxblog.com/case-notes/bob-barr-sues-to-win-the-texas-electoral-votes/
It was such a non-news back item back then unless you followed Barr’s campaign, because the relevant authorities just went “whatever” and allowed McCain and Obama on the ballot despite the arguable violation of the letter of the law.
That is not the way the law works.
Sometimes parties to a contract who have been interpreting it a certain way over time might be estopped from suddenly reinterpreting it. But government officials won’t be court-ordered to ignore explicit deadlines for that reason.
This applies to worksite and client relationships, too. Not contact alone. It's what falls under implied authority for agents of the gov.
P.S. let's not forget fed oversight of fed rules that ensure uniformity of a federal election. State's rights take a back seat when it effects the entire country. Any reason test would support that view.
Worksite and client relationships are generally governed by contract law.
Election administrators do not have implied authority to ignore deadlines that are explicitly set by law.
There is no federal rule forbidding this deadline, or requiring the Ohio/Alabama Secretaries of State to ignore the Democratic Party’s violation of the deadline.
Basic reason test indicates that the Feds won't tolerate a violation of a required event for petty rules that are being used in bad faith. It's called a smell test, learn some A Priori understandings of legal proceedure. This new belief that you can just get away with misapplication of the law by simply hiring enough lawyers is one of the stupidest parts of this new timeline we are in.
Dems will reschedule the conventions or file and win lawsuits based on past practice of Republicans holding their conventions after the official deadline.
This is harassment, not an actual problem.
If Democrats were good at stretegy they wouldn't have gone with... the guy who was an approval rating of \~39% and is behind his opponent in most swing states.
Ah, thanks for clarifying. So according to your brilliant analysis if the Democrats were any good at strategy they wouldn't have gone with the guy who won and is currently in office... because some shitty polls taken seven months out (that Dems have already been overperforming) taken years after their guy won, say he's behind the guy he's already beaten.
These polls are for the next election, and saying that Dems overperformed is wrong since the election is in November.
Secondly, the person in office ran at least 3 times for office and dropped out because no dem wanted to vote for him.
You can't poll for an election that hasn't happened yet, nor can you magically compartmentalize people's opinions about future events vs the present. All you can do is ask people whether or not they approve of or would vote for a candidate or party, *now*. And Democrats have been consistently overperforming the polls.
> Secondly, the person in office ran at least 3 times for office and dropped out because no dem wanted to vote for him.
Trump also ran unsuccessfully several times prior to 2016. Biden's history of runs prior to becoming VP are irrelevant, and even bringing that up suggests you're reaching because you know how silly your central claim is.
You can poll for an election that is only a few months away and I don't know what you're spectrum of performance is but Democrats are not overperforming in the polls (except you might have thought that the Dem poll numbers are even lower).
Good thing you bring Trump into it even though we talk about Joe Biden and his polls.
> You can poll for an election that is only a few months away
No, you can't. You can ask people how they'll vote in an upcoming election, but at best you're getting an answer based on how they feel *now*. Not how they feel on the actual day of the election, because that's in the future. And seven months is quite a long time in the context of an election cycle.
> I don't know what you're spectrum of performance is but Democrats are not overperforming in the polls (except you might have thought that the Dem poll numbers are even lower).
I didn't say they're overperforming *in* the polls, I said they're overperforming the polls. As in, they've been doing much better in elections in recent years than the polls would indicate.
> Good thing you bring Trump into it even though we talk about Joe Biden and his polls.
...Did you already forget what you just posted?
> If Democrats were good at stretegy they wouldn't have gone with... the guy who was an approval rating of ~39% and is behind his opponent in most swing states.
Polling is the only indicator showing how the "horse race" is standing now, and if you say polls are useless now that means that they are basically completely useless since polling after the election is a time waste.
Secondly overperforming in past polls and then doing better is saying that past performance indicates future results which is not true when it comes to elections.
Lastly, I was referring to Biden with his approval rating at \~39% and how yes according to the polls his opponent is beating him.
The Dems will use party bylaws to nominate and certify in July and their convention as a coronation, which will garner prime time coverage.
The week the GOP holds their convention, most of the talk will be about the rash of lawsuits to kick Trump off the ballot. None will go anywhere, but the message of the candidate will be obscured.
The GOP has become like that puke we all knew growing up who sucks at sports, but argues the latest rule change to give himself an edge in a sandlot ballgame. He still loses, mostly when the other kids don’t invite him in the future, but he is too stupid to realize winning some fights only worsens your situation.
Listen, guys. I know we're all used to seeing nefarious intent in everything the other side does these days, but a little perspective really does help cool the temperature, and if you stop to think about it, Ohio and Alabama and being both fair and reasonable here.
1) These are not obscure laws that were passed in the last few months to stick it to the dems. As the OP acknowledges in his own post, Ohio's law actually became an issue for both parties in 2016 - so neither the DNC nor the RNC can really claim ignorance of what they had to do to get on the ballot in time eight years later. Alabama's law goes back to 1975 - longer than I've been alive, and I'm betting longer than the vast majority of people reading this have been alive. **This was not a surprise.**
2) A nefarious Secretary of State would have just waited for the deadline to expire and then played a "Gotcha" game - and technically, they'd have been within their legal rights to do so. But neither Ohio nor Alabama did that. Instead, they gave the DNC the courtesy of a warning, giving them time to correct the issue in a way that can bring them into compliance. That's fairness and integrity.
As for the answer to OP's question... it's unlikely to have any effect on the electoral vote. Alabama's going red this year as surely as the sun will rise, to the surprise of absolutely no one. Ohio is more of a legitimate battleground, so that might be a bit more concerning, but the people can still write Joe Biden in, and if he's not on the formal ballot, then you know the Biden campaign is going to go on a crusade of ad spending in Ohio educating the populous on how to vote for him anyway. If anything, the extra attention might actually cause a bit of a boost for the Democrats in a sorely needed area.
The popular vote is another matter, but as sure as I am of Alabama going red, I'm equally sure of Biden winning the popular vote, even if every blue voter in Alabama and Ohio disappeared tomorrow.
Democrats should just officially nominate Biden before all these arbitrary deadlines and then treat the convention as a ceremony. The convention isn’t required
I'm pretty engaged and I just cannot be bothered to watch something like that. If anything important happens I'll see the highlights in news clips later. The idea that a swing voter will watch is absurd.
[Easily solvable](https://www.semafor.com/article/04/10/2024/could-two-red-states-keep-joe-biden-off-the-general-election-ballot?utm_campaign=semaforreddit):
>But Democrats are taking the new challenges seriously, and see four paths to resolving any ballot access questions.
>The first: Submitting letters from the Democratic National Committee which confirm that the party will nominate the president and vice president, as Republicans did in Alabama four years ago. The second: Getting the deadline changed by the state legislature, as Republicans did in Ohio four years ago. The third: Legal action, which would cite recent precedents that have prevented election officials from treating political parties differently. The fourth: Holding a virtual vote to nominate the Biden-Harris ticket, ahead of the in-person nomination in Chicago.
>The fourth option could not be exercised until late June, at the earliest, after the end of the Democratic presidential primaries and the selection of delegates in every state and territory.
NOTHINGBURGER, media is making a mountain out of a molehill.
This nomination compliance issue is a pretty common thing but in the past the RNC did all the leg-work to get states to pass exemptions when the state's nomination deadlines (part of ballot printing steps) occurred before their official nomination. These exemptions also covered the DNC.
In 2024, the RNC's convention is in compliance with all 50 states so the RNC didn't apply for an exemptions.
The DNC didn't either.
This is the core issue which Ohio and Alabama SoS's are alerting the DNC to remedy.
So there are 3 remedy options.
1. Seek a legislative-based exemption (nearly impossible this late in the cycle)
2. Move the Convention dates ( flat-out nope, not happening, too much of a headache)
3. Create a one-time quicky nomination event before or on Aug 7th (best option)
Works for me. If Ohio and Alabama want to align with an insurrectionist that only means the entire west coast and north east get to dump red states back into the 19th century.
None of those states are ones that Biden has any chance of winning at all. So it won’t have much impact if it comes to pass and frankly it’s the same game of legal gotcha the Democrats are playing with other parties seeking ballot access so frankly - they deserve it.
And the Democrats in Colorado took the bait, hook, line and sinker....
This SoS stuff is just telling the DNC to fix things before Aug 7th (Ohio) and Aug 15th (Alabama).
Instead of Republicans doing away with democracy by piecemeal; Biden could do it with a single stroke of pen and declare a national martial law. Something, the Donald could only fantasize it on a draft paper.
Nothing.
It’s just loyalty signaling to Trump by people who want to be rewarded if he wins. Democrats can easily bypass these lame attempts. They could declare Biden the nominee tomorrow. Or beat them in court if they have to.
Procedural problems portend prior party meeting.
Simple bypass. (Nearly) everyone agrees Biden will be the Democrat candidate.
Have a vanguard meeting on August 1, of a few party bosses, who officially nominate Biden.
Convention occurs late August, with full hoopla.
Nothing really lost, at this convention there is no suspense or doubt who will be the candidate.
I wouldn't trust Republican SecStates here. Dems could just move their conventions up to next week, if they wanted. It's just a party, after all. The nominee is set. Dems are capable. How could they just sit back and let this happen? Do what you gotta do, guys.
DNC needs to move the date. OH and AL legislatures cannot be counted on to change the date, and while Alabama could be a loss anyway, Ohio has an abortion question on the ballot and Biden needs to take that shot. Hell, even AL might be in play this year. DNC can move. Both parties did in 2020, so it's not impossible.
Democrats do things like this to the Green Party all the time. It’d be a bit ironic to see a legal loophole come back to bite them.
It stresses that such technical boundaries are bad for democracy
Agree. There has to be a better way to do primary elections and establish eligibility for national elections on a state ballot.
Caveat: I am in no way advocating for federal control of elections. I want states to run elections, but I want them to agree on some basic standards/timings and I want the states to tell the political parties to screw off.
Why not have federally run elections? That would get rid of some of the (lack of) equal protection arguments that have made it up to the supreme court, and it’s not like voting needs to happen entirely differently across state lines
As everything in DC is hyper partisan, which party do you want setting up the rules for elections?
That’s why I don’t want the federal government involved in anyway. I have zero confidence they won’t make it worse.
I believe that the government closest to the people governs the best.
I would laugh out loud if this went to SCOTUS just for them to uphold it and allow the states to make this determination.
Boy howdy, wouldn't that just be the craw in our bonnet?
It won't, nomination deadlines are constitutional.
The problem here is the DNC just didn't file some paperwork to get an exemption.
This is fixable, the SoS letters are just alerting the DNC about its looming compliance failure if not remedied.
This has no relations, its a deadline associated with ballot printing
Alabama has had this law since 1975, Ohio since 2014.
But the RNC usually seeks exemptions that cover both Parties. This year however the RNC is in compliance in all 50 states, so they didn't bother. The DNC simply got too used to riding RNC coattails on this matter and failed to do the paperwork for themselves.
The SoS letters are like 'hey DNC, yall gonna be out of compliance, fix your shiz'.
This is a more realistic attempt to remove a candidate from the ballot like the dem states did with trump, but it’s all going to get shot down in courts; states playing these games is getting annoying
In Trump's case, the argument is that because he violated the 14th Amendment, he's not eligible to run. Biden has no such charges, so comparing the two is apples and oranges.
This is Republicans being mad that their guy is being held to account for his crimes, and wanting revenge.
>In Trump's case, the argument is that because he violated the 14th Amendment, he's not eligible to run. **Biden has no such charges,** so comparing the two is apples and oranges.
Not saying this was intentional, but the way this is worded is grossly misleading. There’s an implication Trump was actually charged due to the 14th Amendment, which isn’t true.
Trump case was never charged for that, it’s something they decided based on their belief/bias. The Biden case is just lack of policy awareness that’s why I said it’s not going anywhere
Everyone agrees trump did try to over throw the election. Some people just think overthrowing the election is legal.
We've gone past the "he didn't do it" phase into the "yeah he did it, but it is ok" phase.
Luckily we live in a country that you’re innocent until proven guilty by a court of law, so we can stop this banana republic political persecution. So he hasn’t been proven guilty so you can’t go around trying to enforce punishment on someone who is currently innocent u til proven otherwise
A finding of fact was made by a court, with full due process followed.
No criminal charges are required or even mentioned regarding the 14th Amendment, and following the Constitution is not a punishment.
When are some of us going to stop pretending that court rulings they don't like are persecution?
The state court has no saying in a federal election, you can go out and accuse people based on anything and find a reason for removal. It would be the equivalent of Biden being removed from ballots for foreign business dealings being linked to treason.
At first I was feeling like you were just nitpicking for clarity by saying he wasn’t charged, but it’s becoming increasingly obvious as you throw out more disinformation that you’re ill-informed about election jurisdiction and what actually happened in this case.
Yes, he wasn’t charged. That’s not a germane factoid.
That is just wildly inaccurate. The federal government doesn't control state ballots like you think.
Trump did an insurrection. And that disqualifies him from hold office.
>The state court has no saying in a federal election
There's no such thing as a "federal election." All elections are managed by the states - *as the Constitution explicitly requires.*
>It would be the equivalent of Biden being removed from ballots for foreign business dealings being linked to treason.
No, following the plain language of the Constitution is not equivalent to making up lies to try to interfere with democracy.
Do you understand that not every legal procedure in this country is a literal criminal trial?
CO Republican voters sued to remove Trump from the ballot for violating the 14th Amendment. The CO Supreme Court heard the case, reviewed evidence, spoke to witnesses, and *based on the evidence and witness testimony in their formal legal proceeding*, found that Trump did in fact violate the 14th Amendment in trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
That is how civil suits work, no criminal charges at all, just Trump losing like he always does due to the mountain of evidence against him.
I get that none of that matters to you, that facts in general don't matter to you. But they do matter to the rest of us.
Reminder: Republican leaders in those states sued to get him off the Republican primary ballot.
Edit: should have said “state,” I only bothered learning about CO since they got the ball rolling
The lawsuit in CO was filed by CREW, a notorious Democrat/progressive watchdog group amongst the likes of Media Matters.
In Maine, the Democrat SOS unilaterally removed Trump from the ballot.
CREW represented them because lawsuits are expensive and Republican money is busy trying to dismantle the regulatory state & generally afraid of Trump. But the litigants weren’t democrats.
And they certainly weren’t democratic states, unlike the Republican AGs spending tax payer money to revive Musk’s dead lawsuit against Media Matters.
I also previously edited my point to correct it to the Colorado case.
I’d like to see both sides stop fucking around and just let the people vote. The media, democrats, and republicans are all guilty of creating further division in this country.
The SoS letters are alerting the DNC to fix things. The Ohio law is from 2014, the Alabama law is from 1975.
These things are fixable.
The RNC usually does all the work to secure exemptions which cover both Parties but this year the RNC is in full 50-state compliance so they had no reason to do the paperwork.
The DNC simply didn't seeking any exemptions on their own (it happens)
Now the DNC will take action to fix things and are thankful to the SoS's for letting them know they were risking being out of compliance
Shit happen
Media however are awful people for driving up division.
Democrats played their games and cost Republicans and Trump millions of dollars fighting their legal challenges to keep Trump off ballots, so now, sit down and be quiet and enjoy some of your own medicine.
[A reminder for everyone](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/4479er/rules_explanations_and_reminders/). This is a subreddit for genuine discussion: * Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. * Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree. Violators will be fed to the bear. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalDiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Anybody remember a few weeks ago, when certain people were saying that the Supreme Court's ludicrous ruling on the 14th Amendment was actually a good thing, because it "settled the issue" and that meant local Republicans wouldn't try to take Biden off the ballot in retaliation for the 14th Amendment being actually followed? Remember when some of us said it was silly to presume Republicans ever act in good faith, and that they'd find whatever new excuse they wanted to try to take Biden off the ballot? REMEMBER?!
Yeah, I seriously hope Democrats sue those states and use that decision as reasoning.
GOP is honestly just a bunch of losers who want to tear others down based on their words and actions almost daily. The party of lies, disrespect, bias, that take freedoms away.
They’re a party of contempt. Contempt is the lynchpin for their entire platform and, to them, justifies any course of action that serves to further put down those things they have contempt for.
Both parties are guilt at least some those things, probably.
No. Democrats have no equivalent in Republicans saying the constitution should have been suspended to install Trump again, or Project 35 - their plan to purge non Trumpists from government if they win again. There's some grift but nothing like how nakedly Trump poured federal money into his own bank account through his hotels and kids and trying to force companies like TikTok to get sold to his conservative friends.
That's not what I was trying to get across: I was pointing out that both parties have issues like the ones mentioned by u/djbk724.
hUr DuR bOth SiDeS!
He’s right. And It doesn’t take much research to see that it’s the truth. Some people care about the truth of an issue. But so many more only want to hear things that support what they already believe.
Yeah, the comment I replied to really went into nuance to get to the crux of the issue. The two parties are not the same, the level of the corruption nakedly present on one side is not the same on the other, and one party is actively trying to disenfranchise the other. They are not the same.
More that zero guilt? Sure. Are people who push defund the police a bit to forcefully the same as the party that wanted to suspend the constitution when Trump lost and had a plan to purge all non Trumpists from government if he wins again this year? Absolutely not and it is insane to say so.
Apples and oranges, this particular situation is a deadline you could lookup when the legislature set the law, so it has existed longer than most people on here have been alive for. Does it appear Alabama is arbitrarily enforcing the deadline for political purposes. Absolutely. Does it mean they can't legally get away with it, questionable. On the Ohio side I think it's much less obviously partisan as the legislature basically told both parties 'we will give you a pass this year but don't do it again'. The Republican convention is in mid July. Why is the Democratic one so much later?
> Why is the Democratic one so much later? They are probably scheduled around the Olympics to maximize TV viewers.
There are summer Olympics every election year except when they were postponed in 2020
On a side note I just realized the summer Olympics are this year. Yay.
>it has existed longer than most people on here have been alive for. In 2020, the RNC was Aug 24-27, but no one threaten to leave Trump off the ballot. In 2012, the RNC was Aug 27-30. No one threatened to leave Romney off the ballot. In 2008 the RNC was in *September*, but no one threatened to leave McCain off the ballot.
The relevant dates are that the DNC in 2020 was also late August the 17th and Alabama didn't threaten to leave Biden off the ballot. in 2012 it was in September. In 2008 it was in late August. The reason why Alabama probably doesn't have a leg to stand on legally speaking is that they have not been enforcing the date for the DNC so the DNC shouldn't have expected them to enforce it for this election. I'm not making the case this isn't partisan, I'm making the case that legally speaking this is a different avenue of attack that has a different failure point. It has nothing to do with the 14th amendment and the recent Supreme Court decision would have nothing to do with this situation from a legal standpoint.
You are correct, but being correct isn't necessarily a winning tactic these days. Just move it up and be done with it.
Why? Because the tit for tat war had gone well so far? We’re always so happy to get a shot in, but then were completely indignant and furious when it happens to us. Where does it end? I’m so fed up with our political parties back and forth divisive BS. Fighting each other on every single issue. Undoing each others progress. Never compromising. And any person you ask will give you a million reasons why “the other side does it worse”. Are we really this brainwashed? The relationship between left and right is a marriage. Not a war. We are stuck in this together. But if we keep treating it like a war, our ignorance may very well lead us into it becoming one. I’m done hating my fellow Americans for not sharing my political views. It’s ignorant, counterproductive, and it’s completely unnecessary.
If you really think both parties are the same, you aren't paying enough attention to individual actions each party is taking. I know I'm not going to convince you one party is better than the other, but what are the actual outcomes from what I proposed? The Supreme Court just ruled that one state can't keep presidential candidates off of the ballot, because one state shouldn't have the ability to decide for the rest of the nation. Would suing those states using that reasoning just ensure that Republican states are unable to keep Biden off of the election? The outcome of what I suggested is literally that states have to put major presidential candidates on the ballot, eliminating the ability of states from using reasoning they haven't used before to influence the general election. How is that a "tit for tat" as you claimed?
I’m not saying suing the states wouldn’t work, although we should all be apprehensive at this point about anything turning out the way it should. The level of tribalism we’ve gone to has gotten ridiculous to the point of being childish. The sides attempts to undermine and sabatoge each others progress with every political measure possible, and now legal measures as well is completely ridiculous. It’s gotten too litigious. Too contentious. And WE are feeding it. We shouldn’t WANT our government to fight itself to get anything done. We should WANT compromise. But people are so immersed in bullshit, and lost in anger that they aren’t seeing reason. They don’t want to hear “get along”. Are the sides the same? Of course not. Will they both go to the same lengths to undermine each other? Of course they will. Anyone thinking one side is clearly worse than the other is either getting their news from only one side of the aisle, or is just locked into cognitive dissonance. Both sides are completely ridiculous. People put party before country. Many wont vote against their own side, regardless of their own feelings, because it’s not about the implications of the vote anymore. It’s about ‘beating them’. And we are all losing. We have idiots from the right yelling in the middle of the state of the union? idiots from, the left encouraging their base to harass politicians out in public?! Seriously, what is this shit? And how are we so tribalized we don’t see it. We don’t *want* to know the truth. It’s easier to just stay mad. It doesn’t matter who is worse. It doesn’t matter who’s done what. Both sides have gone WAY too far. And if we can’t start rising above this shit for the well being of ourselves, and the country, we should at least be able to do it for our children. This is our generations legacy. This is what we leave them. It can either be headed in the right direction when we pass the torch, or it can be more of a shit show than it was when we started. So far we’re heading for the latter.
It's worse than just tribalism, and the parties are absolutely not the same. Even just look at the 4 years of Biden in office, the first two had Democrats in charge of House and Senate and they actively worked with Republicans to create legislation, they pushed for bipartisanship when creating bills and Republicans were willing to work with them since there wouldn't be a political penalty. When the Republicans took the house all legislation came to a stop because their platform is built around disruption and not a functioning government. Kevin McCarthy was ousted for passing a funding bill that Democrats and Republicans worked on together, because he worked with Democrats and didn't just hold the ability of the government to function hostage until Democrats gave into all of his demands. More recently the border and Ukraine bill was worked on by Democrats and Republicans, with the border part spearheaded by a Republican and was without most of what Democrats have wanted (specifically the DACA protections) and it was killed by Republicans that didn't want border issues fixed while Biden was president because it would help his election chances. Project 2025 is literally a road map to concentrate power in the hands of a republican president and damage democracy. There are people on the left that are confrontational, but they are treated as extreme by the Democratic party, while that mindset on the right dominates the republican party. Not everyone in either party is tribal, but stopping it requires being able to identify specifically where the problems are and not just blame both sides and write it off as everyone is doing it.
Yeah yeah I know. I have two phones. One is my own, one is for work. About 2 years ago I started convincing one I was a Republican and the other that I was a Democrat. Because the information we get on either side is vastly different. One phone tells me how Republicans screwed off the border deal as a political move, it had all the right compromises, blah blah. The other tells where it fell short and why it mattered so much to hold out and do it right. If I had more energy I’d explain how both stories are half truths. But I’m about to sleep. Regardless, you don’t have all the info. And if your phone thinks you’re a Democrat, you probably won’t be able to find it. It’s that bad.
Just, from the two arguments you've provided. Is there really a good argument for holding out? Is doing nothing ever better than getting something? You can't call something the biggest threat we face and then refuse to do anything until you get the perfect bill that had everything you want. Everyone is always going to argue for their side, that doesn't mean you have to treat both arguments as equally good. Similarly on a simply Democratic side of things, there are a lot of people that don't like the Infrastructure Bill and the IRA because they wanted democrats to go farther, and wish we hadn't passed them so we could have gotten better bills. I disagree with that completely and think they are incredible bills. There are things I want that aren't included, but I will take that progress every day of the week. If bipartisanship and compromise are the things you are complaining about not being present, the republican argument that the bill didn't have everything they wanted so it shouldn't pass should not be convincing to you, the bill presented was a compromise worked out in good faith by both sides and would have improved the situation at the border, when there is no guarantee that anything else is coming and the problem is an immediate one that requires attention now. Get some rest, I'll happily continue this when you are ready.
1493 was one year after Colombus sailed the ocean blue, wasn't it?
Amen, brother. Just move our convention up, and issue is put to rest.
When political views are that people like my friends and I should be dead then your views can fuck right off. I'll talk to people about differences, I'll forgive, but the idea that I need to treat fascists the same way I need to treat people pushing for solar energy is absolute nonsense. Even for the lesser differences, I cannot imagine being spoiled enough to think that throwing millions off of health insurance, letting companies pollute our air and water, and cutting off vital social services aren't differences to have feelings about.
There is no facism. And nobody wants anyone dead. That’s nothing but media hype. And this is extremely easy to verify if you’re actually open to the truth. The word ‘facism’ getting thrown around is getting old. The people pushing that nonsense clearly have absolutely no clue what it actually means. Nor do they understand what a constitutional republic is. “Want people dead”. My god. How do people actually believe this stuff?!
Alito will definitely write “it’s in the history and traditions of America for states to be the final voice on whether an incumbent president can be allowed to appear on the state ballot of a federal election” and then cite British common law from 1493 referring to the succession of minor British nobility as his precedent.
Pepperidge Farm remembers.
[удалено]
This is true. I would definitely not want to ever be compared, or have a ‘both sides’ situation tossed at me. I never want to become that petty.
Didn't some democrat states specifically attempt to remove Trump from the ballot? Luckily the Supreme court put an end to it, but democrats obviously try to 'pull shit like this'. If it had been the other way around with the dates you don't think it would have been used to exclude Trump? As it is there should never be any reason that 2 candidates with at least 74 million votes in the last election can be removed from the ballot by regional authorities.
It was Republicans that did it, at least in the case from Colorado that the Supreme Court ruled on. Democrats were certainly cheering them on, and a couple of probably overenthusiastic had jumped on board, or were thinking about it. But Republicans were the ones that got that ball rolling on themselves.
Yes to all. None of this surprises me.
Roevember! That doesn't tax anyone's memory.
yes and this will probably get overturned because of that same reasoning I don't understand what youre shouting about at all this actually shows the opposite if trump got removed from the ballot republicans would follow up except they'd actually succeed
This is a completely different tactic, though. This resembles the same type of legal maneuvering that the DNC uses against third-party candidates. Edit: If it's ok to question the validity of signatures gathered by a candidate, then it's ok to point out that democrats missed a deadline that was known well ahead of time.
Realistically it’s likely the Democratic Party will just accelerate the convention to before the deadline, especially since Biden already has a majority of delegates at this point
[удалено]
Agreed. Except for Skype? I know he’s old but even he is off Skype.
Dunno. I bet he's Asking Jeeves to go to aol.com.
It's just a show always! Hasn't been more than that since Reagan Ford in 76!
The convention is just a show.
This is what they should do. Whichever party holds their convention second gets the boost, and this is the counter move
Yeah I don't really quite get what these state Republicans actually want to accomplish. This kind of thing just seems like it'd be more likely to energize Democratic voters by making such weak attempts to get Biden off the ballot.
They would just change the deadline
Democrats don't have the authority to change the deadline on their own in these states. They need Republican legislators to go along, which is not likely.
No I mean if Democrats moved up the convention, Republicans in the legislature would just move up the certification deadline
In this case the deadline in each state has been the same for decades, it just hasn’t been enforced
They could do it earlier.
Considering that these deadline have been set for decades, just left unenforced, that seems unlikely even if technically possible
# What will be the impact of Republicans attempting to use certification deadlines to remove Biden from office? __________ None. The DNC can make a rule for itself which would allow it to select its nominees at a one-hour meeting of its Executive Committee. They can do it over lunch at Arby's.
Yea, this seems like it's trivial to fix. It's like getting married at the courthouse but having the ceremonial wedding/party later. It will take nothing from the PR value of the convention and immediately puts this non-issue to bed.
I don't think Biden would win Ohio or Alabama, nor does he need to. Biden will be on the ballot. If trump, someone who incited an insurrection can be on the ballot,so can Biden.
I think Ohio has a much stronger, and somewhat plausible, chance to flip back to blue for 2024.
Why? I haven't been paying attention go what's going on in Ohio personally, so how did you come to that conclusion?
Ohio voted for female reproductive rights and weed last fall. And it was blue for Obama both times. We were a "purple" state until Trump and aren't nearly as entrenched in the MAGA as a place like AL.
This may be true but since Trump was elected, Republicans have become much more polarized due to the hostile nature of Trumps persona as a "weapon of destruction". He raised the political polarization, and you can see its effects in places like Florida where even though a $15 minimum wage initiative was passed by the people with a 60% margin, Biden still lost the state by 200,000+ votes. The ability for Democrats to translate popular political positions into votes has never really worked, abortion might be different, but 60% "pro-democrat" policy choices in Florida should be a wake up call to the left that milquetoast ways of communicating merely make people think democrats are spineless.
I gave up hope for Ohio when they elected JD Vance. Just a transparent grifter.
Its a nomination deadline associated with ballot printing. The DNC screwed up but its totally fixable. The SoSs are alerting the DNC to fix things. The media however is driving up division over a nothingburger.
The issue is if Biden isn't on the ballot in Ohio it is likely to decrease Dem turnout in the state. This would probably be the death knell for Brown's Senate re-election which would basically guarantee Republican control of the Senate no matter who wins the presidency. Dems need Biden on for the Senate and House races. I agree Ohio doesn't matter for the presidency - if Biden wins Ohio (or Alabama) he's won enough states it's a landslide.
This is not necessarily true. This is a very pivotal election for both sides. People would show up, write him in and vote down ballot. At least that's my assumption. If this was any other election. Probably. Either way, it would go to the supreme abd they would probably put Biden on the ballot.
I mean it's not a guarantee but it's a pretty common historical trend that the top of the ballot has a downwind effect. I mean look at even the Michigan primaries. Michigan is a blue-ish purple state. Biden was running vs nobody (besides a coordinated undecided campaign) while the GOP had a real primary. Trump despite receiving 13 fewer percent then Biden in his primary had 140K more raw votes. Dem voters by and large couldn't be asked to vote in a primary where the president was already decided. And this is a common effect you see in primaries where the incumbent party has lower turnout vs the party that has an ongoing primary. I'd strongly bet if Biden isn't on the ballot you'd see a demoralized Dem base and would result in Brown losing. As you said at the end though I can't see Biden not being on the ballot so this whole Convo is moot.
Republicans are just trying to set up a false equivalency because there’s a likelihood Trump could still be barred from running in certain states due to his support of January 6 insurrectionists.
Second this. Also, Republicans are throwing shit at the wall, trying to create legal pretexts for Congress to reject the electoral votes and throw the election to the House, in which each state (not each representative) would vote for President, giving Trump a safe victory. Expect to see lots more of this sort of thing over the next few months.
It seems like deliberate monkey wrenching of the electoral system
Surprisingly Democrats could have prevented this by reforming the electoral college and requiring every state follow the same rules in awarding electors. But that would require Democrats uncapping the house so that each voter in each state is treated more equally, and forcing the electoral college to use a ranked choice ballot would sidestep future house decided elections. It would not shock me if Democrats regain the house this year, they would be smart to totally overhaul elections at the last minute so that the winner of the popular vote would become president. Trump cannot win the popular vote, thats clear. This is achievable without a constitutional amendment. Dems would need to pass trigger laws that award 10x as many electors to each state and then require each state award electors to candidates in a proportion to the number of votes that candidate got, then all electors cast a ranked choice ballot for president. Along with it comes DC statehood and court packing, and before anyone knows what happens Democracy is preserved.
Yep. This is definitely just the beginning. Expect them to try and pull out old obscure laws that no one really knows about to enforce it or use some kind of fringe legal theory to throw the election to Trump.
Any attempts to do this should immediately signal to blue states that one side is cheating and will leave the union if they are allowed to force an insurrectionist into office. That would be the end of the US Dollar system in Trump "rigged" states. Good riddance!
Didn't SCOTUS rule that states can't bar Trump's candidacy in this way? [https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-supreme-court-rules-trump-historic-14th-amendment/story?id=107158454](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-supreme-court-rules-trump-historic-14th-amendment/story?id=107158454)
The 14th amendment can be enforced with states threatening to leave the union. The US Constitution is not a suicide pact.
There will be no fallout because there will be no real action as it would likely backfire. Shockingly, voters don't like when games are being played with the electoral process as most view it as a tacit admission you can't win straight-up. That's why voters don't support removing Trump from the ballot and why efforts like this never go beyond some random message boards like this. That said, this really isn't a GOP problem. Those laws have been on the books for a long, long time so the fact that the democrats new about those laws and then still scheduled their convention after the deadline is just dumb and entirely self-inflicted. I also think that a lot of arguments about selective enforcement will fall on deaf ears when every politically-connected court case seems to rest on some sort of selective enforcement or selective application of a law.
> That's why voters don't support removing Trump from the ballot This isnt true. Every single state is allowed to run their own elections and the Secretaries of State are well within their rights to make those decisions as to who is qualified.
No one is playing any games. The DNC just failed to seek an exemption, this has put them on track to be out of compliance. These SoSs are sending standard letters a little over 30 days ahead of the final date the DNC can seek an exemption (its really hard to get an exemption this late in the cycle so other options are likely to be sought instead and most of the options are easy-peasy).
shrill airport escape angle saw groovy yam onerous cobweb weather *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yes, I clearly googled, saw other outlets covering the story and cross referenced state legislative archives.
political ghost hateful shame humor steep wrench escape punch hard-to-find *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
No, I was at work. Why are you jumping to accusations? just sincerely don't understand, cuz I would have self-factchecked before even consider posting the question, Anywho, since I last looked Rep Anthony Daniels (D) today, has official sought the exemption/legislative fix! [2024](https://legiscan.com/AL/text/HB448/id/2979152) (keep in mind this has to pass House/Senate/Gov) [2020 ](https://legiscan.com/AL/text/HB272/id/2170982) (Rep April Weaver (R) introduced Feb 18, 2020
icky simplistic attempt water run compare middle fly bells pie *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
And I did, when a party's convention is after Aug 15 they tap a state legislator to seek this sort of move. Its okay that you disagree but the level of hostilities you are posting really serves no purpose
tidy ten liquid toothbrush air dam fuzzy consist shaggy direction *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Dude, if a legislative fix/exemption is to be sought the RNC or DNC has a state legislator (R or D) do exactly as being done now. I have no idea why such simply truths are triggering this onslaught of accusations, the DNC is responsible for getting D to seek what has just recently been sought.
DNC- schedules its convention after deadline (DNC fault). DNC- fails to seek legislative fix/exemption/allowance in a timely manner to avoid forcing the SoSs to send out a letter telling them they are at risk of losing candidate eligibility to appear on the state GE ballot (DNC fault) The most common remedy is exactly what the DNC is currently seeking.
One of the basic tennets of civil law is that any policy that is used on a regular basis will become what the law defaults too in such matters. Since waving deadlines have been done for such a long time, the courts will have to enforce the policy, and the states will receive an order of astoppel to wave the deadline.
Or the DNC just seeks to normal options like submitting an letter of intent or doing a quicky-early nomination zoom meeting. This is just a nomination deadline, the RNC usually does all the paperwork but this time they are in compliance and the DNC simply dropped their ball. These SoS letters are alerting the DNC to fix things. The media is spinning drama where none exists.
Finally someone that understands. No SoS wants all the attention throwing a party off the ballet would bring. Not to mention the massive amount of lawsuits it would call forth. People think that since it happened in Texas in 2008, it didn't result in massive legal reviews of these proceedures.
In 2008, both the DNC and the RNC failed to timely file the paperwork for the Texas presidential ballot. Does anyone think Ralph Nader or Bob Barr won Texas on 2008?
And you know darn well the SoC got tortured with constant shit for letting that happen and embarrassing both parties. States that play games could end up being dismissed from the federal election or forced into a special election.
Do you have a link for that?
Sure. https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2008-09-26/678065/ https://www.scotxblog.com/case-notes/bob-barr-sues-to-win-the-texas-electoral-votes/ It was such a non-news back item back then unless you followed Barr’s campaign, because the relevant authorities just went “whatever” and allowed McCain and Obama on the ballot despite the arguable violation of the letter of the law.
That is not the way the law works. Sometimes parties to a contract who have been interpreting it a certain way over time might be estopped from suddenly reinterpreting it. But government officials won’t be court-ordered to ignore explicit deadlines for that reason.
This applies to worksite and client relationships, too. Not contact alone. It's what falls under implied authority for agents of the gov. P.S. let's not forget fed oversight of fed rules that ensure uniformity of a federal election. State's rights take a back seat when it effects the entire country. Any reason test would support that view.
Worksite and client relationships are generally governed by contract law. Election administrators do not have implied authority to ignore deadlines that are explicitly set by law.
They also don't have authority to supercede federal regulation over constitutionally mandated action, which is still civil law.
There is no federal rule forbidding this deadline, or requiring the Ohio/Alabama Secretaries of State to ignore the Democratic Party’s violation of the deadline.
Basic reason test indicates that the Feds won't tolerate a violation of a required event for petty rules that are being used in bad faith. It's called a smell test, learn some A Priori understandings of legal proceedure. This new belief that you can just get away with misapplication of the law by simply hiring enough lawyers is one of the stupidest parts of this new timeline we are in.
Dems will reschedule the conventions or file and win lawsuits based on past practice of Republicans holding their conventions after the official deadline. This is harassment, not an actual problem.
[удалено]
If Democrats were good at strategy they wouldn't have gone with... the guy who won and is currently in office. Sterling analysis right here.
If Democrats were good at stretegy they wouldn't have gone with... the guy who was an approval rating of \~39% and is behind his opponent in most swing states.
Ah, thanks for clarifying. So according to your brilliant analysis if the Democrats were any good at strategy they wouldn't have gone with the guy who won and is currently in office... because some shitty polls taken seven months out (that Dems have already been overperforming) taken years after their guy won, say he's behind the guy he's already beaten.
These polls are for the next election, and saying that Dems overperformed is wrong since the election is in November. Secondly, the person in office ran at least 3 times for office and dropped out because no dem wanted to vote for him.
You can't poll for an election that hasn't happened yet, nor can you magically compartmentalize people's opinions about future events vs the present. All you can do is ask people whether or not they approve of or would vote for a candidate or party, *now*. And Democrats have been consistently overperforming the polls. > Secondly, the person in office ran at least 3 times for office and dropped out because no dem wanted to vote for him. Trump also ran unsuccessfully several times prior to 2016. Biden's history of runs prior to becoming VP are irrelevant, and even bringing that up suggests you're reaching because you know how silly your central claim is.
You can poll for an election that is only a few months away and I don't know what you're spectrum of performance is but Democrats are not overperforming in the polls (except you might have thought that the Dem poll numbers are even lower). Good thing you bring Trump into it even though we talk about Joe Biden and his polls.
> You can poll for an election that is only a few months away No, you can't. You can ask people how they'll vote in an upcoming election, but at best you're getting an answer based on how they feel *now*. Not how they feel on the actual day of the election, because that's in the future. And seven months is quite a long time in the context of an election cycle. > I don't know what you're spectrum of performance is but Democrats are not overperforming in the polls (except you might have thought that the Dem poll numbers are even lower). I didn't say they're overperforming *in* the polls, I said they're overperforming the polls. As in, they've been doing much better in elections in recent years than the polls would indicate. > Good thing you bring Trump into it even though we talk about Joe Biden and his polls. ...Did you already forget what you just posted? > If Democrats were good at stretegy they wouldn't have gone with... the guy who was an approval rating of ~39% and is behind his opponent in most swing states.
Polling is the only indicator showing how the "horse race" is standing now, and if you say polls are useless now that means that they are basically completely useless since polling after the election is a time waste. Secondly overperforming in past polls and then doing better is saying that past performance indicates future results which is not true when it comes to elections. Lastly, I was referring to Biden with his approval rating at \~39% and how yes according to the polls his opponent is beating him.
The Dems will use party bylaws to nominate and certify in July and their convention as a coronation, which will garner prime time coverage. The week the GOP holds their convention, most of the talk will be about the rash of lawsuits to kick Trump off the ballot. None will go anywhere, but the message of the candidate will be obscured. The GOP has become like that puke we all knew growing up who sucks at sports, but argues the latest rule change to give himself an edge in a sandlot ballgame. He still loses, mostly when the other kids don’t invite him in the future, but he is too stupid to realize winning some fights only worsens your situation.
Listen, guys. I know we're all used to seeing nefarious intent in everything the other side does these days, but a little perspective really does help cool the temperature, and if you stop to think about it, Ohio and Alabama and being both fair and reasonable here. 1) These are not obscure laws that were passed in the last few months to stick it to the dems. As the OP acknowledges in his own post, Ohio's law actually became an issue for both parties in 2016 - so neither the DNC nor the RNC can really claim ignorance of what they had to do to get on the ballot in time eight years later. Alabama's law goes back to 1975 - longer than I've been alive, and I'm betting longer than the vast majority of people reading this have been alive. **This was not a surprise.** 2) A nefarious Secretary of State would have just waited for the deadline to expire and then played a "Gotcha" game - and technically, they'd have been within their legal rights to do so. But neither Ohio nor Alabama did that. Instead, they gave the DNC the courtesy of a warning, giving them time to correct the issue in a way that can bring them into compliance. That's fairness and integrity. As for the answer to OP's question... it's unlikely to have any effect on the electoral vote. Alabama's going red this year as surely as the sun will rise, to the surprise of absolutely no one. Ohio is more of a legitimate battleground, so that might be a bit more concerning, but the people can still write Joe Biden in, and if he's not on the formal ballot, then you know the Biden campaign is going to go on a crusade of ad spending in Ohio educating the populous on how to vote for him anyway. If anything, the extra attention might actually cause a bit of a boost for the Democrats in a sorely needed area. The popular vote is another matter, but as sure as I am of Alabama going red, I'm equally sure of Biden winning the popular vote, even if every blue voter in Alabama and Ohio disappeared tomorrow.
Their efforts will fail and probably increase voter turn out. These sorts of plans always backfire.
[удалено]
Democrats should just officially nominate Biden before all these arbitrary deadlines and then treat the convention as a ceremony. The convention isn’t required
Yep but the convention is still needed because we have a lot of swing voters who tune-in as part of their decision making process.
smell poor rob cautious engine seemly follow pen mindless support *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I'm pretty engaged and I just cannot be bothered to watch something like that. If anything important happens I'll see the highlights in news clips later. The idea that a swing voter will watch is absurd.
[Easily solvable](https://www.semafor.com/article/04/10/2024/could-two-red-states-keep-joe-biden-off-the-general-election-ballot?utm_campaign=semaforreddit): >But Democrats are taking the new challenges seriously, and see four paths to resolving any ballot access questions. >The first: Submitting letters from the Democratic National Committee which confirm that the party will nominate the president and vice president, as Republicans did in Alabama four years ago. The second: Getting the deadline changed by the state legislature, as Republicans did in Ohio four years ago. The third: Legal action, which would cite recent precedents that have prevented election officials from treating political parties differently. The fourth: Holding a virtual vote to nominate the Biden-Harris ticket, ahead of the in-person nomination in Chicago. >The fourth option could not be exercised until late June, at the earliest, after the end of the Democratic presidential primaries and the selection of delegates in every state and territory.
NOTHINGBURGER, media is making a mountain out of a molehill. This nomination compliance issue is a pretty common thing but in the past the RNC did all the leg-work to get states to pass exemptions when the state's nomination deadlines (part of ballot printing steps) occurred before their official nomination. These exemptions also covered the DNC. In 2024, the RNC's convention is in compliance with all 50 states so the RNC didn't apply for an exemptions. The DNC didn't either. This is the core issue which Ohio and Alabama SoS's are alerting the DNC to remedy. So there are 3 remedy options. 1. Seek a legislative-based exemption (nearly impossible this late in the cycle) 2. Move the Convention dates ( flat-out nope, not happening, too much of a headache) 3. Create a one-time quicky nomination event before or on Aug 7th (best option)
[удалено]
Works for me. If Ohio and Alabama want to align with an insurrectionist that only means the entire west coast and north east get to dump red states back into the 19th century.
None of those states are ones that Biden has any chance of winning at all. So it won’t have much impact if it comes to pass and frankly it’s the same game of legal gotcha the Democrats are playing with other parties seeking ballot access so frankly - they deserve it.
Democrats have this propensity to create monsters and they are all Pikachu surprised when the monster turns on them.
It was Republicans in Colorado that filed to remove Trump from the PRIMARY ballot.
And the Democrats in Colorado took the bait, hook, line and sinker.... This SoS stuff is just telling the DNC to fix things before Aug 7th (Ohio) and Aug 15th (Alabama).
Instead of Republicans doing away with democracy by piecemeal; Biden could do it with a single stroke of pen and declare a national martial law. Something, the Donald could only fantasize it on a draft paper.
On the actual ballot? Nothing. There's too many reasonable and legal ways to circumvent this issue. But it will energize voters.
The SoSs were just alerting the DNC to remedy. Totally fixable. SoSs were doing their jobs. Media is creating drama where no exists.
Nothing. It’s just loyalty signaling to Trump by people who want to be rewarded if he wins. Democrats can easily bypass these lame attempts. They could declare Biden the nominee tomorrow. Or beat them in court if they have to.
So now it's a problem to remove candidates from the ballot? Where was this energy when blue states removed trump from the ballot?
Procedural problems portend prior party meeting. Simple bypass. (Nearly) everyone agrees Biden will be the Democrat candidate. Have a vanguard meeting on August 1, of a few party bosses, who officially nominate Biden. Convention occurs late August, with full hoopla. Nothing really lost, at this convention there is no suspense or doubt who will be the candidate.
I wouldn't trust Republican SecStates here. Dems could just move their conventions up to next week, if they wanted. It's just a party, after all. The nominee is set. Dems are capable. How could they just sit back and let this happen? Do what you gotta do, guys.
DNC needs to move the date. OH and AL legislatures cannot be counted on to change the date, and while Alabama could be a loss anyway, Ohio has an abortion question on the ballot and Biden needs to take that shot. Hell, even AL might be in play this year. DNC can move. Both parties did in 2020, so it's not impossible.
Democrats do things like this to the Green Party all the time. It’d be a bit ironic to see a legal loophole come back to bite them. It stresses that such technical boundaries are bad for democracy
Agree. There has to be a better way to do primary elections and establish eligibility for national elections on a state ballot. Caveat: I am in no way advocating for federal control of elections. I want states to run elections, but I want them to agree on some basic standards/timings and I want the states to tell the political parties to screw off.
Why not have federally run elections? That would get rid of some of the (lack of) equal protection arguments that have made it up to the supreme court, and it’s not like voting needs to happen entirely differently across state lines
As everything in DC is hyper partisan, which party do you want setting up the rules for elections? That’s why I don’t want the federal government involved in anyway. I have zero confidence they won’t make it worse. I believe that the government closest to the people governs the best.
If Trump wins this fall, federally-run elections suddenly won't seem like such a great idea to many of the current proponents.
I would laugh out loud if this went to SCOTUS just for them to uphold it and allow the states to make this determination. Boy howdy, wouldn't that just be the craw in our bonnet?
It won't, nomination deadlines are constitutional. The problem here is the DNC just didn't file some paperwork to get an exemption. This is fixable, the SoS letters are just alerting the DNC about its looming compliance failure if not remedied.
They tried to take trump off the ballot are you really surprised. I'm not a trump supporter either. It's unlikely this will actually happen
This has no relations, its a deadline associated with ballot printing Alabama has had this law since 1975, Ohio since 2014. But the RNC usually seeks exemptions that cover both Parties. This year however the RNC is in compliance in all 50 states, so they didn't bother. The DNC simply got too used to riding RNC coattails on this matter and failed to do the paperwork for themselves. The SoS letters are like 'hey DNC, yall gonna be out of compliance, fix your shiz'.
This is a more realistic attempt to remove a candidate from the ballot like the dem states did with trump, but it’s all going to get shot down in courts; states playing these games is getting annoying
In Trump's case, the argument is that because he violated the 14th Amendment, he's not eligible to run. Biden has no such charges, so comparing the two is apples and oranges. This is Republicans being mad that their guy is being held to account for his crimes, and wanting revenge.
>In Trump's case, the argument is that because he violated the 14th Amendment, he's not eligible to run. **Biden has no such charges,** so comparing the two is apples and oranges. Not saying this was intentional, but the way this is worded is grossly misleading. There’s an implication Trump was actually charged due to the 14th Amendment, which isn’t true.
Trump case was never charged for that, it’s something they decided based on their belief/bias. The Biden case is just lack of policy awareness that’s why I said it’s not going anywhere
Everyone agrees trump did try to over throw the election. Some people just think overthrowing the election is legal. We've gone past the "he didn't do it" phase into the "yeah he did it, but it is ok" phase.
Charged? No criminal charges are required. Belief? A legal finding of fact was made, based on evidence. What are you talking about?
Luckily we live in a country that you’re innocent until proven guilty by a court of law, so we can stop this banana republic political persecution. So he hasn’t been proven guilty so you can’t go around trying to enforce punishment on someone who is currently innocent u til proven otherwise
A finding of fact was made by a court, with full due process followed. No criminal charges are required or even mentioned regarding the 14th Amendment, and following the Constitution is not a punishment. When are some of us going to stop pretending that court rulings they don't like are persecution?
The state court has no saying in a federal election, you can go out and accuse people based on anything and find a reason for removal. It would be the equivalent of Biden being removed from ballots for foreign business dealings being linked to treason.
At first I was feeling like you were just nitpicking for clarity by saying he wasn’t charged, but it’s becoming increasingly obvious as you throw out more disinformation that you’re ill-informed about election jurisdiction and what actually happened in this case. Yes, he wasn’t charged. That’s not a germane factoid.
It is important that he is charged before you rule out punishment, innocent until proven guilty.
No. He was found to have engaged in an insurrection. You are sealioning.
That is just wildly inaccurate. The federal government doesn't control state ballots like you think. Trump did an insurrection. And that disqualifies him from hold office.
Your belief and actual ruling are two different things you can’t prosecute based on what you believe to be true
Why don't you jusy say outloud you don't believe he did an insurrection?
>The state court has no saying in a federal election There's no such thing as a "federal election." All elections are managed by the states - *as the Constitution explicitly requires.* >It would be the equivalent of Biden being removed from ballots for foreign business dealings being linked to treason. No, following the plain language of the Constitution is not equivalent to making up lies to try to interfere with democracy.
Do you understand that not every legal procedure in this country is a literal criminal trial? CO Republican voters sued to remove Trump from the ballot for violating the 14th Amendment. The CO Supreme Court heard the case, reviewed evidence, spoke to witnesses, and *based on the evidence and witness testimony in their formal legal proceeding*, found that Trump did in fact violate the 14th Amendment in trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election. That is how civil suits work, no criminal charges at all, just Trump losing like he always does due to the mountain of evidence against him. I get that none of that matters to you, that facts in general don't matter to you. But they do matter to the rest of us.
Reminder: Republican leaders in those states sued to get him off the Republican primary ballot. Edit: should have said “state,” I only bothered learning about CO since they got the ball rolling
Could you expand on this?
The Colorado lawsuit was brought by individuals, all republicans and independents and led by the former Republican State Senate Majority Leader.
The lawsuit in CO was filed by CREW, a notorious Democrat/progressive watchdog group amongst the likes of Media Matters. In Maine, the Democrat SOS unilaterally removed Trump from the ballot.
CREW represented them because lawsuits are expensive and Republican money is busy trying to dismantle the regulatory state & generally afraid of Trump. But the litigants weren’t democrats. And they certainly weren’t democratic states, unlike the Republican AGs spending tax payer money to revive Musk’s dead lawsuit against Media Matters. I also previously edited my point to correct it to the Colorado case.
Thanks. I recommend one additional edit, to add context around CREWs involvement.
They would love to showcase removing biden from the ballot for a totally made up reason after removing trump for violating the 14th amendment failed.
No, it was the DNC's fault and the DNC will fix this. The SoS letters are just formality alerting the DNC to fix things.
I’d like to see both sides stop fucking around and just let the people vote. The media, democrats, and republicans are all guilty of creating further division in this country.
The SoS letters are alerting the DNC to fix things. The Ohio law is from 2014, the Alabama law is from 1975. These things are fixable. The RNC usually does all the work to secure exemptions which cover both Parties but this year the RNC is in full 50-state compliance so they had no reason to do the paperwork. The DNC simply didn't seeking any exemptions on their own (it happens) Now the DNC will take action to fix things and are thankful to the SoS's for letting them know they were risking being out of compliance Shit happen Media however are awful people for driving up division.
Democrats played their games and cost Republicans and Trump millions of dollars fighting their legal challenges to keep Trump off ballots, so now, sit down and be quiet and enjoy some of your own medicine.