Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
This is not a question of being pro or anti Trump. And it has nothing to do with being pro or anti Biden.
Given that there are at least two states now refusing to allow Trump on a ballot, and the fact that there will likely be many more to follow, why would the GOP, as a whole, be so focused on selecting Trump as their nominee? They'd be handing the ejection to the Democratic party and likely Biden (which I'm not a big fan of anyway).
Wouldn't it make sense to select a nominee that can run in all 50 states and be recognized as President in all 50 states?
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
3Opinion
Why reward the Democrats' illegal attempts to keep him off the ballot, especially when he leads in the polls?
I doubt see anything illegal on the side of the democrats at all and, again, that's by no means coming from someone who is pro-Biden. I don't like the job he has done.
But Trump absolutely created the insurrection on January 6, 2021. To deny that would be equivalent to sticking one's head in the sand. The only argument he really has is not being found guilty in a court of law - yet.
The point is that, as it sets, there are two states he's not even allowed on the ballot. So, if I want the GOP to stand a chance in the election, I'm going to be resistant to place Trump as my nominee -- BECAUSE YOU KNOW HE WON'T EVEN APPEAR ON THE BALLOT IN CERTAIN STATES.
Let me get this right- you think it's perfectly legal for a state's Secretary of State to decide that Trump can't be on the ballot in Maine based 1) on a false interpretation of part of the 14th Amendment, 2) based on the false claim that he created an insurrection and 3) without due process- based on hearing only one side's arguments.
You are simply not credible. And you supporting illegal efforts to keep a candidate off ballots, something that it isn't even clear that a state Secretary of State can even do. Note also that a Michigan court shot down an attempt to get Trump removed from that state's ballot and the California Secretary of State has done the same. You are rewarding undemocratic, totalitarian acts, and what makes you think that some other candidate would be able to keep all of Trump's support?
I don't think it's legal, it is legal. Just as there are certain states that are allowing him to stay on the ballot, others are not.
The point of the question is not being pro-Trump. There are, so far, two states that have allowed him to stay on the ballot, two that have removed him. Eventually each state will make their own determination -- one side or the other.
The SCOTUS has three possible options: listen to the case and vote for leaving Trump on the ballot, listen to the case and remove him from the ballot, or refuse to listen to the case altogether, leaving it up to the individual states. In addition to those options, it's possible they could rule that he can stay on the ballot for now but, if he's found guilty on any of the charges related to January 6, he'll be ineligible to run or be removed from office.
There's an old saying about placing all your eggs into one basket. Unfortunately, that's what the GOP is doing by not rallying around any other nominee. They're likely going to hand the election to whomever runs for the Democrats.
You're making a complete fool of yourself by suggesting that it's legal for some states to remove a presidential candidate from the ballot when they meet all requirements. Not only is it based on a very inaccurate interpretation of the 14th Amendment, you're suggesting it's up to the states to decide who can run for President when in fact the federal Constitution has already set the terms of eligibility and the 14th Amendment is federal law that reserved its powers to the federal government.
And that's before anyone points out the case for insurrection isn't even there. Not even overzealous special prosector Jack Smith deigned to so much as charge Trump with the amorphous claim of "insurrection".
But do tell us exactly which section of the Federal Criminal Code Trump has allegedly violated with regards to "insurrection".
At the end of the day, you can't remove someone from the ballot based on "hearsay" or mere allegations. And if they can do it to Trump, why wouldn't they do it to anyone else the Republicans nominate? And why wouldn't Republican-run states do the same to Biden or whomever the Democrats' nominee is? Do you really want to encourage this sort of stuff?
I don't see you providing any evidence that Trump's supporters will all come out for Haley or DeSantis, but your arguments are clearly grounded in opportunism and opposition to Trump rather than any legal, constitutional basis. All you're saying is, "they did it, so it's legal".
One final thing- the removal from the ballot in Colorado and Maine has been stayed, so you aren't even accurate about that.
You right. It's been stayed so the Supreme Court can rule if they wish. Everyone realizes that if the Supreme Court rules, they'll be the ones to determine the argument.
Speaking of which, this isn't meant to be an argument here. You and anyone else can yell that Trump should be allowed to run. And anyone else can yell that he can't.
What makes a difference is what the individual states rule, along with the Supreme Court If it decides to rule.
As of now, he's not allowed on at least two ballots.
"Stayed" means he's on the ballot in Colorado and Maine.
As I pointed out, individual states do not have the right to overrule the Federal Constitution, which sets the eligibility requirements to serve as President. That is the larger and more salient point.
More specific to this matter, Trump did not commit "insurrection", and a law passed which applied to people who fought for the Confederacy in the Civil War doesn't apply to him. Nor is not allowing due process for Trump permitted by law.
Note also that former Confederates except for top leaders were pardoned by an act of Congress in 1872, which makes the argument that the law banning Confederates from holding public office is applicable today even weaker.
Many Republicans believe he is the last hope for saving the country from collapse. I don't entirely agree. If Trump were beamed up, DeSantis could do it as well.
I think you are right about DeSantis; however, it is about the democratic process here, and right now it looks like a majority of Republicans want Trump to be the nominee.
@Avicenna And it looks somewhat as though he is breaking into the Black and Legal Latino communities. some are beginning to see him as another guy oppressed by The Man. He is.
Yeah, I think that is why the Democrats are so terrified of him and are trying to keep him from running- if more people wake up to the Democrats' propaganda, they won't be able to keep screwing everyone over like they are now. And Trump is definitely a victim of criminal elites.
@Avicenna Trump really is a threat to THEIR "democracy", which is mob rule. They are terrified that he will dismantle the swamp and stir the pot of everything all the way up to the WEF.
Please mods, read my intent here. There really is a risk of an attempted assassination. Ask Tucker!
You know who else removes their political opponents from ballots during "elections"? Dictators.
Barack Obama had a habit of getting his opponents disqualified in Illinois, including in his successful Senate race.
And the Maine Secretary of State met with Biden and Harris at the White House last year.
@Avicenna Yet again the things they accuse Trump of being (threat to our democracy? OMG) is exactly what they are doing.
100% accurate. It's as if they are Stalinist propagandists... oh wait...
Be the first girl to share an opinion
and earn 3 more Xper points!