IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 30th August 2023, 06:10 PM   #281
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 23,962
Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger View Post
That's harder to argue.
Especially since I just found the passage in the Florida constitution that bars convicted felons from holding office. (Fl. Const. Art. VII Sec. 4.) It's not just an administrative decision. It's a provision in the state constitution.

Quote:
Let's just make that the banner headline for everything in this subforum.

Quote:
In Connecticut, for example,...
That's a good example of state variance. Candidates for the public offices named in the state constitution must be "electors" (registered voters) in the state. The constitution adds other qualifications for individual offices: the normal stuff like age and residency. But another passage in the Constitution endows the state legislature with the authority to set qualifications for who may be an elector. That effectively establishes that eligibility for elected office in Connecticut is determined party by statute.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2023, 06:26 PM   #282
jt512
Master Poster
 
jt512's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,468
David Frum has published a cogent argument that the 14h Amendment does not apply (or should not be applied to) Trump.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230829...ndment/675163/

Last edited by jt512; 30th August 2023 at 06:36 PM.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2023, 09:56 PM   #283
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 44,215
Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
David Frum has published a cogent argument that the 14h Amendment does not apply (or should not be applied to) Trump.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230829...ndment/675163/
Care to summarise?

It won't load for me.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th August 2023, 10:17 PM   #284
gabeygoat
Graduate Poster
 
gabeygoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hard Corvallis Oregon
Posts: 1,746
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
No, I know of no other lawsuits or attempts by anyone in state govt. to have Trump banned from running. But lots of folks have written about it.
ok, so you're panicking about something that isn't happening
__________________
"May I interest you in some coconut milk?" ~Akhenaten Wallabe Esq
gabeygoat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 12:51 AM   #285
jt512
Master Poster
 
jt512's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,468
Originally Posted by Orphia Nay View Post
Care to summarise?

Honestly, no. I could not do the article justice, and itís not a long article. I recommend reading the original.

Quote:
It won't load for me.

It loads very slowly, and you may have to scroll down past a black section to see the text. I tried it in two different browsers. It eventually loaded in both.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 01:32 AM   #286
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31į57'S 115į57'E
Posts: 20,730
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Trump has never won a popular vote for President.
That is not accurate. Trump has never won a "plurality" of the votes. However, by the same token, a majority of the voters never voted against Trump.

Since there is no such thing as a "runoff" election in the US, we will never know if Trump could have won a fair election.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 07:01 AM   #287
Hercules56
Philosopher
 
Hercules56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 7,504
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
That is not accurate. Trump has never won a "plurality" of the votes. However, by the same token, a majority of the voters never voted against Trump.

Since there is no such thing as a "runoff" election in the US, we will never know if Trump could have won a fair election.
Wrong. Biden won 51% of all votes in 2020.

In 2016 55% of voters voted for someone other than Trump.
__________________
theliberalgunclub.com

"The mission of The Liberal Gun Club is to provide a pro-Second Amendment voice for left-of-center gun owners in the national conversations on firearms."

Last edited by Hercules56; 31st August 2023 at 07:02 AM.
Hercules56 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 07:02 AM   #288
Hercules56
Philosopher
 
Hercules56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 7,504
Originally Posted by gabeygoat View Post
ok, so you're panicking about something that isn't happening
Panicking??

LOL!!!...No ma'am.
__________________
theliberalgunclub.com

"The mission of The Liberal Gun Club is to provide a pro-Second Amendment voice for left-of-center gun owners in the national conversations on firearms."
Hercules56 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 07:17 AM   #289
Parsman
Muse
 
Parsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 984
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
That is not accurate. Trump has never won a "plurality" of the votes. However, by the same token, a majority of the voters never voted against Trump.

Since there is no such thing as a "runoff" election in the US, we will never know if Trump could have won a fair election.
If Trump got less than 50% of votes cast in the USA the majority of those who voted did not vote for him. So he won neither a plurality or a majority of the votes cast in the elections of 2016 and 2020 which were both as fair as elections can be under the American system.
__________________
I was not; I have been; I am not; I am content - Epicurus

When you're dead you don't know that you're dead, all the pain is felt by others....................the same thing happens when you're stupid.
Parsman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 07:56 AM   #290
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31į57'S 115į57'E
Posts: 20,730
Originally Posted by Parsman View Post
If Trump got less than 50% of votes cast in the USA the majority of those who voted did not vote for him. So he won neither a plurality or a majority of the votes cast in the elections of 2016 and 2020 which were both as fair as elections can be under the American system.
As far as 2016 is concerned, the same argument also applies to Hillary Clinton.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 10:12 AM   #291
Hercules56
Philosopher
 
Hercules56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 7,504
It appears the attorney general and the Secretary of State of New Hampshire are officially looking into this. Michigan as well.
__________________
theliberalgunclub.com

"The mission of The Liberal Gun Club is to provide a pro-Second Amendment voice for left-of-center gun owners in the national conversations on firearms."
Hercules56 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 11:23 AM   #292
Paul2
Philosopher
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,015
Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
David Frum has published a cogent argument that the 14h Amendment does not apply (or should not be applied to) Trump.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230829...ndment/675163/
Frum has said some excellent things in the past, but I see a lack of cogency in his fear about the reaction if SCOTUS rules *for* Trump being on the ballot ("the rage and chaos would be reversed"). The ease of making such a prediction (since it's unfalsifiable for as long as anyone will remember that article) is the converse of the probable lack of calls to engage in rage and chaos if SCOTUS ruled for Trump from the side that bases their positions in terms of respect for the rule of law and seeks to provide evidence for same. See the 2000 election for precedent.
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 11:34 AM   #293
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 35,505
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
As far as 2016 is concerned, the same argument also applies to Hillary Clinton.
...whose subsequent campaign to subvert the election was therefore.....oh wait a second....
__________________
Like many humorless and indignant people, he is hard on everybody but himself, and does not perceive it when he fails his own ideal (MoliŤre)

A pedant is a man who studies a vacuum through instruments that allow him to draw cross-sections of the details (John Ciardi)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 04:32 PM   #294
jt512
Master Poster
 
jt512's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,468
Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post
Frum has said some excellent things in the past, but I see a lack of cogency in his fear about the reaction if SCOTUS rules *for* Trump being on the ballot ("the rage and chaos would be reversed").

I think you have a good point. A ruling that the 14th Amendment does not apply to Trump would basically be upholding the status quo, and it is hard to see how much sustenance an objection to merely upholding the status quo would have.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 04:55 PM   #295
Hercules56
Philosopher
 
Hercules56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 7,504
Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post
Frum has said some excellent things in the past, but I see a lack of cogency in his fear about the reaction if SCOTUS rules *for* Trump being on the ballot ("the rage and chaos would be reversed"). The ease of making such a prediction (since it's unfalsifiable for as long as anyone will remember that article) is the converse of the probable lack of calls to engage in rage and chaos if SCOTUS ruled for Trump from the side that bases their positions in terms of respect for the rule of law and seeks to provide evidence for same. See the 2000 election for precedent.
Frum is a smart guy:

"Stopping Trump by electoral means will be a tough and arduous fight. The fancied alternatives are dreams and delusions. Legal process can prosecute and punish crimes. It cannot save a nation from itself. That duty falls instead on each of us.

This summer’s wish for a constitutional anti-Trump magic wand is an unfeasible, unhelpful fantasy. Let it go.
"
__________________
theliberalgunclub.com

"The mission of The Liberal Gun Club is to provide a pro-Second Amendment voice for left-of-center gun owners in the national conversations on firearms."
Hercules56 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 05:13 PM   #296
slyjoe
Illuminator
 
slyjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ
Posts: 3,633
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
Frum is a smart guy:

"Stopping Trump by electoral means will be a tough and arduous fight. The fancied alternatives are dreams and delusions. Legal process can prosecute and punish crimes. It cannot save a nation from itself. That duty falls instead on each of us.

This summerís wish for a constitutional anti-Trump magic wand is an unfeasible, unhelpful fantasy. Let it go.
"
I would ask Frum why he thinks the 14th amendment exists.
__________________
"You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade
slyjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 05:28 PM   #297
jt512
Master Poster
 
jt512's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,468
Originally Posted by slyjoe View Post
I would ask Frum why he thinks the 14th amendment exists.

You donít have to ask him. You just have to read his article.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 05:43 PM   #298
slyjoe
Illuminator
 
slyjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ
Posts: 3,633
Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
You donít have to ask him. You just have to read his article.
I did read the article. Seems like a lot of hand-wringing about chaos mixed in with some good points; i.e., Republicans could do the same thing.
__________________
"You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade
slyjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 05:49 PM   #299
jt512
Master Poster
 
jt512's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,468
Originally Posted by slyjoe View Post
I did read the article. Seems like a lot of hand-wringing about chaos mixed in with some good points; i.e., Republicans could do the same thing.

Sorry, but that’s just nonsense. You ask why Frum thinks the amendment exists. He clearly states that he thinks that the amendment was written specifically and exclusively to bar supporters of the Confederacy from holding public office, and he clearly explains his rationale for that opinion.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 06:07 PM   #300
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 23,962
Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
Sorry, but thatís just nonsense. You ask why Frum thinks the amendment exists. He clearly states that he thinks that the amendment was written specifically and exclusively to bar supporters of the Confederacy from holding public office, and he clearly explains his rationale for that opinion.
But he ignores when it was invoked in the 20th century. If you cherry-pick your evidence, the conclusion can look quite persuasive.

The fact that Congress granted an amnesty in the 1870s to all former Confederate soldiers and officials could lead one to suspect the attempts by former Confederacy officials to take power was the original motivation for the amendment. But it does not then follow that the amendment is thereafter just a lame duck. The amnesty was narrowly focused.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st August 2023, 10:22 PM   #301
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 44,215
"On Wednesday, a long-shot Republican presidential candidate, John Anthony Castro, of Texas, filed a complaint in a New Hampshire court contending the 14th Amendment barred Trump from that stateís ballot."

https://apnews.com/article/9c5f79203...35a48e708ad725
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2023, 12:43 AM   #302
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 37,266
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
Wrong. Biden won 51% of all votes in 2020.

In 2016 55% of voters voted for someone other than Trump.
55% of those who voted voted for someone other than Trump.

32% of people didn't, or couldn't vote.

"Only" around 37% of eligible voters voted against Trump.

Unless mandatory voting is introduced then it's unlikely that any candidate would have the majority of eligible voters voting against, or for, them.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2023, 05:33 PM   #303
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31į57'S 115į57'E
Posts: 20,730
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
...whose subsequent campaign to subvert the election was therefore.....oh wait a second....
Did you not read the post from Parsman that I quoted?
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2023, 07:02 AM   #304
Paul2
Philosopher
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,015
Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
Sorry, but thatís just nonsense. You ask why Frum thinks the amendment exists. He clearly states that he thinks that the amendment was written specifically and exclusively to bar supporters of the Confederacy from holding public office, and he clearly explains his rationale for that opinion.
If anyone wants me to, Iíll track down the link I posted on another forum (not Isf) from the congressional record at the time the 14th amendment was being debated that has Senator Henderson of Missouri making the comment that the 14th Amendment would apply to future rebellions, for the constitutional originalists out there.
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2023, 07:03 AM   #305
Paul2
Philosopher
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,015
Originally Posted by Orphia Nay View Post
"On Wednesday, a long-shot Republican presidential candidate, John Anthony Castro, of Texas, filed a complaint in a New Hampshire court contending the 14th Amendment barred Trump from that stateís ballot."

https://apnews.com/article/9c5f79203...35a48e708ad725
Presumably he has standing.
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2023, 09:03 AM   #306
slyjoe
Illuminator
 
slyjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ
Posts: 3,633
Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
Sorry, but that’s just nonsense. You ask why Frum thinks the amendment exists. He clearly states that he thinks that the amendment was written specifically and exclusively to bar supporters of the Confederacy from holding public office, and he clearly explains his rationale for that opinion.
So the the government put in an amendment to the constitution EXCLUSIVELY to bar supporters of the Confederacy from holding office? I think Frum is wrong about that. Any amendment, including the 14th, has to be considered as applying in the FUTURE as well.

Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
But he ignores when it was invoked in the 20th century. If you cherry-pick your evidence, the conclusion can look quite persuasive.

The fact that Congress granted an amnesty in the 1870s to all former Confederate soldiers and officials could lead one to suspect the attempts by former Confederacy officials to take power was the original motivation for the amendment. But it does not then follow that the amendment is thereafter just a lame duck. The amnesty was narrowly focused.
Exactly. I can see the amnesty being narrowly focused, but an Amendment? I don't think so.
__________________
"You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade

Last edited by slyjoe; 2nd September 2023 at 09:05 AM.
slyjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2023, 09:04 AM   #307
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 23,962
Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post
Presumably he has standing.
You presume accurately, in that Castro advances a legally colorable claim for standing as a competing candidate for the primary election. Here's the complaint:

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-co...cuit-court.pdf

It's much better pled than Caplan's, both in form and substance. This one will have to be taken seriously.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd September 2023, 05:57 PM   #308
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,432
Sen. Tim Kaine says ‘powerful argument’ 14th Amendment could disqualify Trump.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/03/polit...14th-amendment
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2023, 04:47 AM   #309
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 27,565
We need to enjoy Trump's disqualification as a nice surprise and kick the **** out of him while he's down. The 527s need to be hammering him and the next three leaders in the Republican polls with charges of stupidity and treason. Flood the zone with Trump telling us to ingest bleach, the DeSantis boy getting his ass kicked by Disney and Ramaswamy just talking (with an edit of Christie saying he sounds like Chat GPT). Democrats are too damn nice. Go ugly, go negative early. Just assume one of those three ***** will get the nomination and hammer them. Trump's disqualification, while deserved isn't a plan of action.
__________________
Fight like a Ukrainian.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2023, 05:03 AM   #310
Armitage72
Philosopher
 
Armitage72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 8,070
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
Flood the zone with Trump telling us to ingest bleach,

People keep repeating that claim, and it just isn't true.
He suggested injecting bleach.
Armitage72 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2023, 06:48 AM   #311
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 112,544
It's all about how and who would enforce such a ban?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2023, 07:27 AM   #312
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 27,565
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
It's all about how and who would enforce such a ban?
Two secretaries of state/commonwealth would be enough if the were the right ones. If Trump isn't on the ballot in Pennsylvania and Michigan there's no point in him running. There are other combinations but if he is disqualified on the ballot in both of those states, it might be mathematically possible for him to win but it would not be politically possible.

That said, disqualification is a nice to have but no one should plan on it.
__________________
Fight like a Ukrainian.

Last edited by Craig4; 4th September 2023 at 07:28 AM.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2023, 06:23 PM   #313
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 23,962
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
It's all about how and who would enforce such a ban?
Where membership in Congress is concerned, Congress has the only and final say. And they've used the 14th Amendment before. The decision is unreviewable in court because the Constitution doesn't empower the judiciary with any authority over who sits in Congress. Congress is self-regulating.

We're focusing on the secretaries of state (or whoever the election official is in each state) because they control the ballot. Specifically they control the popular election by which most states choose their electors. The defendant in Castro's case in New Hampshire is the election commission for that state, which seems plausible. All those actions would be reviewable in courts with a line of jurisdiction that would end at the Supreme Court.

But what if Trump were on the ballot? What if individual electors declined to vote for him? What if the governor of the state refused to certify the vote? All these could leverage 14th Amendment ineligibility. Yes, all these actions too are reviewable along the same path. But wouldn't it be fun to watch?
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2023, 02:49 AM   #314
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
 
Andy_Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 46,371
"Legal Scholars” being Miller, Dershowitz, Fitton, Gaetz, a QAnon bloke and that man that paints him orange.

Quote:
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump

Almost all legal scholars have voiced opinions that the 14th Amendment has no legal basis or standing relative to the upcoming 2024 Presidential Election. Like Election Interference, it is just another "trick" being used by the Radical Left Communists, Marxists, and Fascists, to again steal an Election that their candidate, the WORST, MOST INCOMPETENT, & MOST CORRUPT President in U.S. history, is incapable of winning in a Free and Fair Election. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
__________________
Formerly known as Captain Swoop
Andy_Ross is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2023, 05:43 AM   #315
Norman Alexander
Penultimate Amazing
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Dharug & Gundungurra
Posts: 16,150
Marxists AND Fascists, oh my!
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2023, 07:39 AM   #316
Hercules56
Philosopher
 
Hercules56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 7,504
If the 14th amendment was clear enough, and nobody felt conviction of the crime of sedition or aiding seditionists was required, why did Congress go ahead and codify the crime of sedition and specifically reference the 14th amendment?

Seems to me that decades after the 14th amendment was ratified, people felt that simply accusing people of sedition was not enough and it was better that we require a conviction to then ban people from public office.

Honestly I would love it if we could ban Trump from running for office with simply an accusation of sedition. However all of the due process entailed with a jury and a trial and a conviction gives the better sense of justice and not simply vindictiveness.
__________________
theliberalgunclub.com

"The mission of The Liberal Gun Club is to provide a pro-Second Amendment voice for left-of-center gun owners in the national conversations on firearms."

Last edited by Hercules56; 5th September 2023 at 07:41 AM.
Hercules56 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2023, 07:48 AM   #317
Paul2
Philosopher
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,015
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
If the 14th amendment was clear enough, and nobody felt conviction of the crime of sedition or aiding seditionists was required, why did Congress go ahead and codify the crime of sedition and specifically reference the 14th amendment? . . . .
Because (1) the 14th amendment only covers those people who have previously taken an oath for a government office, and (2) the 14th amendment doesn't have any criminal penalties, like jail time.
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2023, 07:54 AM   #318
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 46,073
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
It's all about how and who would enforce such a ban?
And that's the Elephant in the Room.

I said this before but maybe not Trump, maybe not on the Presidential Level but on some level, some version of some kind of "Person A is technically not qualified to hold the office but he got elected anyway" is going to happen and we need to figure out now how we as a democracy are going to deal with that.

Tomorrow the Supreme Court declares that nobody with a type AB+ Bloodtype can be elected Dog Catcher in a city over 10,000 people and on Thursday someone with a AB+ Bloodtype gets the most votes for Dog Catcher in Pittsburg. What happens then? This is not an idle question.

In a Democracy how, both functionally and... philosophically I guess (not exactly what I'm trying to say but close) do you tell the populace "You made the wrong decision / you aren't allowed to make that decision?"

The requirements for most offices aren't really deeply and directly challenged that often. The "has to be 35 years old" thing doesn't cause a paradox because no under 35 person ever really got a close enough to be a viable candidate.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2023, 08:04 AM   #319
dirtywick
Philosopher
 
dirtywick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,090
there's something off that when the only way things can be fair requires us to pretend to be stupid. we all know what happened
dirtywick is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2023, 08:22 AM   #320
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 67,130
Originally Posted by dirtywick View Post
there's something off that when the only way things can be fair requires us to pretend to be stupid. we all know what happened
I, too, think due process and rule of law are a waste of time, and that vigilantism and lynch mobs are the best source of justice in a civil society.
/s
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:51 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.