Is Trump disqualified from the ballot by the 14th Amendmend? - Page 9

dirtywick · 5th September 2023, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

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.

see, it's that kind of imagination that's required. vigilante lynch mobs armed with 14th amendments.

azazal · 5th September 2023, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

see, it's that kind of imagination that's required. vigilante lynch mobs armed with 14th amendments.

Well Trump did ask about 2nd amendment folks back in the 2016 election. So why not 14th amendmenters for 2024?

JoeMorgue · 5th September 2023, 10:34 AM

Again this has been the bit for a while.

"I don't have standards while you have to live up to yours 100% or be a hypocrite."

Paul2 · 5th September 2023, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

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.

The way we figure that out is to require that any challenge to someone being eligible to hold office must be brought forth before the ballots are made up. I presume that this already happens for all the other requirements (for president, have to be 35 or older, etc.). After that, everyone on the ballot has already been considered to be eligible.

We do (or should do) a similar thing for bringing challenges to election results, which would/should have to happen at some point *before* the results are certified at the state level.

JoeMorgue · 5th September 2023, 10:49 AM

Originally Posted by Paul2

The way we figure that out is to require that any challenge to someone being eligible to hold office must be brought forth before the ballots are made up. I presume that this already happens for all the other requirements (for president, have to be 35 or older, etc.). After that, everyone on the ballot has already been considered to be eligible.

And point is what happens when we do all of that and that person still gets the most votes? You can write in a candidate.

Again probably not on a Presidential Level since the Presidential Election is less an election then it is 50 mini-elections in a Trench Coat, but some version of this is going to happen sooner or later to an election that actually matters.

Mike! · 5th September 2023, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

And point is what happens when we do all of that and that person still gets the most votes? You can write in a candidate.

Again probably not on a Presidential Level since the Presidential Election is less an election then it is 50 mini-elections in a Trench Coat, but some version of this is going to happen sooner or later to an election that actually matters.

I would say, if they are legally bared from being on the ballot, even writing it in would not count as a vote for them.

Paul2 · 5th September 2023, 11:38 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

And point is what happens when we do all of that and that person still gets the most votes? You can write in a candidate.

Again probably not on a Presidential Level since the Presidential Election is less an election then it is 50 mini-elections in a Trench Coat, but some version of this is going to happen sooner or later to an election that actually matters.

Write-in candidates would be tricky, but I see Mike holds that, if they're ineligible, they're ineligible, so buyer/write-inner beware.

Fortunately, write-ins winning is pretty rare.

JoeMorgue · 5th September 2023, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by Mike!

I would say, if they are legally bared from being on the ballot, even writing it in would not count as a vote for them.

Okay. How do you tell the 51% of people there votes don't count?

What happens when they say "I disagree?"

What happens when they say "I disagree" with force behind it?

Again these are not idle or unreasonable questions given the last few years.

Mike! · 5th September 2023, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Okay. How do you tell the 51% of people there votes don't count?

What happens when they say "I disagree?"

What happens when they say "I disagree" with force behind it?

Again these are not idle or unreasonable questions given the last few years.

Tell them to go inject some bleach and get back to us. Or tell them they may as well have voted for Bugs Bunny, the end result would be the same.

Hercules56 · 5th September 2023, 12:13 PM

Not that the beliefs of MAGA are intelligent or rational, but this whole exercise validates their belief that "the Democrats know they can't beat Trump in a free and fair election, so they are trying to kick Trump off the ballot".

If we can't beat Trump fair and square, then he deserves to be President and we should get better candidates that appeal to the masses.

LOTS of people absolutely loved Obama, Clinton, JFK. LOTS of people love Trump.

Nobody actually loves Biden.

Hercules56 · 5th September 2023, 12:44 PM

Let's be honest: if Trump was trailing DeSantis in the GOP primary polls, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Cat Not Included · 5th September 2023, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Not that the beliefs of MAGA are intelligent or rational, but this whole exercise validates their belief that "the Democrats know they can't beat Trump in a free and fair election, so they are trying to kick Trump off the ballot".

If we can't beat Trump fair and square, then he deserves to be President and we should get better candidates that appeal to the masses.

LOTS of people absolutely loved Obama, Clinton, JFK. LOTS of people love Trump.

Nobody actually loves Biden.

Everyone is absolutely sure Trump would lose a "free and fair" election. But the US election system isn't anywhere near "free and fair". Take away gerrymandering and the screwed up electoral college, and Trump would never have stood a chance.

Hercules56 · 5th September 2023, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by Cat Not Included

Everyone is absolutely sure Trump would lose a "free and fair" election. But the US election system isn't anywhere near "free and fair". Take away gerrymandering and the screwed up electoral college, and Trump would never have stood a chance.

Gerrymandering has zero influence on Presidential elections. ZERO. If we had no Electoral College the USA would not have existed.

theprestige · 5th September 2023, 04:18 PM

Originally Posted by Cat Not Included

Everyone is absolutely sure Trump would lose a "free and fair" election. But the US election system isn't anywhere near "free and fair". Take away gerrymandering and the screwed up electoral college, and Trump would never have stood a chance.

If we had "free and fair" elections, the political establishment would have organized and perpetuated itself accordingly, and there's no telling whether Trump would win one, or even if Trump would emerge in the first place. You can't assert that a complex contrafactual works in your favor in a vacuum.

Well, you can, but you'll look like a fool if you do.

ETA: Maybe next time include a cat?

Trebuchet · 5th September 2023, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Okay. How do you tell the 51% of people there votes don't count?

Trump does that pretty much every day and it seems to be fine with him.

theprestige · 5th September 2023, 05:15 PM

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

Trump does that pretty much every day and it seems to be fine with him.

I keep saying both sides of the political spectrum are scumbags, and both sides keep proving me right.

Stop appealing to Trump every time you get asked to justify your position.

Cat Not Included · 5th September 2023, 05:58 PM

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Gerrymandering has zero influence on Presidential elections. ZERO. If we had no Electoral College the USA would not have existed.

Doh. OK, that's a dumb one on my part. Gerrymandering is a really bad thing, but in this case that's totally the wrong thing. I was thinking of the...eesh, what's it called? "State counts all its votes for whoever got the most, no matter the margin". Is that past-the-post? I can't begin to think of what its called. Aside from discounting lots of votes, it makes it very hard to defeat a 2 party system.

And "the USA would not have existed" is kinda besides the point. Its still has no part in a "fair" election system.

The 14th amendment clearly should disqualify Trump. Its obviously not actually going to, but somehow suggesting we follow that particular rule from the constitution is unfair?

Norman Alexander · 5th September 2023, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Okay. How do you tell the 51% of people ~~there~~ their votes don't count?

Ask the local elections officer to find 11,780 more votes for you...from his ass.

gnome · 5th September 2023, 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by Cat Not Included

Doh. OK, that's a dumb one on my part. Gerrymandering is a really bad thing, but in this case that's totally the wrong thing. I was thinking of the...eesh, what's it called? "State counts all its votes for whoever got the most, no matter the margin". Is that past-the-post? I can't begin to think of what its called. Aside from discounting lots of votes, it makes it very hard to defeat a 2 party system.

And "the USA would not have existed" is kinda besides the point. Its still has no part in a "fair" election system.

The 14th amendment clearly should disqualify Trump. Its obviously not actually going to, but somehow suggesting we follow that particular rule from the constitution is unfair?

First-past-the-post: Gives the person with the most votes the win, even if it's only a plurality instead of a majority. No runoff.

I think you mean "winner-take-all" which awards the state's entire set of electoral votes to the winner, regardless of proportion.

In other words, the dumbest and most annoying way to count results among typical methods.

Brainster · 5th September 2023, 09:19 PM

Originally Posted by Cat Not Included

Doh. OK, that's a dumb one on my part. Gerrymandering is a really bad thing, but in this case that's totally the wrong thing. I was thinking of the...eesh, what's it called? "State counts all its votes for whoever got the most, no matter the margin". Is that past-the-post?

Winner take all.

Quote:

I can't begin to think of what its called. Aside from discounting lots of votes, it makes it very hard to defeat a 2 party system.

Not sure what you mean by "defeat a 2 party system." Do you mean that it's hard to win as a third-party candidate? I would certainly agree there.

Quote:

And "the USA would not have existed" is kinda besides the point. Its still has no part in a "fair" election system.

The point is that the electoral college gave the smaller states some reassurance that the federal government would not be dominated by the larger states. I don't see anything "fair" about changing the rules in the middle of the game, unless you follow the rule about changing the rules.

Quote:

The 14th amendment clearly should disqualify Trump. Its obviously not actually going to, but somehow suggesting we follow that particular rule from the constitution is unfair?

I suspect the original intent wing of the Supreme Court will not agree.

Hercules56 · 6th September 2023, 06:03 AM

This issue will obviously be settled by the supreme Court. Will be a very interesting debate.

What qualifies as an "insurrection"?

What sort of participation or aid to insurrectionists qualifies for the 14th amendment restrictions?

Is indictment and conviction required?

Fun times.

W.D.Clinger · 6th September 2023, 06:09 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

I keep saying both sides of the political spectrum are scumbags, and both sides keep proving me right.

Stop appealing to Trump every time you get asked to justify your position.

When the thread's title mentions Trump explicitly, it would be scummy to pretend Trump is not relevant to the discussion.

Darat · 6th September 2023, 06:11 AM

Originally Posted by Hercules56

This issue will obviously be settled by the supreme Court. Will be a very interesting debate.

What qualifies as an "insurrection"?

What sort of participation or aid to insurrectionists qualifies for the 14th amendment restrictions?

Is indictment and conviction required?

Fun times.

How?

Hercules56 · 6th September 2023, 06:12 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

How?

You're joking, right?

JoeMorgue · 6th September 2023, 06:16 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

I keep saying both sides of the political spectrum are scumbags, and both sides keep proving me right.

Stop appealing to Trump every time you get asked to justify your position.

When did your contrarian act get THIS shallow and see through? It's like watching someone lip sync their one hit at this point.

Darat · 6th September 2023, 06:16 AM

Originally Posted by Hercules56

You're joking, right?

No.

JoeMorgue · 6th September 2023, 06:18 AM

No. A semantic debate over "Insurrection" does not sound interesting.

Hercules56 · 6th September 2023, 06:19 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

No.

OK.

Well, you understand the function of our Supreme Court, right?

Norman Alexander · 6th September 2023, 06:26 AM

Originally Posted by Hercules56

OK.

Well, you understand the function of our Supreme Court, right?

To implement religious fascism by reading the constitution to suit themselves?

Hercules56 · 6th September 2023, 06:27 AM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

To implement religious fascism by reading the constitution to suit themselves?

LOLOLOLOL!!!

Good one.

JoeMorgue · 6th September 2023, 06:27 AM

Originally Posted by Hercules56

OK.

Well, you understand the function of our Supreme Court, right?

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

To implement religious fascism by reading the constitution to suit themselves?

4 installed "Yes Men" to protect the President WHILE implementing religious fascism by reading the Constitution to suit themselves?

Hercules56 · 6th September 2023, 06:29 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

4 installed "Yes Men" to protect the President WHILE implementing religious fascism by reading the Constitution to suit themselves?

These "Yes Men" have made several decisions that were very much "anti-Trump".

One particular decision that could have tossed out the 2020 election.

JoeMorgue · 6th September 2023, 06:31 AM

Originally Posted by Hercules56

These "Yes Men" have made several decisions that were very much "anti-Trump".

One particular decision that could have tossed out the 2020 election.

....
..
.

I don't ******* care.

I'm so sick "Well they aren't toady yes men who protect him with provably bad takes about the Constitution all of the time!" being a defense.

Hercules56 · 6th September 2023, 06:33 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

....
..
.

I don't ******* care.

I'm so sick "Well they aren't toady yes men who protect him with provably bad takes about the Constitution all of the time!" being a defense.

K bro.

JoeMorgue · 6th September 2023, 06:35 AM

Originally Posted by Hercules56

K bro.

Whatever. Go back to day dreaming about being a member of Trump's legal team, writing self insert fan fiction where you are the hero who figures out the "one legal trick" that saves him.

Hercules56 · 6th September 2023, 06:36 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Whatever. Go back to day dreaming about being a member of Trump's legal team, writing self insert fan fiction where you are the hero who figures out the "one legal trick" that saves him.

Um, ok bro.

....whatever.

Darat · 6th September 2023, 06:54 AM

Originally Posted by Hercules56

OK.

Well, you understand the function of our Supreme Court, right?

The same as the rest of your courts i.e. to ensure justice.

Hercules56 · 6th September 2023, 06:57 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

The same as the rest of your courts i.e. to ensure justice.

And what else?

Darat · 6th September 2023, 07:05 AM

Originally Posted by Hercules56

And what else?

That's it. Have a read of its website.

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW" - These words, written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Hercules56 · 6th September 2023, 07:11 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

That's it. Have a read of its website.

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW" - These words, written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States.

That's incorrect. US Supreme Court is also the highest appellate court in the land. Which is why this issue will ultimately be settled by the US Supreme Court.

5th September 2023, 10:08 AM	#321
dirtywick Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 5,122	Originally Posted by theprestige 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 see, it's that kind of imagination that's required. vigilante lynch mobs armed with 14th amendments.
dirtywick Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 5,122

5th September 2023, 10:31 AM	#322
azazal Ninja Wave: Techno Ninja Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 469	Originally Posted by dirtywick see, it's that kind of imagination that's required. vigilante lynch mobs armed with 14th amendments. Well Trump did ask about 2nd amendment folks back in the 2016 election. So why not 14th amendmenters for 2024?
	__________________ _____________________________________________ My gun collection has killed 5 fewer people than the Kennedy clan has with cars, airplanes and golf clubs. - Ranb

5th September 2023, 10:34 AM	#323
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 46,102	Again this has been the bit for a while. "I don't have standards while you have to live up to yours 100% or be a hypocrite."
	__________________ "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.

5th September 2023, 10:42 AM	#324
Paul2 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 8,015	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue 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. The way we figure that out is to require that any challenge to someone being eligible to hold office must be brought forth before the ballots are made up. I presume that this already happens for all the other requirements (for president, have to be 35 or older, etc.). After that, everyone on the ballot has already been considered to be eligible. We do (or should do) a similar thing for bringing challenges to election results, which would/should have to happen at some point before the results are certified at the state level.
Paul2 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 8,015	__________________ 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

5th September 2023, 10:49 AM	#325
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 46,102	Originally Posted by Paul2 The way we figure that out is to require that any challenge to someone being eligible to hold office must be brought forth before the ballots are made up. I presume that this already happens for all the other requirements (for president, have to be 35 or older, etc.). After that, everyone on the ballot has already been considered to be eligible. And point is what happens when we do all of that and that person still gets the most votes? You can write in a candidate. Again probably not on a Presidential Level since the Presidential Election is less an election then it is 50 mini-elections in a Trench Coat, but some version of this is going to happen sooner or later to an election that actually matters.
	__________________ "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.

5th September 2023, 11:35 AM	#326
Mike! Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it! Join Date: May 2010 Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not! Posts: 52,011	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue And point is what happens when we do all of that and that person still gets the most votes? You can write in a candidate. Again probably not on a Presidential Level since the Presidential Election is less an election then it is 50 mini-elections in a Trench Coat, but some version of this is going to happen sooner or later to an election that actually matters. I would say, if they are legally bared from being on the ballot, even writing it in would not count as a vote for them.
	__________________ "Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes... Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."

5th September 2023, 11:38 AM	#327
Paul2 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 8,015	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue And point is what happens when we do all of that and that person still gets the most votes? You can write in a candidate. Again probably not on a Presidential Level since the Presidential Election is less an election then it is 50 mini-elections in a Trench Coat, but some version of this is going to happen sooner or later to an election that actually matters. Write-in candidates would be tricky, but I see Mike holds that, if they're ineligible, they're ineligible, so buyer/write-inner beware. Fortunately, write-ins winning is pretty rare.
Paul2 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 8,015	__________________ 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

5th September 2023, 11:39 AM	#328
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 46,102	Originally Posted by Mike! I would say, if they are legally bared from being on the ballot, even writing it in would not count as a vote for them. Okay. How do you tell the 51% of people there votes don't count? What happens when they say "I disagree?" What happens when they say "I disagree" with force behind it? Again these are not idle or unreasonable questions given the last few years.
	__________________ "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.

5th September 2023, 12:11 PM	#329
Mike! Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it! Join Date: May 2010 Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not! Posts: 52,011	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue Okay. How do you tell the 51% of people there votes don't count? What happens when they say "I disagree?" What happens when they say "I disagree" with force behind it? Again these are not idle or unreasonable questions given the last few years. Tell them to go inject some bleach and get back to us. Or tell them they may as well have voted for Bugs Bunny, the end result would be the same.
	__________________ "Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes... Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."

5th September 2023, 12:13 PM	#330
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	Not that the beliefs of MAGA are intelligent or rational, but this whole exercise validates their belief that "the Democrats know they can't beat Trump in a free and fair election, so they are trying to kick Trump off the ballot". If we can't beat Trump fair and square, then he deserves to be President and we should get better candidates that appeal to the masses. LOTS of people absolutely loved Obama, Clinton, JFK. LOTS of people love Trump. Nobody actually loves Biden.
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	__________________ 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."

5th September 2023, 12:44 PM	#331
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	Let's be honest: if Trump was trailing DeSantis in the GOP primary polls, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	__________________ 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."

5th September 2023, 01:56 PM	#332
Cat Not Included Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2016 Posts: 425	Originally Posted by Hercules56 Not that the beliefs of MAGA are intelligent or rational, but this whole exercise validates their belief that "the Democrats know they can't beat Trump in a free and fair election, so they are trying to kick Trump off the ballot". If we can't beat Trump fair and square, then he deserves to be President and we should get better candidates that appeal to the masses. LOTS of people absolutely loved Obama, Clinton, JFK. LOTS of people love Trump. Nobody actually loves Biden. Everyone is absolutely sure Trump would lose a "free and fair" election. But the US election system isn't anywhere near "free and fair". Take away gerrymandering and the screwed up electoral college, and Trump would never have stood a chance.

5th September 2023, 02:49 PM	#333
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	Originally Posted by Cat Not Included Everyone is absolutely sure Trump would lose a "free and fair" election. But the US election system isn't anywhere near "free and fair". Take away gerrymandering and the screwed up electoral college, and Trump would never have stood a chance. Gerrymandering has zero influence on Presidential elections. ZERO. If we had no Electoral College the USA would not have existed.
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	__________________ 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."

5th September 2023, 04:18 PM	#334
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: The Antimemetics Division Posts: 67,171	Originally Posted by Cat Not Included Everyone is absolutely sure Trump would lose a "free and fair" election. But the US election system isn't anywhere near "free and fair". Take away gerrymandering and the screwed up electoral college, and Trump would never have stood a chance. If we had "free and fair" elections, the political establishment would have organized and perpetuated itself accordingly, and there's no telling whether Trump would win one, or even if Trump would emerge in the first place. You can't assert that a complex contrafactual works in your favor in a vacuum. Well, you can, but you'll look like a fool if you do. ETA: Maybe next time include a cat?
	__________________ There is no Antimemetics Division. Last edited by theprestige; 5th September 2023 at 05:12 PM. Reason: ETA

5th September 2023, 04:27 PM	#335
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Port Townsend, Washington Posts: 38,281	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue Okay. How do you tell the 51% of people there votes don't count? Trump does that pretty much every day and it seems to be fine with him.
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

5th September 2023, 05:15 PM	#336
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: The Antimemetics Division Posts: 67,171	Originally Posted by Trebuchet Trump does that pretty much every day and it seems to be fine with him. I keep saying both sides of the political spectrum are scumbags, and both sides keep proving me right. Stop appealing to Trump every time you get asked to justify your position.
	__________________ There is no Antimemetics Division.

5th September 2023, 05:58 PM	#337
Cat Not Included Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2016 Posts: 425	Originally Posted by Hercules56 Gerrymandering has zero influence on Presidential elections. ZERO. If we had no Electoral College the USA would not have existed. Doh. OK, that's a dumb one on my part. Gerrymandering is a really bad thing, but in this case that's totally the wrong thing. I was thinking of the...eesh, what's it called? "State counts all its votes for whoever got the most, no matter the margin". Is that past-the-post? I can't begin to think of what its called. Aside from discounting lots of votes, it makes it very hard to defeat a 2 party system. And "the USA would not have existed" is kinda besides the point. Its still has no part in a "fair" election system. The 14th amendment clearly should disqualify Trump. Its obviously not actually going to, but somehow suggesting we follow that particular rule from the constitution is unfair?

5th September 2023, 05:59 PM	#338
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 16,173	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue Okay. How do you tell the 51% of people ~~there~~ their votes don't count? Ask the local elections officer to find 11,780 more votes for you...from his ass.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

5th September 2023, 06:23 PM	#339
gnome Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 14,493	Originally Posted by Cat Not Included Doh. OK, that's a dumb one on my part. Gerrymandering is a really bad thing, but in this case that's totally the wrong thing. I was thinking of the...eesh, what's it called? "State counts all its votes for whoever got the most, no matter the margin". Is that past-the-post? I can't begin to think of what its called. Aside from discounting lots of votes, it makes it very hard to defeat a 2 party system. And "the USA would not have existed" is kinda besides the point. Its still has no part in a "fair" election system. The 14th amendment clearly should disqualify Trump. Its obviously not actually going to, but somehow suggesting we follow that particular rule from the constitution is unfair? First-past-the-post: Gives the person with the most votes the win, even if it's only a plurality instead of a majority. No runoff. I think you mean "winner-take-all" which awards the state's entire set of electoral votes to the winner, regardless of proportion. In other words, the dumbest and most annoying way to count results among typical methods.
	__________________

5th September 2023, 09:19 PM	#340
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 20,303	Originally Posted by Cat Not Included Doh. OK, that's a dumb one on my part. Gerrymandering is a really bad thing, but in this case that's totally the wrong thing. I was thinking of the...eesh, what's it called? "State counts all its votes for whoever got the most, no matter the margin". Is that past-the-post? Winner take all. Quote: I can't begin to think of what its called. Aside from discounting lots of votes, it makes it very hard to defeat a 2 party system. Not sure what you mean by "defeat a 2 party system." Do you mean that it's hard to win as a third-party candidate? I would certainly agree there. Quote: And "the USA would not have existed" is kinda besides the point. Its still has no part in a "fair" election system. The point is that the electoral college gave the smaller states some reassurance that the federal government would not be dominated by the larger states. I don't see anything "fair" about changing the rules in the middle of the game, unless you follow the rule about changing the rules. Quote: The 14th amendment clearly should disqualify Trump. Its obviously not actually going to, but somehow suggesting we follow that particular rule from the constitution is unfair? I suspect the original intent wing of the Supreme Court will not agree.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

6th September 2023, 06:03 AM	#341
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	This issue will obviously be settled by the supreme Court. Will be a very interesting debate. What qualifies as an "insurrection"? What sort of participation or aid to insurrectionists qualifies for the 14th amendment restrictions? Is indictment and conviction required? Fun times.
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	__________________ 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."

6th September 2023, 06:09 AM	#342
W.D.Clinger Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 5,515	Originally Posted by theprestige I keep saying both sides of the political spectrum are scumbags, and both sides keep proving me right. Stop appealing to Trump every time you get asked to justify your position. When the thread's title mentions Trump explicitly, it would be scummy to pretend Trump is not relevant to the discussion.
W.D.Clinger Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 5,515

6th September 2023, 06:11 AM	#343
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 112,595	Originally Posted by Hercules56 This issue will obviously be settled by the supreme Court. Will be a very interesting debate. What qualifies as an "insurrection"? What sort of participation or aid to insurrectionists qualifies for the 14th amendment restrictions? Is indictment and conviction required? Fun times. How?
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

6th September 2023, 06:12 AM	#344
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	Originally Posted by Darat How? You're joking, right?
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	__________________ 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."

6th September 2023, 06:16 AM	#345
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 46,102	Originally Posted by theprestige I keep saying both sides of the political spectrum are scumbags, and both sides keep proving me right. Stop appealing to Trump every time you get asked to justify your position. When did your contrarian act get THIS shallow and see through? It's like watching someone lip sync their one hit at this point.
	__________________ "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.

6th September 2023, 06:16 AM	#346
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 112,595	Originally Posted by Hercules56 You're joking, right? No.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

6th September 2023, 06:18 AM	#347
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 46,102	No. A semantic debate over "Insurrection" does not sound interesting.
	__________________ "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.

6th September 2023, 06:19 AM	#348
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	Originally Posted by Darat No. OK. Well, you understand the function of our Supreme Court, right?
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	__________________ 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; 6th September 2023 at 06:22 AM.

6th September 2023, 06:26 AM	#349
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 16,173	Originally Posted by Hercules56 OK. Well, you understand the function of our Supreme Court, right? To implement religious fascism by reading the constitution to suit themselves?
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

6th September 2023, 06:27 AM	#350
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander To implement religious fascism by reading the constitution to suit themselves? LOLOLOLOL!!! Good one.
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	__________________ 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."

6th September 2023, 06:27 AM	#351
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 46,102	Originally Posted by Hercules56 OK. Well, you understand the function of our Supreme Court, right? Originally Posted by Norman Alexander To implement religious fascism by reading the constitution to suit themselves? 4 installed "Yes Men" to protect the President WHILE implementing religious fascism by reading the Constitution to suit themselves?
	__________________ "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.

6th September 2023, 06:29 AM	#352
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue 4 installed "Yes Men" to protect the President WHILE implementing religious fascism by reading the Constitution to suit themselves? These "Yes Men" have made several decisions that were very much "anti-Trump". One particular decision that could have tossed out the 2020 election.
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	__________________ 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."

6th September 2023, 06:31 AM	#353
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 46,102	Originally Posted by Hercules56 These "Yes Men" have made several decisions that were very much "anti-Trump". One particular decision that could have tossed out the 2020 election. .... .. . I don't ******* care. I'm so sick "Well they aren't toady yes men who protect him with provably bad takes about the Constitution all of the time!" being a defense.
	__________________ "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.

6th September 2023, 06:33 AM	#354
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue .... .. . I don't ******* care. I'm so sick "Well they aren't toady yes men who protect him with provably bad takes about the Constitution all of the time!" being a defense. K bro.
Hercules56 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 7,535	__________________ 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."

6th September 2023, 06:35 AM	#355
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 46,102	Originally Posted by Hercules56 K bro. Whatever. Go back to day dreaming about being a member of Trump's legal team, writing self insert fan fiction where you are the hero who figures out the "one legal trick" that saves him.
	__________________ "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.