Democrats move to take Trump off the ballot

[Hellokitty]

Why are democrats so afraid of TRUMP being on the ballot in blue states?

 

[RealDave]

States move to require all presidential candidates to release taxes

All we hear from democrats are accusations that the GOP are tying to suppress the vote in a myriad of ways

Funny, I never heard one Republican suggest that the democrat nominee should be taken off the ballot.

That dear friends is called fascism. .

If a Democrat did not release their returns, they would also not be ion the ballot.

If you are saying this law favors Democrats, I guess you are saying Democrats are more honest with less to hide.

 

[Moonglow]

States move to require all presidential candidates to release taxes

All we hear from democrats are accusations that the GOP are tying to suppress the vote in a myriad of ways

Funny, I never heard one Republican suggest that the democrat nominee should be taken off the ballot.

That dear friends is called fascism. .

It's a states right to determine what rules apply to candidates running for president in their state.

 

[Moonglow]

Why are democrats so afraid of TRUMP being on the ballot in blue states?

That is not the issue and you know it. Why is Trump afraid to show his tax forms?

 

[Darkwind]

States move to require all presidential candidates to release taxes

All we hear from democrats are accusations that the GOP are tying to suppress the vote in a myriad of ways

Funny, I never heard one Republican suggest that the democrat nominee should be taken off the ballot.

That dear friends is called fascism. .

Shouldn't States be able to write their own rules?

You mean like State Amendments to the State Constitution that sets marriage as a union between one man and one woman?

Or is it that States should be allowed to make their own rules when you happen to agree with it?

 

[Crepitus]

States move to require all presidential candidates to release taxes

All we hear from democrats are accusations that the GOP are tying to suppress the vote in a myriad of ways

Funny, I never heard one Republican suggest that the democrat nominee should be taken off the ballot.

That dear friends is called fascism. .

Requiring a candidate to tell the truth is fascism?

Who knew?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

This won't be allowed. Democrats could as well say that no republican vote will be counted.

 

[Darkwind]

I question whether such a move would be constitutional. Yes, the states have the power to regulate elections, which includes ballot access. However, this does not accomplish any legitimate interest in regulating ballot access. This only establishes a political test, with the effect of secretly creating an additional qualification for an elected federal office. And the states have no power to institute new or additional qualifications for elected federal offices.

How are financial record requirements political?

How are they not in light of the right to privacy?

 

[Darkwind]

States move to require all presidential candidates to release taxes

All we hear from democrats are accusations that the GOP are tying to suppress the vote in a myriad of ways

Funny, I never heard one Republican suggest that the democrat nominee should be taken off the ballot.

That dear friends is called fascism. .

Requiring a candidate to tell the truth is fascism?

Who knew?

What other litmus tests will you then add to the election process? Religion? Party affiliation? Who you associate with? What neighborhood you live in?

Will you require EVERY candidate, to tell the truth, or just those you disagree with?

 

[RealDave]

States move to require all presidential candidates to release taxes

All we hear from democrats are accusations that the GOP are tying to suppress the vote in a myriad of ways

Funny, I never heard one Republican suggest that the democrat nominee should be taken off the ballot.

That dear friends is called fascism. .

Shouldn't States be able to write their own rules?

You mean like State Amendments to the State Constitution that sets marriage as a union between one man and one woman?

Or is it that States should be allowed to make their own rules when you happen to agree with it?

So if a Stsate made the ownership of guns illegal, you would be OK with that?

 

[Seawytch]

I question whether such a move would be constitutional. Yes, the states have the power to regulate elections, which includes ballot access. However, this does not accomplish any legitimate interest in regulating ballot access. This only establishes a political test, with the effect of secretly creating an additional qualification for an elected federal office. And the states have no power to institute new or additional qualifications for elected federal offices.

How are financial record requirements political?

How are they not in light of the right to privacy?

All candidates have to provide them, not just Republican candidates, making it apolitical. Candidates filing for office already provide other financial documents, these would simply be in addition to those. Private, personal, information can be redacted.

 

[Seawytch]

States move to require all presidential candidates to release taxes

All we hear from democrats are accusations that the GOP are tying to suppress the vote in a myriad of ways

Funny, I never heard one Republican suggest that the democrat nominee should be taken off the ballot.

That dear friends is called fascism. .

Shouldn't States be able to write their own rules?

You mean like State Amendments to the State Constitution that sets marriage as a union between one man and one woman?

Or is it that States should be allowed to make their own rules when you happen to agree with it?

State laws cannot violate the U.S. Constitution. This law will be challenged, just like those state laws were. Those laws were found to violate the constitution. This is how our system works, you get that, right?

 

[Darkwind]

I question whether such a move would be constitutional. Yes, the states have the power to regulate elections, which includes ballot access. However, this does not accomplish any legitimate interest in regulating ballot access. This only establishes a political test, with the effect of secretly creating an additional qualification for an elected federal office. And the states have no power to institute new or additional qualifications for elected federal offices.

How are financial record requirements political?

How are they not in light of the right to privacy?

All candidates have to provide them, not just Republican candidates, making it apolitical. Candidates filing for office already provide other financial documents, these would simply be in addition to those. Private, personal, information can be redacted.

To what purpose are you going to put people who want to serve into legal jeopardy from political hacks such as yourself?

In order for a law like this to be Constitutional, it would have to first prove that there is a pattern in the entire system of corruption that could be quelled if the information is released. In other words, there must be a reasonable reason to violate the rights of the citizens. I don't like him is NOT a reasonable standard.

It isn't even a law now, and already the concept of it is being abused by political hacks.

 

[Darkwind]

States move to require all presidential candidates to release taxes

All we hear from democrats are accusations that the GOP are tying to suppress the vote in a myriad of ways

Funny, I never heard one Republican suggest that the democrat nominee should be taken off the ballot.

That dear friends is called fascism. .

Shouldn't States be able to write their own rules?

You mean like State Amendments to the State Constitution that sets marriage as a union between one man and one woman?

Or is it that States should be allowed to make their own rules when you happen to agree with it?

State laws cannot violate the U.S. Constitution. This law will be challenged, just like those state laws were. Those laws were found to violate the constitution. This is how our system works, you get that, right?

This law also will be challenged and lose. It is unconstitutional.

 

[Seawytch]

This law is DOA.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is the only agency authorized to regulate the financing of presidential and other federal campaigns (i.e., campaigns for the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives). The states cannot impose additional requirements on federal candidates. Federal law requires all presidential candidates to file a statement of candidacy within 15 days of receiving contributions or making expenditures that exceed $5,000. The statement of candidacy is the only federally mandated ballot access requirement for presidential candidates; all other ballot access procedures are mandated at the state level.
​

Ballot access for presidential candidates - Ballotpedia

​

 

[Hellokitty]

Why are democrats so afraid of TRUMP being on the ballot in blue states?

That is not the issue and you know it. Why is Trump afraid to show his tax forms?

Why are democrats so afraid of TRUMP being on the ballot in blue states?

That is not the issue and you know it. Why is Trump afraid to show his tax forms?

Of course that's what the issues is. Democrats want to force Biden on their party and they know the only way he has a shot at winning is if TRUMP's not on the ballot. This desperate attempt also comes across as democrats not only fearing they will loss the electoral college vote to TRUMP but also the popular vote.

So I'll ask again why are democrats so afraid of TRUMP being on the ballot in blue states?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

States move to require all presidential candidates to release taxes

All we hear from democrats are accusations that the GOP are tying to suppress the vote in a myriad of ways

Funny, I never heard one Republican suggest that the democrat nominee should be taken off the ballot.

That dear friends is called fascism. .

The reason CA is so screwed up is because the Democrat Party has no competition.
They've practically erased Republicans from the state.

There are 7 Republican house members from California.

There are Red states with just one or two Democrats.

Quit whining

7 out of 53. That’s slightly more than 13%. Or said another way, 87% Democrats. I’m not sure California could be anymore liberal.

 

[Seawytch]

I question whether such a move would be constitutional. Yes, the states have the power to regulate elections, which includes ballot access. However, this does not accomplish any legitimate interest in regulating ballot access. This only establishes a political test, with the effect of secretly creating an additional qualification for an elected federal office. And the states have no power to institute new or additional qualifications for elected federal offices.

How are financial record requirements political?

How are they not in light of the right to privacy?

All candidates have to provide them, not just Republican candidates, making it apolitical. Candidates filing for office already provide other financial documents, these would simply be in addition to those. Private, personal, information can be redacted.

To what purpose are you going to put people who want to serve into legal jeopardy from political hacks such as yourself?

In order for a law like this to be Constitutional, it would have to first prove that there is a pattern in the entire system of corruption that could be quelled if the information is released. In other words, there must be a reasonable reason to violate the rights of the citizens. I don't like him is NOT a reasonable standard.

It isn't even a law now, and already the concept of it is being abused by political hacks.

Candidates already file financial paperwork that is public information...and we manage to redact all the private information before it is made public. Tax returns would be treated no differently, but THIS particular change to rules has to be made at the Federal level....and it will be in the future, you can bank on it.

 

[candycorn]

States move to require all presidential candidates to release taxes

All we hear from democrats are accusations that the GOP are tying to suppress the vote in a myriad of ways

Funny, I never heard one Republican suggest that the democrat nominee should be taken off the ballot.

That dear friends is called fascism. .

Shouldn't States be able to write their own rules?

No
It is a National Election

Interesting…. I always heard it’s the “general election”. Where do you get the term “national election” from?

It's a nationwide general election. In the election world, it's a federal election. Gubernatorial elections are state elections, but can also be federal if there is a Senate or congressional seat on the ballot as well. We view them that way because there are different rules for local, state and federal elections.

ok.

 

[candycorn]

States move to require all presidential candidates to release taxes

All we hear from democrats are accusations that the GOP are tying to suppress the vote in a myriad of ways

Funny, I never heard one Republican suggest that the democrat nominee should be taken off the ballot.

That dear friends is called fascism. .

Shouldn't States be able to write their own rules?

You mean like State Amendments to the State Constitution that sets marriage as a union between one man and one woman?

Or is it that States should be allowed to make their own rules when you happen to agree with it?

It seems as though the Republicans are saying that States don’t have that right.