I heard yesterday the State of Illinois

[Wyatt earp]

There were threads on this, but its good to show how dumb the dems are, thinking that they can put unconstitutional requirements on presidential candidates. If they do that, maybe the USSC will disallow their electoral votes to count?

On what premise? The State of Illinois has the right to regulate elections in its state. You can deprive people of their right to vote depending on certain circumstances. Why couldn't a person be deprived of their right to run for not meeting certain qualifications, like making their tax returns available? A candidate's privacy in that regard should not have the same protection afforded the average citizen.

So you would be ok for Illinois saying the requirements for president would only be a female between the ages of 8 years old and 15 years old who had blond hair????

The constitution addresses age requirements. It doesn't mention hair color or sex.

What does that have to do with my post?????



Again for the peanut gallery on the left what if:

California requirement for president is: Only Gay people can be on the ballot

West Virginia requirement for president is: Only white Democrat KKK can be on the ballot

North Carolina requirement for president is: White Hillbillys can be on the ballot

Illinois requirement for president is: people who are bears fans can be on the ballot

Texas requirement for president is: Only steers and queers can be on the ballot

Iowa requirement for president is:Only farmers can be on the ballot

Wyoming requirement for president is: Only Cowboys can be on the ballot

New York requirement for president is: Only white snobs can be on the ballot





DO YOU FUCKING COMPREHEND IT NOW???????????????????????????????????????









.

 

[007]

There were threads on this, but its good to show how dumb the dems are, thinking that they can put unconstitutional requirements on presidential candidates. If they do that, maybe the USSC will disallow their electoral votes to count?

On what premise? The State of Illinois has the right to regulate elections in its state. You can deprive people of their right to vote depending on certain circumstances. Why couldn't a person be deprived of their right to run for not meeting certain qualifications, like making their tax returns available? A candidate's privacy in that regard should not have the same protection afforded the average citizen.

So you would be ok for Illinois saying the requirements for president would only be a female between the ages of 8 years old and 15 years old who had blond hair????

The constitution addresses age requirements. It doesn't mention hair color or sex.

What does that have to do with my post?????



Again for the peanut gallery on the left what if:

California requirement for president is: Only Gay people can be on the ballot

West Virginia requirement for president is: Only white Democrat KKK can be on the ballot

North Carolina requirement for president is: White Hillbillys can be on the ballot

Illinois requirement for president is: people who are bears fans can be on the ballot

Texas requirement for president is: Only steers and queers can be on the ballot

Iowa requirement for president is:Only farmers can be on the ballot

Wyoming requirement for president is: Only Cowboys can be on the ballot

New York requirement for president is: Only white snobs can be on the ballot





DO YOU FUCKING COMPREHEND IT NOW???????????????????????????????????????









.

WHY do you think using LOGIC will get you an HONEST answer from the RABID, UNHINGED, LYING, HYPOCRITE left?

America is getting a REAL GOOD LOOK at just what kind of CORRUPT SHIT STAINS democrats are. They are OFF THE RAILS this year trying to OUT LEFT EACH OTHER, and THE DEMS KNOW they don't stand a snowball's chance in HELL next year of winning the white house... LEGALLY, FAIR AND SQUARE, so CHEAT is their game now. That's all they got.

 

[Cellblock2429]

CHEAT is the only plan the radical left has left for 2020, but this won't work. They try this shit and the feds just won't count their electoral votes then.

Two can play those games.

I'm pretty sure each state runs it's own elections, and can impose any rules they want unless there are laws preventing it.. The electoral college can't just decide to not count their votes without a legal reason why.

1. What gives them the right to impose arbitrary "rules" on a Federal presidential election? (the Constitution sets the requirements, not the dems in various states)
2. If they violate Federal election laws their electoral votes should not be counted.

Every state has a set of arbitrary rules to be on their ballot, that is why there are not 100 people on the ballot for president.




Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

/——/Red States need to eliminate pro abortion libtards from the ballot.

 

[bullwinkle]

made a rule that if Trump doesn't reveal 5 years of his tax returns, the state will not allow him on the 2020 Presidential ballot. Is this legal? I know Trump dumps laws, like using the military for police duties, that his adherents think is okey-dokey. But I doubt this will get by without notice. Does anybody know what this is about? I don't see how this can be done, but I have to assume there are legislators in Illinois that know the law better than I who agreed to the bill. Sadly, laws and traditions don't mean much anymore.

I looked to see if there is a thread on this, but found none. Hope I didn't miss it in error

Our gov breaks the laws they pass every single day! Example the illegal immigration situation.

I suspect our employers break that illegal immigration law far more than the government, which looks the other way in case a donor is involved.

Why would you hold employers responsible and give the lawmakers/breakers a pass?

Who sez I give either of them a pass?