Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Lol you are just hysterical. Actually, the constitution states that a state can make their own election rules for qualifying candidates.Lol oh my god. Your hypocrisy blows my mind. States have always had their own election rules you idiot. Should all those rules be over turned now that the narrative isn’t in your favor?Lol I love how you only support states’ rights when it fits your agenda. Typical republican.LMAO, I don't even see the 9th circus upholding that shit, a State can't augment the constitutional requirements to serve as president. Also the State doesn't run primaries, the parties do.
.
States agreed to the Constitution, they can't unilaterally change it, it takes 3/4ths of the States to agree. See Article 5. You commies just crack me up. LMAO
.
If they conflict with the Constitution, you bet your commie ass.
.
Remember this is not the general election, it's the republican primary. Assuming Trump is the republican candidate, he will still appear on the ballot in general elections. This is nothing but a political move aimed at getting Trump to release his tax forms.This isn’t about disqualify him for office. That has nothing to do with the language of the bill. It’s stated in the constitution that states can make their own rules on their own ballots. It’s simply a rule of appearing on the ballot.The only requirements are outlined in the constitution you stupid fuckLol I love how you only support states’ rights when it fits your agenda. Typical republican....on the ballot.
Ah, I love this. I can’t wait to see how this would turn out for Trump. Fuck him. I hope he cowers from the challenge.
California becomes first state to bar Trump from 2020 ballot unless he releases his tax returns
LMAO, I don't even see the 9th circus upholding that shit, a State can't augment the constitutional requirements to serve as president. Also the State doesn't run primaries, the parties do.
.
Lol...on the ballot.
Ah, I love this. I can’t wait to see how this would turn out for Trump. Fuck him. I hope he cowers from the challenge.
California becomes first state to bar Trump from 2020 ballot unless he releases his tax returns
His taxes are his own business... not yours.
You sound Like a spineless motherfucker
I think a country has a right to know about any conflicts of interests.
I think a candidate should simply be open and honest here though.
It’s not singling out one person. It’s for anyone who doesn’t release their tax returns.Lol you are just hysterical. Actually, the constitution states that a state can make their own election rules for qualifying candidates.Lol oh my god. Your hypocrisy blows my mind. States have always had their own election rules you idiot. Should all those rules be over turned now that the narrative isn’t in your favor?Lol I love how you only support states’ rights when it fits your agenda. Typical republican.
States agreed to the Constitution, they can't unilaterally change it, it takes 3/4ths of the States to agree. See Article 5. You commies just crack me up. LMAO
.
If they conflict with the Constitution, you bet your commie ass.
.
I doubt the courts would allow a law that was an attempt to single out one person.
Just like with Roberts tossing the citizenship question out because the administration lied, I doubt that this could honestly be defended in court
It’s not singling out one person. It’s for anyone who doesn’t release their tax returns.Lol you are just hysterical. Actually, the constitution states that a state can make their own election rules for qualifying candidates.Lol oh my god. Your hypocrisy blows my mind. States have always had their own election rules you idiot. Should all those rules be over turned now that the narrative isn’t in your favor?States agreed to the Constitution, they can't unilaterally change it, it takes 3/4ths of the States to agree. See Article 5. You commies just crack me up. LMAO
.
If they conflict with the Constitution, you bet your commie ass.
.
I doubt the courts would allow a law that was an attempt to single out one person.
Just like with Roberts tossing the citizenship question out because the administration lied, I doubt that this could honestly be defended in court
Trump’s name isn’t singled out in the language of the law therefore those filing the suit couldn’t possibly make that argument.It’s not singling out one person. It’s for anyone who doesn’t release their tax returns.Lol you are just hysterical. Actually, the constitution states that a state can make their own election rules for qualifying candidates.Lol oh my god. Your hypocrisy blows my mind. States have always had their own election rules you idiot. Should all those rules be over turned now that the narrative isn’t in your favor?
If they conflict with the Constitution, you bet your commie ass.
.
I doubt the courts would allow a law that was an attempt to single out one person.
Just like with Roberts tossing the citizenship question out because the administration lied, I doubt that this could honestly be defended in court
I doubt the court buys that.
Those are filing requirements, not qualification requirements. It's more about fees and deadlines if anything. But I just want you to remember this:
View attachment 271990
This is what I'll be posting to your reply back on this topic after the court shoots it down.
They are requirements to be on the ballot.
I suspect the courts will, but I do not think it is as black and white as your little mind makes is.
I also do not agree with it, but that is irrelevant.
Filing requirements are pure paperwork is all. This is blackmail. Sorry you can't see the difference, but the court will.
collecting 10,000 signatures is more than just paperwork
That's only if you don't run with a supporting party. It applies to Independents and write-ins.
Uh the constitution lays out the qualifications for president but that isn’t what Cali is doing. They aren’t arguing that a candidate shouldn’t be president, they are just specifying that the candidate follow a rule to be on their ballot. It’s what states have always done. Christ, if Texas was trying to make a rule that candidates couldn’t be on a ballot unless they provided tax returns and this was a Democrat candidate withholding instead, your dumbass would defend that shit tooth and nail.Lol you are just hysterical. Actually, the constitution states that a state can make their own election rules for qualifying candidates.Lol oh my god. Your hypocrisy blows my mind. States have always had their own election rules you idiot. Should all those rules be over turned now that the narrative isn’t in your favor?
If they conflict with the Constitution, you bet your commie ass.
.
Actually you're a liar, the Constitution lays out the qualifications for reps to the federal government, to include the president. Using your logic a State could say only black trangenders can be on the ballot for president. I guess you think that would be just peachy? You commies are funny, pathetic, but funny.
.
Yep, because the parties run their own primaries and they do their own nominations for the general election. Commiefornification can't change that. Or what the minimum requirements for a candidate can be to be on a ballot for federal office.
.
Democrats wanting to return to their glory days of selective exclusion. Instead of skin color its now political affiliation. When do you loons plan on lynching people you disagree with ?
Those are filing requirements, not qualification requirements. It's more about fees and deadlines if anything. But I just want you to remember this:
View attachment 271990
This is what I'll be posting to your reply back on this topic after the court shoots it down.
They are requirements to be on the ballot.
I suspect the courts will, but I do not think it is as black and white as your little mind makes is.
I also do not agree with it, but that is irrelevant.
Filing requirements are pure paperwork is all. This is blackmail. Sorry you can't see the difference, but the court will.
collecting 10,000 signatures is more than just paperwork
That's only if you don't run with a supporting party. It applies to Independents and write-ins.
Is it in the Constitution as a requirement to be president?
/—-/ Red State voter suppression translated = only US citizens, registered and alive are allowed to vote ONCE.Oh red states don't need to do that. Their elections are already rigged through voter suppression./—-/ And if Red States ban pro abortion candidates from the ballot you’ll be cool with that, right?This will be interesting. Obviously a state can pass such a law. I think it's fair to want a candidate to be transparent. I'm not sure the courts will allow it.
They are requirements to be on the ballot.
I suspect the courts will, but I do not think it is as black and white as your little mind makes is.
I also do not agree with it, but that is irrelevant.
Filing requirements are pure paperwork is all. This is blackmail. Sorry you can't see the difference, but the court will.
collecting 10,000 signatures is more than just paperwork
That's only if you don't run with a supporting party. It applies to Independents and write-ins.
Is it in the Constitution as a requirement to be president?
No, it's in the state filing system. But those laws are created for organizational purposes, not because one candidate doesn't want to do a particular thing. Like I said, it's no different than when Ears didn't want anybody to see his college transcripts or original birth certificate. If my state made a requirement of either, it would have been created for one individual and is basically blackmail.
Filing requirements are pure paperwork is all. This is blackmail. Sorry you can't see the difference, but the court will.
collecting 10,000 signatures is more than just paperwork
That's only if you don't run with a supporting party. It applies to Independents and write-ins.
Is it in the Constitution as a requirement to be president?
No, it's in the state filing system. But those laws are created for organizational purposes, not because one candidate doesn't want to do a particular thing. Like I said, it's no different than when Ears didn't want anybody to see his college transcripts or original birth certificate. If my state made a requirement of either, it would have been created for one individual and is basically blackmail.
Again, while I do suspect the courts will stop it, I do not think it is as black and white as all the Trumpians think it is.
Also, it addresses all candidates equally,
if he didn't submit a tax return, I think the IRS would be after him. hmmm you must be confused.
collecting 10,000 signatures is more than just paperwork
That's only if you don't run with a supporting party. It applies to Independents and write-ins.
Is it in the Constitution as a requirement to be president?
No, it's in the state filing system. But those laws are created for organizational purposes, not because one candidate doesn't want to do a particular thing. Like I said, it's no different than when Ears didn't want anybody to see his college transcripts or original birth certificate. If my state made a requirement of either, it would have been created for one individual and is basically blackmail.
Again, while I do suspect the courts will stop it, I do not think it is as black and white as all the Trumpians think it is.
Also, it addresses all candidates equally,
No, it only addresses one candidate in particular. It’s adding a new requirement to the requirements already in the Constitution.
It's hard to imagine what kind of mental deficiency would make a person so obsessed with seeing another persons tax return. So now we are going to allow these mouth foamers to rewrite election law? What next, bring back the poll tax or have an intelligence test to determine eligibility? Democrats are too crazy to rule.
