no tax return, no place on ballot

[Harpy Eagle]

I am saying that states already impose standards that are not in the Constitution. They have been upheld by the courts.

Whether this one will be is yet to be seen.

And no, a rule he must be under 35 would violate the constitution directly.

Please list the additional standards states impose that could stop a party from nominating the candidate of it's choice for elections in that state.

So would you think it constitutional for Texas to require all nominees to have an NRA membership and show all of their college and medical records?

Every state has signature requirements for any candidate not of a select few parties.

That's not what I asked.

Currently, the GOP, Democrat Party, and other parties will all decide their own nominees without asking permission from the States as to who they can put on the ballot.

You are saying the the state of California can disqualify a party's nominee because they're butt-hurt.

Please link me to a state that has ever denied a party the right to pick it's own nominee for their ballot.

The states have given certain parties an exemption from meeting their rules for being on the ballot. This exemption is not based on anything in the Constitution, it is an individual state thing.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I am saying that states already impose standards that are not in the Constitution. They have been upheld by the courts.

Whether this one will be is yet to be seen.

And no, a rule he must be under 35 would violate the constitution directly.

Please list the additional standards states impose that could stop a party from nominating the candidate of it's choice for elections in that state.

So would you think it constitutional for Texas to require all nominees to have an NRA membership and show all of their college and medical records?

By the way, we are all still waiting on that classified data you said would be made public yesterday...any updates on that?

I never said that.

Would you care to address the post, or continue to deflect in order to hide your failure?

You made a whole fucking thread about it you lying bastard.

The Storm Is Coming! Declassified Documents In Deep State Coup To Be Released By Wednesday, July 31

 

[pknopp]

Because he said he would. (Release his taxes)

Apparently he changed his mind.

His tax returns aren't your business.

Feel free to post your tax returns in your reply.

No, he lied. I don't care about his tax returns. I've stated that repeatedly. I care about a president honoring his word.

Then I guess you're voting for Jesus Christ this election?

What candidate hasn't lied?

As far as I have been able to determine, Bernie Sanders.

 

[MAGAman]

Can you highlight the part of the Constitution that list the requirement for 10,000 signatures?

That is an administrative need to keep from having 20,000 people on the ballot, and is designed to make elections better. It doesn't bar a party from making a nomination. And it has nothing to do with a party being butt-hurt.

Keep digging....

So you never answered whether it would be constitutional for TX to require NRA memberships for party nominees.

 

[danielpalos]

Democrats be like... if you don't streak down 5th ave, you can't be on the ballot

lol. dear right wingers, we are referring to a public office not a private office. xoxo

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Can you highlight the part of the Constitution that list the requirement for 10,000 signatures?

That is an administrative need to keep from having 20,000 people on the ballot, and is designed to make elections better. It doesn't bar a party from making a nomination. And it has nothing to do with a party being butt-hurt.

Keep digging....

So you never answered whether it would be constitutional for TX to require NRA memberships for party nominees.

It is still a requirement that is not in the Constitution.

As for Tx, who knows. We will have to see how the courts rule on this one. I suspect it will be shot down

 

[MAGAman]

You made a whole fucking thread about it you lying bastard.

The Storm Is Coming! Declassified Documents In Deep State Coup To Be Released By Wednesday, July 31

You shouldn't get so emotional and lose your mind over your losses.

There has been some declassification of documents. There's more to come....

When you get over your temper tantrum, you can either reply to the post or I'll accept your surrender of the point.

 

[MAGAman]

It is still a requirement that is not in the Constitution.

As for Tx, who knows. We will have to see how the courts rule on this one. I suspect it will be shot down

The signature requirement does not disqualify a party's nominee. It's not a political act of desperation.

And any idiot that's read the Constitution knows it could only be upheld in a corrupt court.

 

[TheGreatSatan]

Democrats be like... if you don't streak down 5th ave, you can't be on the ballot

lol. dear right wingers, we are referring to a public office not a private office. xoxo

Democrats are to dumb and brainwashed to see that this tax return BS is just the new chum Democrats are feeding the drones who follow them. They ran out of the russian chum.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You made a whole fucking thread about it you lying bastard.

The Storm Is Coming! Declassified Documents In Deep State Coup To Be Released By Wednesday, July 31

You shouldn't get so emotional and lose your mind over your losses.

There has been some declassification of documents. There's more to come....

When you get over your temper tantrum, you can either reply to the post or I'll accept your surrender of the point.

Where are the promised documents? You are full of shit. Just admit you were duped and move on

 

[pknopp]

It is still a requirement that is not in the Constitution.

As for Tx, who knows. We will have to see how the courts rule on this one. I suspect it will be shot down

The signature requirement does not disqualify a party's nominee. It's not a political act of desperation.

And any idiot that's read the Constitution knows it could only be upheld in a corrupt court.

The ability of an administration to put a question on a census is clearly something legal. The court still blocked the Trump administration because they lied before the court.

This was my thinking when I noted that this could be an interesting case. No, I still do not think it will hold up as it's clearly going after one single candidate but it was that candidates lies that got us here.

 

[karpenter]

How can it be unconstitutional for the state to require tax returns for gubernatorial and presidential candidates in a state primary?

Because Pre-Existing Federal Law Says
Federal Income Tax Returns Are Confidential To The IRS ONLY
California Doesn't Have Standing To Even ASK To Examine Them
Let Alone Standing To Enact Their Impotent Little Law

Nor Does California, New York
Or Any Other State Have Standing
To Remove The Republican Party Nominee
From ANY State Ballot For ANY Reason
Which Is What This Boils Down To

And Why The Republican Nominee For President (TRUMP)
Will Be On The Ballot Of ALL 50 STATES
And All The Hoping, And Wishing, And Praying
Won't Change A Thing

50 Pages Of MORE Proof
Democrats Have No Idea How Our Elections Work

 

[Flopper]

It can get funded because he would close loopholes and deductions to make it work. Either way, the effective tax rate is the 50’s was higher and the world didn’t collapse did it?

Why would the doctors quit? Why would the hospitals close? Based on what? You also forget that we pay per capita more than any nation in the world on earth on healthcare. A socialized system would save us money.

I just explained why hospitals would close and doctors would quit. No business can operate at a loss or even break even for that matter. Do you think an American wants to spend 8 years of their life racking up hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans to become a physician only to work until 50 years old before it's paid off?

There is only one way to approach the healthcare problem, and that is analyze why it's so expensive in the first place. I guarantee you government is mostly responsible for that. After we greatly reduce the cost for healthcare, then let's figure out a way to pay for it. But this approach of paying for something that's out of control cost-wise is pure stupidity. That's why Commie Care is such a failure.

Now as to the tax rate. Yes, people paid higher taxes, but there were not many places left to go. Overseas travel was dangerous and expensive. Communications were antiquated and long distance was expensive, unreliable and the sound quality was miserable.

Today a business owner can pack up and move out of the country with no problem. He can keep track of his investments up to the minute on his or her cell phone. He can have corporate meetings on Skype or other means of virtual gatherings. With radar and satellites, overseas travel has never been safer.

See, what you don’t get is, 1st world countries in Europe have great socialist healthcare systems and there’s no critical shortage of doctors. You act as though our system is the best and when really it is the worst among developed nations. And I’ll tell you why it is worst and the most expensive: it’s a ridiculous for-profit system. People pay for prescription drugs at sky rocket rates. The same drugs in other countries cost a fraction of the same price. That shit is deliberate. Lobbyists made it illegal for Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices.

I don’t understand what point you’re making here. Regardless of the limitations at the time, rich people paid more in effective taxes and the middle class thrived.

I was not alive in the 50's, I was born in 1960, and let me tell you, nobody was thriving back then.

There is no critical shortage of doctors in socialized healthcare? Why don't you visit one country north where people wait forever to have serious medical issues addressed?

Being a truck driver in Cleveland, I often rub elbows with Canadian drivers. While waiting to get loaded or unloaded, we often talk.

I try to bring up the healthcare situation here and there. The younger drivers tell me they love their system. The older drivers tell me to keep what we have, or we will be sorry if in any way duplicate their system.

Show me one country where you think the healthcare system is perfect, and I'll provide several articles saying it's not so, because every country in the world has healthcare issues including the US. Ours may be different in the way of problems, but don't kid yourself thinking they don't have problems as well.

So you want government to control prescription prices? Great idea.

Hillary's Vaccine Shortage

Price controls are proven to be a really bad idea. We have a long history of price control policies going back to the 1930s. Every one of them ended in disaster. The fact that people still propose price controls demonstrates a horrible failure of our education system and a general ignorance of basic economics.

Only competition and efforts to increase the supply can control prices. Government regulation is a big log jam on supply.

.

What people don't understand is we are the innovator of many drugs in the world. But it's a tedious task as well.

It takes anywhere form 5 to 10 years for a new drug to hit the American market thanks to the FDA and trial lawyers. When a company creates a new drug, it has to undergo all kinds of government testing. It's also hundreds of thousands pieces of paperwork that goes along with it.

But after (let's say) you spent the hundreds of millions of dollars for all this government testing. You invested 7 years of combatting red tape, and now the FDA simply says "No thanks, we will not approve it!" What do you do?

What you do is increase the price of the drugs you already have on the market. That's the problem.

But oh! other countries pay less for drugs than we do!!!! This is true, but other countries also never had to do the testing that our companies have to. So if the drug makes it to our market, they can charge much cheaper prices in other countries where the cost to market the drug is almost nothing because we paid for all the mandated research.

Then there is the liability issue no other country has. Somebody here dies because of a drug. The family can sue them right out of business. So the manufacture of the drugs needs to include a liability cost because somebody somewhere in the US is going to sue them, and we have to pay for that as well.

You make a very good point. Other nations are getting a free ride when it comes to much of the research because most of the developmental research cost is paid by the drug companies and thus consumers.

In most advanced nations, drugs are either bid by government or some form of price controls are use to hold prices down, leaving the US and a few other countries funding most of the research.

If the US did as these other countries do, then the drug companies would be forced to raise their prices abroad forcing other nations to bear their share of the cost.

 

[TheGreatSatan]

It is still a requirement that is not in the Constitution.

As for Tx, who knows. We will have to see how the courts rule on this one. I suspect it will be shot down

The signature requirement does not disqualify a party's nominee. It's not a political act of desperation.

And any idiot that's read the Constitution knows it could only be upheld in a corrupt court.

It's just chum Democrats are feeding their brainwashed drones to keep hope alive that they are going to catch trump and send him to jail.

You might as well believe Democrats are going to give black people all giant reparations checks...

Or believe that healthcare will be free and awesome...

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It is still a requirement that is not in the Constitution.

As for Tx, who knows. We will have to see how the courts rule on this one. I suspect it will be shot down

The signature requirement does not disqualify a party's nominee. It's not a political act of desperation.

And any idiot that's read the Constitution knows it could only be upheld in a corrupt court.

The signature requirement disqualifies everyone that does not meet it. Where does the Constitution say the states can impose a signature requirement?

Please like the section of the Constitution you think this would violate.

 

[pknopp]

I just explained why hospitals would close and doctors would quit. No business can operate at a loss or even break even for that matter. Do you think an American wants to spend 8 years of their life racking up hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans to become a physician only to work until 50 years old before it's paid off?

There is only one way to approach the healthcare problem, and that is analyze why it's so expensive in the first place. I guarantee you government is mostly responsible for that. After we greatly reduce the cost for healthcare, then let's figure out a way to pay for it. But this approach of paying for something that's out of control cost-wise is pure stupidity. That's why Commie Care is such a failure.

Now as to the tax rate. Yes, people paid higher taxes, but there were not many places left to go. Overseas travel was dangerous and expensive. Communications were antiquated and long distance was expensive, unreliable and the sound quality was miserable.

Today a business owner can pack up and move out of the country with no problem. He can keep track of his investments up to the minute on his or her cell phone. He can have corporate meetings on Skype or other means of virtual gatherings. With radar and satellites, overseas travel has never been safer.

See, what you don’t get is, 1st world countries in Europe have great socialist healthcare systems and there’s no critical shortage of doctors. You act as though our system is the best and when really it is the worst among developed nations. And I’ll tell you why it is worst and the most expensive: it’s a ridiculous for-profit system. People pay for prescription drugs at sky rocket rates. The same drugs in other countries cost a fraction of the same price. That shit is deliberate. Lobbyists made it illegal for Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices.

I don’t understand what point you’re making here. Regardless of the limitations at the time, rich people paid more in effective taxes and the middle class thrived.

I was not alive in the 50's, I was born in 1960, and let me tell you, nobody was thriving back then.

There is no critical shortage of doctors in socialized healthcare? Why don't you visit one country north where people wait forever to have serious medical issues addressed?

Being a truck driver in Cleveland, I often rub elbows with Canadian drivers. While waiting to get loaded or unloaded, we often talk.

I try to bring up the healthcare situation here and there. The younger drivers tell me they love their system. The older drivers tell me to keep what we have, or we will be sorry if in any way duplicate their system.

Show me one country where you think the healthcare system is perfect, and I'll provide several articles saying it's not so, because every country in the world has healthcare issues including the US. Ours may be different in the way of problems, but don't kid yourself thinking they don't have problems as well.

So you want government to control prescription prices? Great idea.

Hillary's Vaccine Shortage

Price controls are proven to be a really bad idea. We have a long history of price control policies going back to the 1930s. Every one of them ended in disaster. The fact that people still propose price controls demonstrates a horrible failure of our education system and a general ignorance of basic economics.

Only competition and efforts to increase the supply can control prices. Government regulation is a big log jam on supply.

.

What people don't understand is we are the innovator of many drugs in the world. But it's a tedious task as well.

It takes anywhere form 5 to 10 years for a new drug to hit the American market thanks to the FDA and trial lawyers. When a company creates a new drug, it has to undergo all kinds of government testing. It's also hundreds of thousands pieces of paperwork that goes along with it.

But after (let's say) you spent the hundreds of millions of dollars for all this government testing. You invested 7 years of combatting red tape, and now the FDA simply says "No thanks, we will not approve it!" What do you do?

What you do is increase the price of the drugs you already have on the market. That's the problem.

But oh! other countries pay less for drugs than we do!!!! This is true, but other countries also never had to do the testing that our companies have to. So if the drug makes it to our market, they can charge much cheaper prices in other countries where the cost to market the drug is almost nothing because we paid for all the mandated research.

Then there is the liability issue no other country has. Somebody here dies because of a drug. The family can sue them right out of business. So the manufacture of the drugs needs to include a liability cost because somebody somewhere in the US is going to sue them, and we have to pay for that as well.

You make a very good point. Other nations are getting a free ride when it comes to much of the research because most of the developmental research cost is paid by the drug companies and thus consumers.

In most advanced nations, drugs are either bid by government or some form of price controls are use to hold prices down, leaving the US and a few other countries funding most of the research.

If the US did as these other countries do, then the drug companies would be forced to raise their prices abroad forcing other nations to bear their share of the cost.

Germany has also been a leader in research. Their costs are far less than ours.

 

[karpenter]

What candidate hasn't lied?

As far as I have been able to determine, Bernie Sanders.

Nope
There Was His Wage Thingy
And Then He CUT THEIR HOURS !!

HA-HAA !!

 

[Flopper]

This State Law Over-Rides Pre-Existing Federal Law
That Says Federal Income Tax Returns Are Confidential To The IRS
So California Doesn't Have Legal Standing To Enact This Law

They are not overriding it, it will still be confidential until such time as the candidates volunteer to make it not so.

Can You Show That States Make The Rules On Federal Elections
Because It Would Seem The Federal Gov't Makes The Rules On National Elections
Would That Be Why The Libertarian Party
Is Now Automatically On The Ballots Of All Fifty States
Where Does An Individual State Have The Authority
To Drop The Republican Candidate From Any Election, For Any Reason

You are wrong, the Fed Govt does not make the rules on National Election. Evan McMullin only was on 11 ballots in 2016 because every state has different rules.

Why should "major" party candidates get special treatment? Where is that in the Constitution?

Federal Election Law protect rights of voters against discrimination in both national and state election. Other than that, federal elections laws put requirements on campaign finance and certify that candidate meets the constitutional retirement in federal elections.

 

[pknopp]

What candidate hasn't lied?

As far as I have been able to determine, Bernie Sanders.

Nope
There Was His Wage Thingy
And Then He CUT THEIR HOURS !!

HA-HAA !!

If you think that is an impressive rebuttal......well it is typical.

 

[danielpalos]

Democrats be like... if you don't streak down 5th ave, you can't be on the ballot

lol. dear right wingers, we are referring to a public office not a private office. xoxo

Democrats are to dumb and brainwashed to see that this tax return BS is just the new chum Democrats are feeding the drones who follow them. They ran out of the russian chum.

lol. only the clueless and Causeless right wing believes that.

we merely need, follow the Capital under Any form of Capitalism; especially when foreign interference is suspected.