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.
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.
Well, it's not like Democrats give a shit about the Constitution.
Unconstitutional.
So, if Trump releases his, the Democrat challenger has to release THEIRS, right???You can have that standard in Virginia. In California, we want to see his tax returns. We don't trust the motherfucker.Teddy Kennedy never released his tax returns when he challenged Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Dem primary.
How about a different standard? If you destroy evidence that's under a Congressional subpoena, you don't get to be on the ballot. Hillary would have been ineligible under this rule.
I believe Biden has already submitted his tax returns.So a red state can now add arbitrary requirements for the Democrats' candidate, or keep them off the ballot, right???
And if California demands that Trump show his tax returns to get on the ballot, then I assume that the Democrats' candidate will have to show THEIR tax return too, or be left off the ballots!!!
Wrong. They are adding a requirement to run for President. If the founders wanted states to make their own requirements, they would have stated so in the Constitution. The state of Commie Fornia decided to change the requirements which is unconstitutional, and they know it.
No, the person can still run for president, they are not stopping them. You are just making things up.
No, what they are saying is HE CAN'T run for President in their state. Again, totally unconstitutional.
That's like my state saying before the Romney election, all contenders must provide their college transcripts and original birth certificate. Do you think my state would have been able to do that for DumBama's reelection?
That would have been Obama's problem, not your state's problem.
Tax returns are not that hard to get a hold of. If Trump doesn't have a copy, he can get one from the IRS.
Only against the conservative white folk. Not against the left wing libbie white folk.The dems have really lost it...its amazing to witness....you could not have made this up....
Since Democrats have turned against white folks, they are worried about losing elections. So now the plan is beg, borrow and steal.
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
Democrats don't have to obey the law. Just ask 'em.So, if Trump releases his, the Democrat challenger has to release THEIRS, right???You can have that standard in Virginia. In California, we want to see his tax returns. We don't trust the motherfucker.Teddy Kennedy never released his tax returns when he challenged Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Dem primary.
How about a different standard? If you destroy evidence that's under a Congressional subpoena, you don't get to be on the ballot. Hillary would have been ineligible under this rule.
And their tax return (and net gain in assets) can be put under a microscope for payoffs or illicit activity...
If the Democrat doesn't release THEIR tax returns, THEY get left off the ballot, and Trump carries the state...
I just can't wait to see THAT play out!!!
And when the "compact" from the blue states (giving their EC votes to the winner of the popular vote) kicks in, the Democrats are done if they can't find a CLEAN candidate!!!
You can pretty much take it to the bank that California will not vote GOP for the remainder of your lifetime.Thank for admitting your disorder.Oh stop. We were NEVER voting for Trump. With or without the tax returns.California, the traitor state! lol you idiots are insane!
You can pretty much take it to the bank that California will not vote GOP for the remainder of your lifetime.Thank for admitting your disorder.Oh stop. We were NEVER voting for Trump. With or without the tax returns.California, the traitor state! lol you idiots are insane!
I believe such a law would benefit Trump. Presidential candidates don't get elected in November, those that comprise the Electoral College are what people are really selecting. California Republicans simply need to get their electors chosen, and to accomplish that they'll have a better chance with somebody on the ballot other than Trump himself.
I believe such a law would benefit Trump. Presidential candidates don't get elected in November, those that comprise the Electoral College are what people are really selecting. California Republicans simply need to get their electors chosen, and to accomplish that they'll have a better chance with somebody on the ballot other than Trump himself.
It's just the idea of commie states changing or trying to change the election system because leftist have the mentality of children. They lost, and they've been melting ever since. Get rid of the Electoral College, majority vote of the country gets their EC votes, trying to blackmail a sitting President, allowing convicted felons to vote, tossing around the idea of lowering the voting age.
The problem is if we don't stop these anti-Americans in their tracks, they will only try to advance from there. Democrats never had the balls to go nose to nose in a fair fight.
I think he already had ICE focus on California just a couple of weekends ago. I didn't go well for him.You can pretty much take it to the bank that California will not vote GOP for the remainder of your lifetime.Thank for admitting your disorder.Oh stop. We were NEVER voting for Trump. With or without the tax returns.California, the traitor state! lol you idiots are insane!
Better not say that too loud. After this, Trump may have ICE focus specifically on that state for the removal of illegals regardless if they are criminal or not.
You can have that standard in Virginia. In California, we want to see his tax returns. We don't trust the motherfucker.Teddy Kennedy never released his tax returns when he challenged Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Dem primary.
How about a different standard? If you destroy evidence that's under a Congressional subpoena, you don't get to be on the ballot. Hillary would have been ineligible under this rule.
The Constitution does not mandate an election of electors to select the president. The 14th Amendment does mention the choosing of Electors. There is similar mention in the 24th Amendment. In other words, Electors could be appointed by a state's legislature, or the legislature could empower the governor to choose electors. If a state decides on a public election as a method of selecting electors which all states do, then state law and the state constitution determines the requirements and how the election is run.Wrong. They are adding a requirement to run for President. If the founders wanted states to make their own requirements, they would have stated so in the Constitution. The state of Commie Fornia decided to change the requirements which is unconstitutional, and they know it.
No, the person can still run for president, they are not stopping them. You are just making things up.
No, what they are saying is HE CAN'T run for President in their state. Again, totally unconstitutional.
That's like my state saying before the Romney election, all contenders must provide their college transcripts and original birth certificate. Do you think my state would have been able to do that for DumBama's reelection?
The Constitution does not mandate a popular election for electors who will select the president. The 14th Amendment does mention the choosing of Electors, but is relevant only when Electors are elected by popular vote. There is similar mention in the 24th Amendment. In other words, Electors could be appointed by a state's legislature, or the legislature could empower the governor to choose electors. If a state decides on a public election as method selecting electors which all states do, then state law determines the requirements for electors and how the election is run.Wrong. They are adding a requirement to run for President. If the founders wanted states to make their own requirements, they would have stated so in the Constitution. The state of Commie Fornia decided to change the requirements which is unconstitutional, and they know it.
No, the person can still run for president, they are not stopping them. You are just making things up.
No, what they are saying is HE CAN'T run for President in their state. Again, totally unconstitutional.
That's like my state saying before the Romney election, all contenders must provide their college transcripts and original birth certificate. Do you think my state would have been able to do that for DumBama's reelection?
In accordance with the constitution California is free as to how it selects electors which can be in any manor it chooses as long as it does not violate state or federal law. And requiring all candidates to submit tax returns violates neither. If Trump does not submit his tax returns, he will loose a huge of number of voters in the popular vote but still could become president. If this would spread to other states in which Trump is looking to win, then this could be a huge problem for the president. If could well force him to release his tax returns. If this would happen it would bring to light a big problem in the constitution.
