No it is an example of competence. They knew about the deadline and took care of it beforehand.So to be clear when Trump decided to hold his convention late in 2020 and missed the deadline you think that was evidence of his incompetence and that he would screw up a drive through order?
No it’s not…but it IS a disqualifier for the presidency. (and vice presidency)LOL. Being 34 isn't a crime.
Okay so then you have chosen that the framers of the 14th amendment thought Jefferson Davis should have been eligible for the presidency in 1868 when they wrote the amendment.Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
It would be more entertaining if it wasn’t a bunch of sad old white guys who have no rhythm.Everyone knows it’s a bad look to say ‘yes I’m voting for the party that tried to end democracy’, hence all the dancing and mental gymnastics.
No it is an example of competence. They knew about the deadline and took care of it beforehand.
If you have a test and one person just does not bother to show up while another talked to the teacher beforehand and explains they are having surgery on that day and gets an exemption. One behavior is an example of being a comptent person while the other is an airhead.
But it is a rule. How do you adjudicate?LOL. Being 34 isn't a crime.
I figured it was sarcasm dice you weren’t calling for your usual public executions for minor offenses.Alla y’all motherfuckers need new sarcasm meters.
Ahh - so when Democrats quickly and easily take care of this by holding some pro-forma convention ahead of the deadline you will then agree that this is a display of competence and revise your opinion.No it is an example of competence. They knew about the deadline and took care of it beforehand.
If you have a test and one person just does not bother to show up while another talked to the teacher beforehand and explains they are having surgery on that day and gets an exemption. One behavior is an example of being a comptent person while the other is an airhead.
Okay so then you have chosen that the framers of the 14th amendment thought Jefferson Davis should have been eligible for the presidency in 1868 when they wrote the amendment.
Do you honestly believe that?
So…I should call for the very public execution of TFG and all the convicted insurrectionists for treason?I figured it was sarcasm dice you weren’t calling for your usual public executions for minor offenses.
Still shows they are not competent.Ahh - so when Democrats quickly and easily take care of this by holding some pro-forma convention ahead of the deadline you will then agree that this is a display of competence and revise your opinion.
Can you confirm?
We need a bipartisan/multipartisan commission that determines/confirms eligibility of candidates nation-wide, probably including two representatives of every state or something. Confirmation should happen with every election regardless of previous confirmations.But it is a rule. How do you adjudicate?
So to be clear:Still shows they are not competent.
Spilling something and having to clean up your mistake is NOT the same as being competent and not spilling.
When the have to do damage control to correct their mistake it still shows a total absence of forethought and planning.
Weed is now legal in Ohio
Dude1: "Dude! we have a deadline to make."
Dude 2: "Dude, this shit is unreal time no longer exists"
Ok great, I will not ask you what was in their minds when they wrote it then.I don't know what was in their minds when they wrote that. I have already stated what I believe.
Still shows they are not competent.
Spilling something and having to clean up your mistake is NOT the same as being competent and not spilling.
When the have to do damage control to correct their mistake it still shows a total absence of forethought and planning.
Weed is now legal in Ohio
Dude1: "Dude! we have a deadline to make."
Dude 2: "Dude, this shit is unreal time no longer exists"
The 90-day deadline has often caused trouble since its adoption in 2010. Only in 2016 did both parties’ conventions take place before the Ohio cutoff date. Both conventions took place after the deadline in 2012 and 2020, and legislators extended the deadline both times. This is the first time that only one convention comes too late, but Republicans could well be affected in the future.
Ohio’s 90-day deadline is not only arbitrary, I believe that it is irrational. Nobody seems to know why the state extended the deadline from 60 to 90 days in 2010. The change came in an obscure provision of a 341-page bill.
The 90-day deadline has been a problem in almost every presidential election since then. The Legislature waived the deadline in 2012 and 2020, when both parties’ conventions fell after the cutoff date, and those elections ran smoothly. So the state can’t justify sticking with the 90-day rule this year when only one party is holding its convention after the deadline.
I don't know what was in their minds when they wrote that. I have already stated what I believe.
Revise his position? HAHAHA HAHAHAHAThis is 100% false.
In case you would like to read the legal reasoning here you go:
Here's the district court ruling finding that Trump engaged in insurrection and the evidence used to support this finding:
So now that you know they DID have legal reasoning, do you want to revise your position?
lol you’re the one that believes him when he states he won’t vote orange monkey in November.Like is anyone else absolutely astounded by @pcgeek11 arguing that leading an armed invasion of the US does not disqualify you from becoming president under the 14th amendment?
Correct.lol you’re the one that believes him when he states he won’t vote orange monkey in November.
Pcgeek is 100% voting for trump and is offering to be his Monica inauguration night.Correct.
The framers had nothing to do with the 14th, and amendments supersede the parts of the constitution that they are amending.So the accusation become the conviction? Do you think the framers wanted that? No hearing, no ability to address the charges, no defense? "Everyone knows" suddenly becomes the standard for denial of rights?
It's well established that amendments can be limited, interpreted, constrained. It's been done to the second, why not the fourteenth?