Colorado kicks Trump Off Ballot for 2024

[Arcangl86]

There is a primary election to choose candidates. Those ballots are sent through the Parties. I receive a ballot for Republicans only.

As determined by state law. There is no requirement for partisan primaries.

There is General Election to decide between the two or more party candidates.

As determined by state law. California for instance has a system where everybody goes into a open primary and the top two vote receivers go into the general, regardless of party.

Yes, there is a General Election Ballot.

Correct

The State cannot determine who is on that ballot.

Incorrect. That's why things like ballot access are so important for third parties.

Arizona has two General Election Ballots, one State, one Federal

I'm not from Arizona so I can't speak to this directly. However if that's accurate that would be a rather unusual way to do things as it adds complexity and cost.

Arizona can determine who votes on the State Ballot for State Offices but Arizona has absolutely no say in who is on the Federal Election Ballot or who votes in the Federal Election.

Nope, not true. If it was, then things like voter ID laws and felony disentrancement wouldn't apply for federal elections and they do. And you wouldn't get the current situation where third parties appear on some state ballots and not on others.

The Colorado Republican Party can decide to either issue primary ballots to Republicans or Caucus

It is true that they can chose to caucus, but primaries in Colorado, like in many states, are run by the state.

The Courts and the State cannot interfere in the Caucus as that is egregious election interference.

I see no indication that anybody is planning on interfering in the Caucus.

 

[Merrill]

I want Trump to be held properly to account for Jan 6 and any other legal challenges he faces.

Yeah right lol

Trump is not on trial for sedition / insurrection, and he did face impeachment hearings in congress already.

Now he is facing other legal challenges, but that is a different matter (some of which is completely partisan bogus)

the group that started this effort to get Trump removed from state ballots is Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a hyper-partisan congressional watchdog outfit. That group is funded primarily through "Democracy Alliance" which is a Soros-funded activist group:

Inside a secretive billionaire club’s plan to help Democrats take Congress

The donor clique views wooing new voters in diversifying states across the southern U.S. as the best way to take down President Donald Trump in 2020.

www.politico.com

and Soros funded the campaigns of judges, including the state's attorney in Colorado

 

[SimplyMe]

Yeah right lol

Trump is not on trial for sedition / insurrection, and he did face impeachment hearings in congress already.

Now he is facing other legal challenges, but that is a different matter (some of which is completely partisan bogus)

the group that started this effort to get Trump removed from state ballots is Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a hyper-partisan congressional watchdog outfit. That group is funded primarily through "Democracy Alliance" which is a Soros-funded activist group:

Inside a secretive billionaire club’s plan to help Democrats take Congress

The donor clique views wooing new voters in diversifying states across the southern U.S. as the best way to take down President Donald Trump in 2020.

www.politico.com

But the plaintiffs in the case, the ones that actually brought the case, are six Colorado Republicans.

and Soros funded the campaigns of judges, including the state's attorney in Colorado

That's nice but the State's Attorney is not a judge. Instead, this was a decision by the Colorado Supreme Court. The initial trial judge specifically made the ruling that it did not disqualify Trump, using an argument made by Trump's lawyers in their defense, even though she found Trump guilty of supporting an insurrection.

 

[Merrill]

But the plaintiffs in the case, the ones that actually brought the case, are six Colorado Republicans.



That's nice but the State's Attorney is not a judge. Instead, this was a decision by the Colorado Supreme Court. The initial trial judge specifically made the ruling that it did not disqualify Trump, using an argument made by Trump's lawyers in their defense, even though she found Trump guilty of supporting an insurrection.

From Reuters

"The case was brought by a group of Colorado voters, aided by the advocacy group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington"

yes, the plaintiffs were a group of Republicans, but the organization funding the effort, and which prepared that legal justification for the complaint is CREW.

 

[SimplyMe]

From Reuters

"The case was brought by a group of Colorado voters, aided by the advocacy group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington"

yes, the plaintiffs were a group of Republicans, but the organization funding the effort, and which prepared that legal justification for the complaint is CREW.

So a group of Republicans found a way to use a liberal group for their benefit, it doesn't change who brought the suit. Seems like that would be the type of thing you'd support, a liberal group using their money to support Conservative causes.

 

[essentialsaltes]

yes, the plaintiffs were a group of Republicans, but the organization funding the effort, and which prepared that legal justification for the complaint is CREW.

At least we've established the state AG wasn't involved.

 

[Merrill]

So a group of Republicans found a way to use a liberal group for their benefit, it doesn't change who brought the suit. Seems like that would be the type of thing you'd support, a liberal group using their money to support Conservative causes.

I would never support something like this, which is like something you see out of Vladimir Putin's playbook

The Democratic Party's agenda for both the primaries and the general election is to keep opponents to Joe Biden off the ballot. RFK and Williamson were denied ballot access in places like Utah and Florida (with Florida simply cancelling the primary and handing over the electoral votes to Joe), and the DNC altered the primary calendar to favor the president.

Now the party is resorting to dubious legal appeals to get the GOP challenger removed from the presidential ballot

this is all profoundly undemocratic

pretty sad to see people in this country cheering this stuff on

 

[Yttrium]

There is General Election to decide between the two or more party candidates.
Yes, there is a General Election Ballot. The State cannot determine who is on that ballot.

The Constitution specifically says that it's up to the state legislatures to determine how electors are chosen. The states don't even have to hold general elections, It so happens that all the states have decided to hold general elections with similar formats.

If you look at the general election ballots from different states, you'll find that the lists for presidential candidates are different. That's because most third parties don't manage to qualify for the ballots in every state. Each state has its own standards for getting on the ballot, and third parties usually don't have the resources to meet those requirements everywhere.

 

[wing2000]

I would never support something like this, which is like something you see out of Vladimir Putin's playbook

The Democratic Party's agenda for both the primaries and the general election is to keep opponents to Joe Biden off the ballot. RFK and Williamson were denied ballot access in places like Utah and Florida (with Florida simply cancelling the primary and handing over the electoral votes to Joe), and the DNC altered the primary calendar to favor the president.

Now the party is resorting to dubious legal appeals to get the GOP challenger removed from the presidential ballot

this is all profoundly undemocratic

pretty sad to see people in this country cheering this stuff on

The fact remains Republican and Independent voters are supporting this effort...an effort that would not be necessary if Donald Trump had simply accepted the election results and the numerous related court decisions thereafter.

In my view, this is not a partisan issue.

It is a Constittional issue. There is a reason this section of the 14th Amendment has not been tested since the last century: No President has engaged in an insurrection.

 

[QvQ]

The Constitution specifically says that it's up to the state legislatures to determine how electors are chosen.

Electors are not candidates
IF a State can decide who the candidates are then people could be excluded for disability or age and even more egregious reasons, such as religion.
It is a question whether the State can decide who the candidates are.
It doesn't matter to me, politically
I think DeSantis has a better chance than Trump.
It does matter to me in terms of Constitutional questions.

 

[essentialsaltes]

It is a question whether the State can decide who the candidates are.

There is no question. States do decide who is eligible. The state election laws, of course, have to be constitutional.

 

[Merrill]

The fact remains Republican and Independent voters are supporting this effort...an effort that would not be necessary if Donald Trump had simply accepted the election results and the numerous related court decisions thereafter.

In my view, this is not a partisan issue.

It is a Constittional issue. There is a reason this section of the 14th Amendment has not been tested since the last century: No President has engaged in an insurrection.

Most people are in agreement with the idea that what Trump did was wrong. But he was never charged with insurrection or sedition, nor was he convicted. Not everyone agrees that it was "insurrection"

yes, there is a serious Constitutional issue here: whether or not state courts can decide, in absence of conviction, or even confirmation or sedition, can arbitrarily declare a candidate guilty of a crime, and then invoke the 14th to keep the candidate off the ballot. That radical billionaires could work to get judges appointed, and fund legal groups, who will then use an expansive, constitutionally-dubious reading of the 14th to make sure their enemies can't get elected.

no one in their right mind should "support this effort", as upholding the Colorado verdict would give license to every court in the country to declare candidates invalid, and to strip citizens of their voting rights. Alan Derschowitz remarked ""In the 60 years I've been practicing and teaching law, I've never seen a decision that's so anti-democratic and so unconstitutional; it is absurd,"

 

[Tropical Wilds]

I am not a Trump supporter, and this really doesn't have to do with him

The thread about how he was kicked off the ballot and then the people defending him really had nothing to do with him? Lol, k.

 

[SimplyMe]

I would never support something like this, which is like something you see out of Vladimir Putin's playbook

Fair enough.

The Democratic Party's agenda for both the primaries and the general election is to keep opponents to Joe Biden off the ballot.

I'm not aware of the Democratic Party trying to keep anyone off the ballot in the General Election. CREW is not the Democratic Party, although they may support "liberal" causes. The Republicans that brought the suit, with the help of CREW are not part of the Democratic Party. Nor is there any attempt, by anyone, to keep Republicans (other than Trump) or RFK off the General Election ballot.

RFK and Williamson were denied ballot access in places like Utah and Florida (with Florida simply cancelling the primary and handing over the electoral votes to Joe), and the DNC altered the primary calendar to favor the president.

So where were your complaints when Trump/Republicans did this same thing in the 2020 primaries? Except, in Trump's case, I believe there were about 7 states where there was no vote (either a primary or caucuses), they just declared Trump the winner of their primary. And, yes, there were a couple of Republican challengers to Trump in 2020 (even if they did as poorly as RFK would do in the Democratic primaries). It is common for both parties to do this when they have an incumbent President.

Now the party is resorting to dubious legal appeals to get the GOP challenger removed from the presidential ballot

Where? Again, CREW is not the Democratic Party and the six Republicans are Republican. I'm not aware of any effort by the DNC or Biden to remove any person from the general election ballot.

this is all profoundly undemocratic

pretty sad to see people in this country cheering this stuff on

By your logic, it must be undemocratic that Arnold Schwarzenegger cannot run for President of the United States, since he is not Constitutionally qualified to run. I'm not "cheering this on" by any means but I am interested in the courts determination of if former Pres. Trump is Constitutionally qualified to run for President again based on the 14th Amendment. As I've said, I'll be interested in SCOTUS's ruling (assuming they take the case) and what legal justifications they use for their ruling -- as well as which justices vote in support of the majority decision.

 

[BPPLEE]

Fair enough.


I'm not aware of the Democratic Party trying to keep anyone off the ballot in the General Election. CREW is not the Democratic Party, although they may support "liberal" causes. The Republicans that brought the suit, with the help of CREW are not part of the Democratic Party. Nor is there any attempt, by anyone, to keep Republicans (other than Trump) or RFK off the General Election ballot.



So where were your complaints when Trump/Republicans did this same thing in the 2020 primaries? Except, in Trump's case, I believe there were about 7 states where there was no vote (either a primary or caucuses), they just declared Trump the winner of their primary. And, yes, there were a couple of Republican challengers to Trump in 2020 (even if they did as poorly as RFK would do in the Democratic primaries).



Where? Again, CREW is not the Democratic Party and the six Republicans are Republican. I'm not aware of any effort by the DNC or Biden to remove any person from the general election ballot.



By your logic, it must be undemocratic that Arnold Schwarzenegger cannot run for President of the United States, since he is not Constitutionally qualified to run. I'm not "cheering this on" by any means but I am interested in the courts determination of if former Pres. Trump is Constitutionally qualified to run for President again based on the 14th Amendment. As I've said, I'll be interested in SCOTUS's ruling (assuming they take the case) and what legal justifications they use for their ruling -- as well as which justices vote in support of the majority decision.

There are several lawsuits around the country seeking to keep Trump off the ballot.

Why are the 14th Amendment lawsuits seeking to bar Trump failing?

“Who wants to be the judge that disqualifies the leading presidential candidate on the Republican ticket?” one legal scholar said.

abcnews.go.com

 

[essentialsaltes]

There are several lawsuits around the country seeking to keep Trump off the ballot.

Why are the 14th Amendment lawsuits seeking to bar Trump failing?

“Who wants to be the judge that disqualifies the leading presidential candidate on the Republican ticket?” one legal scholar said.

abcnews.go.com

Mostly brought by Republicans. Well, one Republican.

Further dismissals have come from cases mounted by long shot Republican presidential write-in candidate John Anthony Castro, who has filed similar suits in dozens of states

 

[SimplyMe]

There are several lawsuits around the country seeking to keep Trump off the ballot.

Why are the 14th Amendment lawsuits seeking to bar Trump failing?

“Who wants to be the judge that disqualifies the leading presidential candidate on the Republican ticket?” one legal scholar said.

abcnews.go.com

I didn't say there weren't. I said to show me one that was done by "the Democrats;" again, I'm not aware of any where the Democratic National Committee have had any involvement. In fact, based on Colorado (and a few other states where Republicans are involved to keep Trump off the ballot) it is just as fair, or perhaps even more fair, to say "the Republicans" are fighting to keep Trump off the ballot.

 

[BPPLEE]

Mostly brought by Republicans. Well, one Republican.

Further dismissals have come from cases mounted by long shot Republican presidential write-in candidate John Anthony Castro, who has filed similar suits in dozens of states

How many active attempts are there to keep Trump off the ballot?

 

[BPPLEE]

I didn't say there weren't. I said to show me one that was done by "the Democrats;" again, I'm not aware of any where the Democratic National Committee have had any involvement. In fact, based on Colorado (and a few other states where Republicans are involved to keep Trump off the ballot) it is just as fair, or perhaps even more fair, to say "the Republicans" are fighting to keep Trump off the ballot.

There are plenty of Republicans who would like to see Trump off the ballot

 

[essentialsaltes]

How many active attempts are there to keep Trump off the ballot?

According to this, it looks like 13 pending, 2 on appeal, and Colorado.