U.S. Politics

[Martin Weidmann]

Things that a dictator actually does:

1) Change the election laws in a way that is most advantageous to them just before an election
2) Lock up political opponents
3) Keep political opponents off the ballot
4) Suppress free speech
5) Enrich themselves and their families with corruption and bribes.

All actions that have been taken by Old Joe and his radical followers.   The Colorado ruling is the single most egregious example of voter suppression and election interference in American history.  It would not only keep Trump off the ballot but would preclude American citizens from even writing in his name as their candidate of choice.  Thus, depriving them of their Constitutional right to vote for a presidential candidate.  Imagine if an all-Republican appointed group of judges decided that Old Joe could not appear on the ballot.  The leftist media and radical mobs would go insane and burn the cities to the ground.   Absent a reversal by the Supreme Court, the precedent has been set that politically appointed judges in every individual state have the ability to preclude American citizens from voting for their candidate of choice.  The chaos and damage to democracy would be mind bending.  But the ends always justify any means for the radical Trump haters.  If it means destroying democracy to keep him from being elected, then they are willing to cross that Rubicon.   Ukraine Joe's fall in the polls while Trump surges has caused absolute panic.  They are running out of options.

All actions that have been taken by Old Joe and his radical followers.

Says the most radical follower of a man who couldn't care less about law and order, and none of it is true.

The Colorado ruling is the single most egregious example of voter suppression and election interference in American history. 

In reality the Colorado ruling follows the law designed that somebody who has already been behind an insurrection doesn't get another chance to destroy democracy.

Imagine if an all-Republican appointed group of judges decided that Old Joe could not appear on the ballot.  The leftist media and radical mobs would go insane and burn the cities to the ground.

If "Old Joe" had been behind an insurrection he shouldn't appear on the ballot, but, unlike Trump he wasn't.

Absent a reversal by the Supreme Court, the precedent has been set that politically appointed judges in every individual state have the ability to preclude American citizens from voting for their candidate of choice.

Nope. Judges need good reason to preclude somebody from being on the ballot. In Trump's case they did.

If it means destroying democracy to keep him from being elected, then they are willing to cross that Rubicon.

Protecting the country from a fascist wannabe dictator who quotes Hitler, is only "destroying democracy" in the eyes of the most fanatic Trump followers. Hilarious.

[Richard Smith]

The US Supreme Court is likely to unanimously reverse the Colorado decision.   Sec. 3 of the 14th Amendment does not apply to the president.  Even if it did, Trump has not been charged with "insurrection" must less convicted.  In fact, he was acquitted as part of the impeachment of any such act.   Imagine the chaos if the Dem precedent was established that every individual court from the various 50 states has the power to make a determination that a political candidate for President cannot be on the ballot based upon their own subjective interpretation of what constitutes an "insurrection."  And this decision is made in a state with judges appointed only by the political party running against this candidate.  Even the most radical, unhinged lunatic, Trump hating fringe must acknowledge that disenfranchising millions of American citizens from voting is not the way to win elections.  That kind of Jim Crow policy for political power is a relic of the past.  It does highlight, however, the extent to which these radicals are willing to go and their lack of confidence that Old Joe can win the 2024 election. 

Here is a prediction.  When the Supreme Court overturns this radical decision, the leftist loons will attempt to discredit the ruling on the basis of politics.  The irony.

[Martin Weidmann]

The US Supreme Court is likely to unanimously reverse the Colorado decision.   Sec. 3 of the 14th Amendment does not apply to the president.  Even if it did, Trump has not been charged with "insurrection" must less convicted.  In fact, he was acquitted as part of the impeachment of any such act.   Imagine the chaos if the Dem precedent was established that every individual court from the various 50 states has the power to make a determination that a political candidate for President cannot be on the ballot based upon their own subjective interpretation of what constitutes an "insurrection."  And this decision is made in a state with judges appointed only by the political party running against this candidate.  Even the most radical, unhinged lunatic, Trump hating fringe must acknowledge that disenfranchising millions of American citizens from voting is not the way to win elections.  That kind of Jim Crow policy for political power is a relic of the past.  It does highlight, however, the extent to which these radicals are willing to go and their lack of confidence that Old Joe can win the 2024 election. 

Here is a prediction.  When the Supreme Court overturns this radical decision, the leftist loons will attempt to discredit the ruling on the basis of politics.  The irony.

The US Supreme Court is likely to unanimously reverse the Colorado decision.   Sec. 3 of the 14th Amendment does not apply to the president. 

So, now "Richard" is all of a sudden a legal scholar.... or - more likely - he is just a parrot repeating the wishful thinking propaganda of right wing media   

Trump has not been charged with "insurrection" must less convicted.

Isn't it ironic that the claim that Trump can't be considered to be guilty because he was never convicted is made by the same guy who has no problem proclaiming Oswald guilty despite the fact that he was never convicted?

[Richard Smith]

The latest census numbers confirm that people are leaving the disastrous blue states as crime, homelessness, taxes, and lunacy reign supreme in those socialist utopias.  California and NY are being abandoned by law abiding citizens.  Where are they going?  To states run by Republicans in the South and mid-west.   Voting with their feet.

[Richard Smith]

There are no words for what is going on at the border.  It has become surreal.  Another year comes to a close with chaos, war, and crime out of control under Old Joe. With no end in sight.

[Richard Smith]

The year comes to an end the same way it began with disaster after disaster under Old Joe as he vacations in the Caribbean.  Endless wars (two now and another brewing with Iran), record crime, a tide of illegal immigrants, inflation, homeless, debt, and now even COVID is returning.   Remember when Old Joe promised to address COVID in some unspecified way?  He waved his magic wand and the media suddenly stopped reporting on it.  CNN took down that ticker that counted the number of cases and deaths.  They stopped advocating for masks and the vaccine.  Almost no one in the US has taken the booster under Old Joe.  He flubbed the rollout and never promoted it.  Imagine if Trump had done that.   Here is the headline today from the LA Times:

"Everyone seems to be sick with respiratory illness in California."

Why aren't CNN and MSNBC running this story continuously as they did when Trump was president?  It is a complete non-story for them.  Instead they have reverted to all Trump news.  They must be in a complete panic over the latest poll numbers.  They shouldn't worry.  With the changes to the election laws with endless early voting and ballot harvesting, the Republican candidate has to win 60-40 to be elected.  It will be an uphill climb even with the worst president in history running on the Dem side.

[Richard Smith]

So now a publicity seeking state bureaucrat can remove a national candidate from the presidential ballot based upon her political bias?  Can there be any better example of election interference than removing a presidential candidate from the ballot and precluding voters from that state from casting their vote for their desired candidate?  Imagine that if every such partisan bureaucrat can declare a candidate for president to be ineligible?  This is old school USSR type methods.  Not even Putin can compete with the current group of politicians working to undermine the 2024 election.  If you want the public to have confidence in the election process, then how about allowing the election to be conducted fairly?  That means allowing voters to cast their votes free of interference.   Dems raise a hue and cry when it is suggested that voters present some form of ID.  That is what they claim is voter suppression.  But they are now allowing low level partisan officials to remove candidates entirely from the presidential ballot.  Unreal hypocrisy.  Imagine if a Trump supporting republican working for a state decided to remove Old Joe from the ballot?  There would be an uprising that it was an abuse of power.  Acting like a - wait for it - dictator.  The media would shout from the rooftops that it was the end of democracy.