BREAKING: The Colorado Supreme Court holds, 4-3, that Trump "is disqualified" to be president under the Fourteenth Amendment, and "it would be a wrongful act" for him to be listed on the Colorado presidential primary ballot. More to come at Law Dork: https://www.lawdork.com/
@chrisgeidner so much for democracy
@volkris @chrisgeidner You're talking about that time the former guy tried to stay president after we fired him, right?
@liquor_american nope!
This is about the future, preventing voters from voting their choices on future ballots, not about the past.
@volkris @chrisgeidner You see, what you're suggesting would actually violate the constitution, specifically Amendment XIV Section 3.
Please allow me to do the very tiny amount of work for you that you seem unable or unwilling to do for yourself:
@volkris @chrisgeidner A link for you, too, because you need the help https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv
@liquor_american The thing is, even if this is legal and correct and even moral or any standard of propriety that you would like to propose, it still does mean people can't vote for the candidate they want.
Even if it is entirely proper to throw out that democratic process, it still has to be owned that the democratic process is being thrown out.
No matter how correct this may be, it does mean people aren't able to vote for the candidate they want to vote for on the ballots.
And owning that might be part of emphasizing how important it is that this be done. It's reasonable to say that this is so important that we have to throw out democratic principles for the sake of keeping Trump off the ballot.
Fine.
It means that is just this important.
@volkris @chrisgeidner What are you even talking about?
No state owes it to an insurrectionist to include his name on their ballot. Idiots with fucking-up ideas can still write him in if they want. That ought to satisfy you, right?
Or do you actually have some other problem you're not being forthcoming with?
@liquor_american nope, just stating it plainly.
Keeping a major candidate off the ballot means an interruption of the democratic process.
You might say that no state owes it to anybody to support the free vote, and you may say that it's absolutely worth it to interfere with it, and keep Trump off the ballot, and that's fine.
But it's worth it to own what's going on here.
If it's so important to keep Trump off the ballot that the democratic process should be subverted like this, well then let's own that, and let's say clearly that it's so important to keep Trump away that we are willing to interfere with the voting process.
If that's your position, great!
@volkris @chrisgeidner Literally just read the Constitution. It's right there. And if you don't like it, lobby your representatives to repeal the amendment. That is the proper process, since you seem very concerned with processes.
@liquor_american what in the world are you talking about? It has nothing to do with my preferences.
Great! You say the constitution throws the voting process under the bus. Fine. Own it.
It has nothing to do with me or my preferences. It's really about, great if you think it's more important to keep the guy off the ballot, then I guess this is working for you, more important to do this then support the democratic process of voting for who people want to vote for.
I mean I don't live in Colorado. And I don't want to vote for Trump. So it really doesn't impact me.
But if you think this is a good thing, great! Own it!
@volkris @chrisgeidner Your need to put words in my mouth and then shame me for your words that you put in my mouth is pretty damn weird. I'm starting to think maybe you like wasting my time, because making a legitimate point doesn't seem to be a priority for you.
If you don't like what the Constitution proscribes for insurrectionists, there is a remedy for that. It's called repealing an amendment. Very very simple.
Have a good one
@liquor_american if you're trying to talk to me, whoever said I don't like what the constitution prescribes?
Like I'm trying to emphasize, if you're down with being anti-democratic because this is so important that it requires anti-democratic responses, great! Go for it!
But own it.
I'm not judging. I'm not voting for Trump. I don't really care. But let's be clear that we are being anti-democratic with this sort of move.
@jaystephens denying the facts doesn't make them untrue. It just makes the arguer clearly wrong.
Yes it is undemocratic. Just stomping the foot and declaring it otherwise doesn't change the fact that it is undemocratic.
@volkris @liquor_american @chrisgeidner you are entitled to your opinion.
My opinion is that your position is fairly fast down a slippery slope that leads to authoritarian leaders being able to force you to vote how they want, through threat of violence, which is the opposite of democracy.
@volkris @liquor_american @chrisgeidner I know you're not _quite_ arguing that no behaviour at all should keep a person off the ballot but you do seem to be coming quite close.
@jaystephens Oh I would emphatically say that no behavior at all should keep a person off the ballot! Because I support the democratic process. I think it's really important for voters to have that voice.
And again, we do have legal safeguards to prevent bad people from actually taking office, but I think it is so important that voters be able to vote for whoever they want to. That is a really important thing for society.
That element of formal expression of public ideas is critical to a modern society.
Have you heard the old phrase involving soapbox, ballot box, cartridge box? Well that's why the ballot box is so critical to preventing the process from getting to number three.
Let voters vote for whoever they want to, and let the legal institution react to their choice.
@jaystephens I have no idea how you get there from here, as I am emphatically saying that we should reject the authoritarian leaders trying to put their fingers on the scales of voting.
The whole point is that I am trying to resist that slippery slope that you bring up.
We have to recognize the facts before us and not let authoritarians rewrite them in order to pressure us in the way we vote.
@volkris
Democracy and following the rules (called "laws" in the US) aren't mutually exclusive choices.
@liquor_american @chrisgeidner
@rhizome I mean in cases like this they are.
If you are interfering with the ability of voters to vote for the person that they want to vote for, then even if that's the law, that's an undemocratic law, and maybe that's fine. But let's recognize it.
@volkris
At a certain remove all laws are anti-Democratic inasmuch as they restrict behavior. I don't want to live in a world without laws, but if you do, the South Sudan is a one-way plane ride away. This is a banal dorm-stoner topic.
@liquor_american @chrisgeidner
@rhizome Right, so again the point is to own the anti-democratic laws, stating proudly that whatever goal is on the table is important enough that it's worth being anti-democratic.
However in this case it's particularly noteworthy because it's about voting itself.
If it's so important to keep people from being able to vote the way they want to, great! The point is to own that, to say it proudly, and to emphasize how important it is to keep that option away from voters.
@volkris
Your idea is that a constitutional amendment wasn't implemented democratically?! Undemocratic laws look more like "no skateboarding" signs.
@liquor_american @chrisgeidner
@rhizome it's perfectly possible for democratic processes to call for undemocratic laws.
Nothing prevents that.
Again, let's own it.
If we are voting for restrictions on voting, fine. We just need to admit that that is what we are doing.
Maybe we should consider some poll taxes? I would vote against them, but hey democracy means I don't get my way.
@volkris
It is in fact so important that we wrote it down in a very special document. A legal rider to the Constitution of the United States of America. That kind of rider is called an “Amendment” and it is proudly displayed on the 14th such document, in its 3rd section. It’s among the strongest of legal measures available to our system of government.
How much more proud and emphatic do we have to be about how “insurrectionists are not allowed to lead without extreme pardon?”
@kvc Oh I would just like people to recognize that they are taking choice away from voters and promoting an undemocratic perspective.
As long as people recognize that, it works for me.
@paninid @volkris @chrisgeidner I've never heard that before. Is that where someone speaks on behalf of the US Constitution without ever having read it?
@liquor_american @volkris @chrisgeidner
In the 90’s, the GOP experienced Clinton Derangement Syndrome, where any mention or appearance of the Clintons caused people to lose their minds.
Since 2015, Trump Derangement Syndrome resulted in the same.
Now, #ConstitutionalDerangementSyndrome is when the existence of civic institutions, processes, and culture triggers people.
@paninid @volkris @chrisgeidner I wish someone getting triggered would actually read the thing before getting all upset
@liquor_american @volkris @chrisgeidner
That is way too much work.
However, I can recommend inputting various sections and clauses to have ChatGPT rewrite them in the voice of a TikTok influencer for a 5th grade audience.
#Edutainment, as they say!
@volkris @liquor_american @chrisgeidner ohhh you’re worried about interrupting the democratic process, huh?
You know what else interrupts the democratic process? An attempted coup. Fake electors. Wrongly claiming widespread voter fraud. Partnering with violent hate groups to interrupt the electoral process.
Excluding Trump is *preverving* the democratic process, you doob.
@DMTea worried? Nope!
I am not at all worried.
I mean, I'm not in favor of keeping voters from voting, but this is up to the individual state. If Colorado wants to restrict its voters from voting, well, that's up to them.
But at the least we need to all recognize what we are doing and own it.
@volkris @liquor_american @chrisgeidner you keep saying voters won’t be able to vote, though any voter can write in any name.
You really have zero understanding how anything you’re talking about works, huh.
Weird random internet person is so sad DaddyTrump won’t be on a ballot 😭
@DMTea I mean I'm not going to put for Trump and so that doesn't impact me.
But I do think it is concerning to strike a major candidate from the ballot.
@volkris @liquor_american @chrisgeidner is as concerning to you as that same candidate affecting a coup and attempting to derail democracy?
Your “concern” is really stupidly one-dimensional.
@DMTea The idea that Trump ever attempted a coup is just plain stupid and based on a complete lack of understanding of how the US government functions.
I mean the attack on the capital was on the wrong branch of government for god's sake.
But just setting that frustration aside, I really don't care who you guys are voting for, but I am going to point out that if you interrupt voting for Trump then you are interrupting democracy, interrupting the democratic process.
I don't care how ignorant you might be about how the US government works, I don't care how ignorant you might be about basic notions of civics, you do what you're going to do, but let's just be abundantly clear:
If you prevent people from voting for Trump then you are preventing voting and you are standing in the way of the democratic process.
Maybe that's for the best. Maybe democracy is stupid. Maybe we should not let people vote for who they want to vote for. That's fine. If that's what you want to believe that's fine.
But own it.
@volkris @liquor_american @chrisgeidner
Ah here it is. You could just admit you’re a shill/rube/bad actor from the beginning and saved everyone your bullshit lmao
Of course Trump attempted a coup, and of course you are a MAGApede defending SprayTan Mussolini.
You could have just told everyone you’re a fascist up front and saved us all a bunch of time.
@DMTea Yeah I could have admitted all of that, if it was true, but it isn't, but you know you assume what you're going to assume.
This is social media after all.
I'm under no particular misbelief that folks posting things like yours are interested in reasonable discussion.
But you know, might as well put it out there just in case.
@volkris @liquor_american @chrisgeidner yeah, I don’t entertain fascist deniers, so you’re shit outta luck.
“Extremely liberal but without a home in US politics” just means you gape hard for the literal, obvious fascists that you won’t decry. That tells us all enough about you.
Your concern trolling is a 3/10, I’ve seen Russian accounts do better with Google translate.
@DMTea I mean if I was trolling I would simply call you a fascist and be done with it.
But if you're interested in talking let's talk.
Otherwise I'm just going to assume you're a fascist and walk away.
Jan 6th happened. Fake electors happened. Voter fraud lies happened. The coup attempt happened.
To deny this can only mean you condone it, which highlights that you are a fascist.
Concern trolling won’t do anything except really underscore how little you choose to understand what you’re talking about.
@DMTea Well no to deny it is to look at the facts and see that those claims amount to nutty conspiracy theories that just don't match with the record.
We have a huge problem in the country today that people don't know what is true and what's not true. People are so happy to pursue bias confirmation that they buy into all of these stories that just don't fit the substantive record, that again are pretty out there conspiracy theories.
We really should be calling out the folks who are promoting those stories because of the way they sew discord, and heck, even help get trolls like Trump re-elected.
That does nothing good for any of us.
But you can name call if you want. The problem is that I'm sure neither of us wants the guy to be re-elected, but unfortunately going down that road sets him up for it.
@DMTea
Who denies any of that happened?
Jan 6th wasn't an insurrection. There was NO path to overthrow the government or split off from the US.
Alternate (not FAKE) electors has been common over the years - even Clinton had some.
No one knows if voter fraud really occurred. We only know the courts rejected many claims due to "standing".
It wasn't a coup attempt. Just exercising the process to get more time to let the legal process take place.
Two different view of the same thing.
@volkris
@DMTea @volkris
Flynn: Send in the military to confiscate voting machines happened.
Appoint Jeff Clark as AG, send a letter to Kemp & Raffensberger “just say there was fraud and let me and republicans in congress handle the rest” happened.
Lee: “I’ve been working 14 hours a day. Tell me what we should be saying” happened.
Kraken tampering with Coffee Co voting data happened.
Appoint Kash Patel as DNI, SecDef happened.
@Joe_Hill but none of that amounts to supporting the claims being made.
Despite claims to the contrary, the US has laws surrounding the presidential election process, and Trump acted within those laws.
Maybe we should change the laws. Well we actually did, but maybe we should change them more. That's a fair discussion to have.
But with the sanction of US law these claims against Trump just don't stand.
@volkris @Joe_Hill weird, the 14th amendment doesn’t mention breaking laws even once. Just engaging in rebellion or insurrection is what it takes to be invoked.
Multiple courts found he engaged in rebellion or insurrection, thus the ruling.
You are trying SO hard to ignore the actual process laid out in the constitution while making noise about inane bullshit.
Cry harder, fascist.
@DMTea Hey fascist, I am definitely not crying. I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm not looking to vote for Trump, so it's not like it is disenfranchising me for him not to be on ballots.
But to be clear, if the guy is following the laws of the country then he's not engaging in rebellion or insurrection.
And he clearly did. And courts are occasionally wrong throughout history, as was the Colorado court, as it cited claims that have been debunked pretty roundly by now.
But you do you. As a good fascist go ahead and get behind the authorities calling for undemocratic resolutions based on outright propaganda.
That is, after all, pretty clearly the fascist way to go.
@volkris @DMTea @liquor_american @chrisgeidner You need to do a little more reading. J6 was but one facet of a multi-pronged attack on the 2020 election.
@Joe_Hill honestly I never found the time too do more reading into the pizzagate conspiracy, so I have a lot of reading piling up.
That's how far behind I am on my nutty conspiracy reading list at this point.
I promise once I get done with reading about the clintons and pedophilia and whatever the hell that was about I'll get around to reading about your conspiracy theory too.
@volkris @chrisgeidner My position is we abide by the US Constitution. If you think your feelings supersede that, it's not really my job to explain to you how that thinking is faulty.