Democratic Nominee in 2020

Poll
No votes (0%)
4 votes (18.18%)
2 votes (9.09%)
1 vote (4.54%)
No votes (0%)
1 vote (4.54%)
1 vote (4.54%)
8 votes (36.36%)
2 votes (9.09%)
3 votes (13.63%)

22 members have voted

February 22nd, 2019 at 1:20:33 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 128
Posts: 13335
Quote: JimRockford

That was my first thought as well, but I think it would hold up. States have wide berth to make their own ballot rules. Each state has it's own hurdles to restrict third party ballot access, but the constitution says nothing about parties let alone restrictions based on party affiliation.


It won't hold up. The argument is easy. Where were Obama's college transcripts? Where were Clinton's medical records? Such a law opens up too big a can of worms. This isn't like saying you have to get a baseline percent last election or else so many sigs. This is an arbitrary requirement and one with no reasonable basis for being needed.

CA is trying the same thing. Just blue states making a circus.
The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it
February 22nd, 2019 at 1:45:51 PM permalink
JimRockford
Member since: Sep 18, 2015
Threads: 2
Posts: 572
Quote: AZDuffman
It won't hold up. The argument is easy. Where were Obama's college transcripts? Where were Clinton's medical records? Such a law opens up too big a can of worms. This isn't like saying you have to get a baseline percent last election or else so many sigs. This is an arbitrary requirement and one with no reasonable basis for being needed.

CA is trying the same thing. Just blue states making a circus.

I agree with all of that. All I'm saying is SCOTUS would not reverse it.
The mind hungers for that on which it feeds.
February 22nd, 2019 at 1:56:17 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 128
Posts: 13335
Quote: JimRockford
I agree with all of that. All I'm saying is SCOTUS would not reverse it.


It would probably be thrown out before SCOTUS. I really cannot see SCOTUS allowing it to stand if it gets there. Clear violation of state/fed powers.
The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it
February 22nd, 2019 at 2:29:50 PM permalink
fleaswatter
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1
Posts: 542
Amy Klobuchar reportedly ordered staffer to clean comb after she used it to eat salad

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/amy-klobuchar-reportedly-ordered-staffer-to-clean-comb-after-using-it-to-eat-salad
Quote:
Democratic presidential candidate Amy Klobuchar on Friday faced fresh accusations of belittling staffers, with a new report relaying a bizarre allegation that she'd berated a staff member for failing to bring her a fork with her salad.

The alleged confrontation, as reported by The New York Times, got weird.

According to the newspaper, the aide who neglected to get plastic utensils for Senator Klobuchar, D-Minn., committed the affront at an airport while traveling to South Carolina in 2008. Klobuchar not only chastised the aide, but reportedly proceeded to eat the salad using a comb from her bag -- then handed the comb to the aide and told him to clean it.

for those lefties afraid of Fox News:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/22/us/politics/amy-klobuchar-staff.html

Quote:
Senator Amy Klobuchar was hungry, forkless and losing patience.

An aide, joining her on a trip to South Carolina in 2008, had procured a salad for his boss while hauling their bags through an airport terminal. But once onboard, he delivered the grim news: He had fumbled the plastic eating utensils before reaching the gate, and the crew did not have any forks on such a short flight.

What happened next was typical: Ms. Klobuchar berated her aide instantly for the slip-up. What happened after that was not: She pulled a comb from her bag and began eating the salad with it, according to four people familiar with the episode.

Then she handed the comb to her staff member with a directive: Clean it.
sleepy Joe has dementia
February 22nd, 2019 at 2:49:27 PM permalink
ams288
Member since: Apr 21, 2016
Threads: 18
Posts: 6448
Quote: fleaswatter


NYT is the one who broke the story, so you could have just cut out the middle man and skipped the Faux News article.
ďA straight man will not go for kids.Ē - AZDuffman
February 22nd, 2019 at 3:06:51 PM permalink
terapined
Member since: Aug 6, 2014
Threads: 52
Posts: 6504
Quote: fleaswatter
for those lefties afraid of Fox News:

Why would anybody be afraid of Foxnews?
I think Chris Wallace does good interviews
I like Shep
Sometimes we live no particular way but our own - Grateful Dead "Eyes of the World"
February 22nd, 2019 at 3:39:00 PM permalink
fleaswatter
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1
Posts: 542
Quote: ams288
NYT is the one who broke the story, so you could have just cut out the middle man and skipped the Faux News article.


I included Fox News because some people might not be able to get past the NY Slimes paywall
sleepy Joe has dementia
February 22nd, 2019 at 3:56:41 PM permalink
JimRockford
Member since: Sep 18, 2015
Threads: 2
Posts: 572
Quote: AZDuffman
It would probably be thrown out before SCOTUS. I really cannot see SCOTUS allowing it to stand if it gets there. Clear violation of state/fed powers.

The constitution allows states to select electors to the electoral college however they want. They don't even have to use popular vote.
https://newrepublic.com/article/147310/can-states-ban-trump-ballot-doesnt-release-tax-returns
The mind hungers for that on which it feeds.
February 22nd, 2019 at 4:06:03 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 128
Posts: 13335
Quote: JimRockford
The constitution allows states to select electors to the electoral college however they want. They don't even have to use popular vote.
https://newrepublic.com/article/147310/can-states-ban-trump-ballot-doesnt-release-tax-returns


True. But they canít add a requirement to run outside the constitution. The whole thing is just TDS on steroids.
The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it
February 22nd, 2019 at 4:23:13 PM permalink
JimRockford
Member since: Sep 18, 2015
Threads: 2
Posts: 572
Quote: AZDuffman
True. But they canít add a requirement to run outside the constitution. The whole thing is just TDS on steroids.

The legal scholars in the New Republic article that I linked disagree As do the ones who wrote this one.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2017/04/14/opinions/state-laws-requiring-tax-return-disclosure-legal-tribe-painter-eisen/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F&rm=1
The mind hungers for that on which it feeds.