Anyone else listening to the arguments before the supreme court as/re Colorado-Trump?"
If so:
Your thoughts?
That kind of complancency is what put him in the White House 8 years ago....He's not going to regain POTUS...
That kind of complancency is what put him in the White House 8 years ago.
He won one out of the last two. And in the first of those elections, most democrats were saying "well, I meam, let's be real here. He's not going to win. He's a reality TV show star with a trail of bankruptcies and frauds behind him; no one in their right mind is going to vote for him." Would be wise to not repeat that mistake IMO.Did he win the last one?_
Agreed. Haley could beat Biden. The worst outcome for the republicans is that Trump becomes the GOP nominee, remains on the ballot in most states - and then starts to see legal decisions against him. The diehard Trump supporters don't care, but many republicans don't want to vote for a convicted felon.If a ruling went against Trump and snowballs into him either being declared ineligible or being removed from all or most ballots... Then that might actually be good for the Republican Party.
He won the one he won, in 2016.Did he win the last one?
He won the one he won, in 2016.
Because - as billvon points, out - the Dems all thought "He's not going to become POTUS." Until he did.
They aren't concerned about voting for somebody who has been found guilty of sexual assault, on a balance of probabilities.The diehard Trump supporters don't care, but many republicans don't want to vote for a convicted felon.
Many Republican women are concerned, and many (say they) will not vote for him as a result. That doesn't mean they'll vote for Biden, and whether the "many" translates to anything meaningful in the final election result is another matter. But while the Orange One has garnered favour with the female right with his claims on the Roe v Wade overturning, he has lost some with his rape of Carroll and subsequent attitude around it.They aren't concerned about voting for somebody who has been found guilty of sexual assault, on a balance of probabilities.
But there's always a distribution. There are republicans who will vote for Trump even if he is found guilty of raping a 10 year old girl and bragging about it, because "Biden's a pedophile" or some such. There are people who decided not to vote for him as soon as they heard him bragging about grabbing pussies. In between there are a lot of people who have a threshold that he hasn't exceeded - yet.They aren't concerned about voting for somebody who has been found guilty of sexual assault, on a balance of probabilities.
If he does get convicted, absent a self-pardon, then I'd expect some jail time, even if minimum security. "House arrest" would hardly be a punishment, so there'd be little justice in that. But maybe with the current state of the US, that's what will happen.I don't think the court cases are going to have much effect unless he doesn't win the Presidency. If he doesn't win, he could end up with house arrest (or worse). I don't think (I could be wrong) a conviction will change many voters minds.
It'd be naive to think that there would be no reaction from his voters to what is going on, and the harder he is hit in courts the worse it will get for him. By that I mean that the more he is shown to be a criminal, more will move away from him. I can't honestly see people moving toward him in such circumstance. So his supporter numbers will only drop. However, whether the drop will be significant to the overall result, time will tell. It may be that while his overall numbers drop, they will be in states he is already unlikely to win, and he retains sufficient support in the swing states to succeed.They already know what he did. The MAGA core will vote for him no matter what. The other Republicans that are currently willing to vote for him (for whatever reason) will still be willing to vote for him even if convicted, IMO.
...
All the outrage and disbelief was "numbed out" long ago")
If he does get convicted, absent a self-pardon, then I'd expect some jail time, even if minimum security. "House arrest" would hardly be a punishment, so there'd be little justice in that. But maybe with the current state of the US, that's what will happen.
It'd be naive to think that there would be no reaction from his voters to what is going on, and the harder he is hit in courts the worse it will get for him. By that I mean that the more he is shown to be a criminal, more will move away from him. I can't honestly see people moving toward him in such circumstance. So his supporter numbers will only drop. However, whether the drop will be significant to the overall result, time will tell. It may be that while his overall numbers drop, they will be in states he is already unlikely to win, and he retains sufficient support in the swing states to succeed.
So, 2/3 vote to disqualify him and/or 2/3 to lift the disqualification. Doesn't sound like anyone thought that through... Kind of odd, considering how difficult it is to get an amendment ratified in the first place.Since the Constitution states that there needs to be a 2/3rd majority to remove the disability (i.e. if someone is disqualified for being an insurrectionist, they can still be elected to office if 2/3rd of Congress agree), then I think they'll come up with something similar for Congress to determine that someone is an insurrectionist - i.e. 2/3rd agreement.
Well, they need to come up with something that enables someone to be declared an insurrectionist beyond doubt such that they can be disqualified. Otherwise they'd simply be stating that individual states can't make the ruling... without providing the means by which someone can be ajudged to be one sufficiently to be disqualified by all states. Which would leave the question in limbo. Which may be their intention... "heck, who knows how to do this properly, as long as we're not the ones to rock the apple-cart".So, 2/3 vote to disqualify him and/or 2/3 to lift the disqualification. Doesn't sound like anyone thought that through... Kind of odd, considering how difficult it is to get an amendment ratified in the first place.