MAGA's response to President Biden's announcement

[metis]

Maybe follow the law. Changing delegate votes require a legal basis unmet in this case. Maybe you should broaden YOUR news sources. Even RFK Jr. has slammed this switching of delegate votes by Democrat Party elites. And he's no Republican.

I've been listening to legal experts, and they certainly don't agree with you and Faux News. Either way, Kamala is running, and if the Pubs want to fight it legally, they have that right. However, even common sense should tell you that you they are barking up the wrong tree.

Let me give you a what if... Let's say both Trump and Biden died suddenly in August before an election, are you going to tell us that we won't have a president for the next four years?

The reality you don't understand is that the use of delegates is important because things can happen within a few months of an election, and it would be a catastrophe if the parties had no alternatives. Even the choosing of electors also is important for basically a similar reason plus the issue of differing representation of the states [which I strongly dislike, btw].

 

[Pogo]

Maybe follow the law. Changing delegate votes require a legal basis unmet in this case. Maybe you should broaden YOUR news sources. Even RFK Jr. has slammed this switching of delegate votes by Democrat Party elites. And he's no Republican.

The delegates haven't voted yet, the primaries elected the delegates to the convention, not the nominee, it appears they will vote by Aug 7 to keep ohio happy otherwise they would wait till the convention. None of this is relevant to anybody being disenfranchised to the election to determine out democratic trajectory no matter how poorly you actually understand the rules.
Seriously, drop it, all this disenfranchisement nonsense is based on a misunderstanding of the rules and as you would know, nobody but you and a few others who also misunderstand is complaining. Yes there are Democrats that are as ignorant of the process as you and as misogynist as you who wouldn't have voted in the primary, but they were not disenfranchised, just a you ignorant.

 

[Pogo]

I think your turban is on way too tight.

in honor of tu quoque, it is a touque

 

[metis]

in honor of tu quoque, it is a touque

I was just pulling his leg but don't tell him that, OK? Shhhhhhhhhhhh

 

[Pogo]

I've been listening to legal experts, and they certainly don't agree with you and Faux News. Either way, Kamala is running, and if the Pubs want to fight it legally, they have that right. However, even common sense should tell you that you they are barking up the wrong tree.

Let me give you a what if... Let's say both Trump and Biden died suddenly in August before an election, are you going to tell us that we won't have a president for the next four years?

The reality you don't understand is that the use of delegates is important because things can happen within a few months of an election, and it would be a catastrophe if the parties had no alternatives. Even the choosing of electors also is important for basically a similar reason plus the issue of differing representation of the states [which I strongly dislike, btw].

in at least some states the electors names are on the primary ballot and you select as many as you wish to vote for up to the number of delegates for your representative area.
This is not news, just not commonly paid attention too unless there are more choices than delegates. It is a pathetically ignorant argument.

 

[Pogo]

I've been listening to legal experts, and they certainly don't agree with you and Faux News. Either way, Kamala is running, and if the Pubs want to fight it legally, they have that right. However, even common sense should tell you that you they are barking up the wrong tree.

Let me give you a what if... Let's say both Trump and Biden died suddenly in August before an election, are you going to tell us that we won't have a president for the next four years?

The reality you don't understand is that the use of delegates is important because things can happen within a few months of an election, and it would be a catastrophe if the parties had no alternatives. Even the choosing of electors also is important for basically a similar reason plus the issue of differing representation of the states [which I strongly dislike, btw].

in at least some states the electors names are on the primary ballot and you select as many as you wish to vote for up to the number of delegates for your representative area.
This is not news, just not commonly paid attention too unless there are more choices than delegates. It is a pathetically ignorant argument.

 

[Shaul]

I've been listening to legal experts, and they certainly don't agree with you and Faux News. Either way, Kamala is running, and if the Pubs want to fight it legally, they have that right. However, even common sense should tell you that you they are barking up the wrong tree.

Let me give you a what if... Let's say both Trump and Biden died suddenly in August before an election, are you going to tell us that we won't have a president for the next four years?

The reality you don't understand is that the use of delegates is important because things can happen within a few months of an election, and it would be a catastrophe if the parties had no alternatives. Even the choosing of electors also is important for basically a similar reason plus the issue of differing representation of the states [which I strongly dislike, btw].

LOL Appeal to authority fallacy. Funny.
It is you that is ignoring the blow back Democrats will be receiving for this. You think this is just GOP thing. It isn't independent voters and many Democrats see this as extra legal and ham handed.

 

[Pogo]

LOL Appeal to authority fallacy. Funny.
It is you that is ignoring the blow back Democrats will be receiving for this. You think this is just GOP thing. It isn't independent voters and many Democrats see this as extra legal and ham handed.

Ignorance is no defense under law. You lose.

 

[Shaul]

The delegates haven't voted yet, the primaries elected the delegates to the convention, not the nominee,

Wrong. This varies by individual state laws. Many states, by law, require delegates to vote for the named candidate they were assigned to on the first convention ballot.

it appears they will vote by Aug 7 to keep ohio happy otherwise they would wait till the convention. None of this is relevant to anybody being disenfranchised to the election to determine out democratic trajectory no matter how poorly you actually understand the rules.
Seriously, drop it, all this disenfranchisement nonsense is based on a misunderstanding of the rules and as you would know, nobody but you and a few others who also misunderstand is complaining. Yes there are Democrats that are as ignorant of the process as you and as misogynist as you who wouldn't have voted in the primary, but they were not disenfranchised, just a you ignorant.

The courts will decide this issue. Not you.

 

[Shaul]

Ignorance is no defense under law. You lose.

Tee hee. You seem to think this is a legal forum. Shows who the ignorant one is.

 

[Pogo]

Wrong. This varies by individual state laws. Many states, by law, require delegates to vote for the named candidate they were assigned to on the first convention ballot.

The courts will decide this issue. Not you.

yes faithless voter laws/rules exist, but they are not permanent and may be modified, some states may require more than one round of balloting. Not to the point.

You are welcome to file a suit, but I doubt you could demonstrate standing. LOL

 

[Pogo]

Tee hee. You seem to think this is a legal forum. Shows who the ignorant one is.

Mirror mirror on the wall.

 

[Wandering Monk]

I've been listening to legal experts, and they certainly don't agree with you and Faux News. Either way, Kamala is running, and if the Pubs want to fight it legally, they have that right. However, even common sense should tell you that you they are barking up the wrong tree.

Let me give you a what if... Let's say both Trump and Biden died suddenly in August before an election, are you going to tell us that we won't have a president for the next four years?

The reality you don't understand is that the use of delegates is important because things can happen within a few months of an election, and it would be a catastrophe if the parties had no alternatives. Even the choosing of electors also is important for basically a similar reason plus the issue of differing representation of the states [which I strongly dislike, btw].

When a candidate drops out, his delegates are released to vote for other candidates at the convention.

Experts: Delegates Free to Pick Democratic Nominee - FactCheck.org

Election law experts say House Speaker Mike Johnson is wrong when he says it is "unlawful" for Democrats to "simply just switch out a candidate who has been chosen through the ... democratic process."

www.factcheck.org

 

[We Never Know]

Wrong. This varies by individual state laws. Many states, by law, require delegates to vote for the named candidate they were assigned to on the first convention ballot.

The courts will decide this issue. Not you.

Speaking of individual states....

"CNN conducted a survey of all 50 states.

By Daniel Dale, Casey Gannon and Paula Reid, CNN
Published 6:00 AM EDT, Fri July 26, 2024

The election authorities of at least 48 states, both Republicans and Democrats, say there are no obstacles that would prevent Vice President Kamala Harris from getting on election ballots if she becomes the official Democratic presidential nominee, as expected....

The 48 states (plus the District of Columbia) whose election authorities have said the official Democratic nominee will not have ballot issues include the seven states with the closest margins in the 2020 election, which are widely considered the key swing states again in 2024: Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Michigan and Nevada. The 48 states also include the 15 states where former President Donald Trump, the Republicans’ 2024 nominee, had his highest share of the vote in 2020...

Florida and Montana, did not respond to requests for comment, but a review of the states’ ballot access rules suggests Harris is not likely to face an issue there either.

Since Biden was never the official nominee, states say there’s no problem for Harri

The election authorities in 48 states and the District of Columbia offered highly similar comments explaining why Harris does not face any hurdles getting on the ballot there.

In general, they explained that they receive the names of a major party’s presidential nominee after the nominee is officially chosen by the party; that the Democratic convention has not been held yet (it’s scheduled for in-person events on August 19-22, with an official nomination vote to be held virtually earlier in the month); and that their state’s deadline for receiving the party nominees’ names has not arrived yet..."

Loading…

amp-cnn-com.cdn.ampproject.org

 

[Argentbear]

Maybe follow the law. Changing delegate votes require a legal basis unmet in this case. Maybe you should broaden YOUR news sources. Even RFK Jr. has slammed this switching of delegate votes by Democrat Party elites. And he's no Republican.

fact check

 

[Argentbear]

Actually they do. And now you are demonstrating you are in cahoots with the Democrat Party elites in their deception, whether wittingly or not.

You claimed on the topic of those who voted for Biden in the Primary: Voters were deceived and now their cast ballots for Biden are being disenfranchised. Those are facts.

You haven't supported these "facts"

 

[Pogo]

fact check

Facts are useless in informing a person who did not arrive at their understanding based on logic and facts.
Trump is welcome to them.

 

[Pogo]

Maybe follow the law. Changing delegate votes require a legal basis unmet in this case. Maybe you should broaden YOUR news sources. Even RFK Jr. has slammed this switching of delegate votes by Democrat Party elites. And he's no Republican.

Any time you want to show us these laws that you think have been violated, we are listening, until then we will continue with our own understanding based on expert legal opinion and our own understandings.

As with so many of your complaints / assertions, further research shows them to be specious.

 

[Pogo]

Possible but not probable.

Look, the man was FRAIL. He was easily confused. I've given the examples of my parents many times but I'll do so again. At 79, my dad died, but he died due to an autoimmune disease, and he was sharp as a tack till the very, very end. My mom, not so much. She died three years later, at age 80, after having dementia for many years. My dad's mom died at age 87 without one bit of dementia. We don't all age gracefully.

But maybe Biden believed what he was saying.

He is at least as competent as Shrub began and Ronnie Rayguns when Nancy took over. LOL

 

[Kathryn]

He was at least as competent as Shrub began and Ronnie Rayguns when Nancy took over. LOL

You called the debate show COMPETENT? Wow.