Should a Convicted Felon Be Allowed to Remain on the Presidential Ballot?

[PureX]

Ah, to personal to share.
Fair enough.

The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. So when one shows themselves to be a criminal, i.e., willing to disregard the laws protecting the well-being of others so as to serve oneself, it is reasonable to expect more of that behavior from them in the future.

Knowing this to be so, why would any sensible society choose to allow people that have exhibited this disregard toward others to gain positions of power, authority, or influence over others? That would be patently stupid, and seriously dangerous.

What part of this line of thinking do you disagree with? And why?

 

[McBell]

What part of this line of thinking do you disagree with? And why?

I am wondering if you honestly think that line of thinking will hold up in court to pass laws to prevent a convict from ever voting or holding office ever again.

It is one thing to go on an emotional rant.
It is quite another to present a case that will hold up in court.

Thus far, all you have done is gone on an emotional rant about it.
And this thread is about the law, not your personal feelings on the topic.

 

[Pogo]

I am wondering if you honestly think that line of thinking will hold up in court to pass laws to prevent a convict from ever voting or holding office ever again.

It is one thing to go on an emotional rant.
It is quite another to present a case that will hold up in court.

Thus far, all you have done is gone on an emotional rant about it.
And this thread is about the law, not your personal feelings on the topic.

Sort of misses the concept of forgiveness and paying one's debt to society as well.

 

[PureX]

I am wondering if you honestly think that line of thinking will hold up in court to pass laws to prevent a convict from ever voting or holding office ever again.

I don't care about them voting. Every citizen should have that right. And It's not a question of what "holds up" in court. It's a question we can answer via reason and common sense. And allowing convicted criminals to attain positions of power and control over others is nor reasonable not sensible.

It is one thing to go on an emotional rant.
It is quite another to present a case that will hold up in court.

I have no idea what "court" you're on about, and I don't care. It's a simple question with a clear and simple answer, and I am seeing that you want to avoid it, now, with some fictitious "court" reference.

Thus far, all you have done is gone on an emotional rant about it.
And this thread is about the law, not your personal feelings on the topic.

So, you have no real objections to the logic I posted for my comments in post #121, and you have no apparent reason why you are objecting to it, anyway.

Just as I thought.

Get back to me when you can get past your "rant" insults and offer me an actually rebuttal.

 

[McBell]

I don't care about them voting. Everyone citizen have that right. And It's not a question of what "holds up" in court. It's a question we can answer via reason and common sense. And allowing convicted criminals to attain positions of power and control over others is not reasonable not sensible.

I have no idea what "court" you're on about, and I don't care. It's a simple question with a clear and simple answer, and I am seeing that you want to avoid it, now, with some fictitious "court" reference.

So, you have no real objections to the logic I posted for my comments in post #121, and you have no apparent reason why you are objecting to it, anyway.

Just as I thought.

Get back to me when you can get past your "rant" insults and offer me an actually rebuttal.

Perhaps when you have calmed down from your emotional outbursts you will be able to have a civil mannered discussion of the topic.

 

[PureX]

Perhaps when you have calmed down from your emotional outbursts you will be able to have a civil mannered discussion of the topic.

I am quite calm. But if you need that excuse for your total lack of intelligent content, then by all means, pretend that I am a ranting lunatic. Whatever serves your ego. After all, that is why you're here, right?

 

[McBell]

I am quite calm. But if you need that excuse for your total lack of intelligent content, then by all means, pretend that I am a ranting lunatic. Whatever serves your ego. After all, that is why you're here, right?

Your transference is showing.

Since you are obviously craving attention,
Perhaps you should get yourself a puppy?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

See, you are still refusing to take responsibility for your own flaws. This is why you should never be put in charge of anyone else's well-being.

Again, you talk out of your ***. You know nothing about me or what happened so I'd appreciate you shutting the hell up about it and not assuming ****. The people who do know about it don't agree with your nonsense take on it.

 

[PureX]

Again, you talk out of your ***. You know nothing about me or what happened so I'd appreciate you shutting the hell up about it and not assuming ****. The people who do know about it don't agree with your nonsense take on it.

I can see plain as day that you're blaming me instead of taking responsibility for your own bad past behaviors. Which indicates that you've leared nothing from them. Every post you make just shows that you have no business being in control of anyone else's well-being.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I can see plain as day that you're blaming me instead of taking responsibility for your own bad past behaviors. Which indicates that you've leared nothing from them. Every post you make just shows that you have no business being in control of anyone else's well-being.

At this point, you're just being a bully behind a keyboard. I ****ing plead guilty, went to court and took care of it. If that's not taking responsibility, wtf is it. Like I said, shut up about things you don't know a thing about. Now go ahead and continue ignoring everything I say and just repeat yourself. You seem to enjoy having your turds stink up the forum.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It worked for Nelson Mandela. He was even celebrated for it.

Mandela's conviction was seen as unjust. That is not the case with Trump's conviction':

First Polls After Trump Conviction: Warning Signs For Republican

More than half of respondents in a Morning Consult survey said they “strongly” or “somewhat” approve of former President Donald Trump’s guilty verdict in his criminal hush money case.

www.forbes.com

 

[Twilight Hue]

If they have done their sentence, I think they should still be allowed to vote and run for office.

I'd give repeat felons a three strike rule. Then they are out.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am very anti-Trump, but even I do not see any good arising from not allowing convicted people to vote. Allowing excons to vote is also the right thing to do. It gives them a reason to try to become part of society again.

 

[Riders]

Should a convicted felon be allowed to remain in the presidential ballot? Why or why not?

No

 

[Heyo]

Mandela wasn't a conman, chronic lair, cheater, or authoritarian. He fought for the rights of his countrymen and was imprisoned for it. Nothing about Trump, including his race, resembles Mandela. When Mandela was released and elected, he unified his nation and was an effective leader. He didn't motivate citizens to attack his government, he supported his national rugby team who went on to win the world cup as underdogs in 1995. The national team was mostly white and reviled by black citizens. But Mandela's open support for the team opened the door to a unified feeling, and broght national pride to all citizens. This is why he is celebrated. Trump is remembered for his January 6 attack on our nation. He's known for fraud. He's known as a liar, a coman, a cheater, and mentally flawed.

Mandela, Lomu and a Rugby World Cup final that went beyond sport

On 24 June 1995, New Zealand and South Africa walked out at Ellis Park for a historic Rugby World Cup final. On Saturday in Paris they meet again

www.theguardian.com

So, Mandela was not a "True Felon"? And who is going to decide who is?

Well, the US Constitution has a 14th Amendment that deals with people who have conspired against the US or given aid or comfort to insurrectionists. Arizona (iirc) tried to not have Trump on the ballots for the primaries, but was shut down by the Extreme Court.
They may try again for the general election.
That would be the constitutional solution to preventing Trump from running for PotUS.

 

[Pogo]

Mandela's conviction was seen as unjust. That is not the case with Trump's conviction':

First Polls After Trump Conviction: Warning Signs For Republican

More than half of respondents in a Morning Consult survey said they “strongly” or “somewhat” approve of former President Donald Trump’s guilty verdict in his criminal hush money case.

www.forbes.com

Doesn't mean they wont vote for him anyhow.

 

[Pogo]

I'd give repeat felons a three strike rule. Then they are out.

Well he has 34, 32 life sentences, is what he did worse than getting caught with pot three times in one of the states with a three strikes law or is the three strikes idea a bit to simplistic.

 

[Pogo]

No

that was a two part question with most of the credit for the essay.

 

[Laniakea]

Mandela's conviction was seen as unjust. That is not the case with Trump's conviction':

First Polls After Trump Conviction: Warning Signs For Republican

More than half of respondents in a Morning Consult survey said they “strongly” or “somewhat” approve of former President Donald Trump’s guilty verdict in his criminal hush money case.

www.forbes.com

Seen by those you agree with?
Plenty of people are seeing the charges and conviction against Trump as unjust. Polls and financial contributions to Trump's campaign are reflecting that. You may not agree, but that's immaterial.

 

[McBell]

Seen by those you agree with?

Interesting how you are all the time using polls to support yourself but the second a poll is presented that you disagree with....
Most entertaining actually.

Plenty of people are seeing the charges and conviction against Trump as unjust.

Many people claim to have seen Elvis.
So what?

Polls and financial contributions to Trump's campaign are reflecting that. You may not agree, but that's immaterial.

Again, so what?
There are people still under Trumps spell.

Still not enough to get a popular vote win though.