Liberal Forum

maineman » 29 Dec 2023, 12:28 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:28 pm

so... you're all for removing candidates from ballots, as long as they're democrats?

got it.

loud and clear

Nope.
We just want  to watch you eat your own cooking.
 

Vegas » 29 Dec 2023, 12:44 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:44 pm

As always, no thoughts of your own. 

He needs to turn it around so he can hide. 

Pure cowardice. 100% pure bred grade A cowardice.

So stop going on like a narcissist bitch and show us your thought stuff..
 

Huey » 29 Dec 2023, 12:35 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:35 pm

No, write-in votes for Trump wouldn’t count in the Colorado GOP primary

https://www.verifythis.com/article/news ... aa6ddad491

It may come as an emotional shock to many...especially here...but a state cannot tell a political party what type of primary they must conduct in their state since it isn't an election to an office, it is to determine who gets party delegates.  If any state (not just Maine and Colorado) want to keep Trump's name from appearing on a printed ballot, the RNC can simply change the process of selecting convention delegates in those states to the caucus method.  Voila...no ballots.

 

Huey » 29 Dec 2023, 12:39 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:39 pm

Right now he is on the ballot so it is a moot point.  But no, contrary to your posts, those votes won't count.

No...my point was that you are free to write him in...

The beauty of it is that

A) it's in vain

B) you'll then be in a fight with state GOPs

R.Suave » 29 Dec 2023, 12:45 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:45 pm

So stop going on like a narcissist bitch and show us your thought stuff..

Hiding again. Sure, on the condition that you admit you are hiding. 

Then I will. 

R.Suave » 29 Dec 2023, 12:47 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:47 pm

No...my point was that you are free to write him in...

The beauty of it is that

A) it's in vain

B) you'll then be in a fight with state GOPs

 

I won't.

A) I am not a CO or ME resident.

B) I am not voting for him.  It is the principle of the thing. 

Huey » 29 Dec 2023, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:49 pm

I won't.

A) I am not a CO or ME resident.

B) I am not voting for him.  It is the principle of the thing.

If so, why are you speaking of your own example?


 

Vegas » 29 Dec 2023, 12:48 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:48 pm

Hiding again. Sure, on the condition that you admit you are hiding. 

Then I will.

Hiding....again


You're supposed to be in the desert, livestreaming your agonizing death

 

Huey » 29 Dec 2023, 12:34 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:34 pm

Not at all.  Not unless there is a felony criminal conviction.  I am telling you not to bitch about it because your words will come back to bite you in the ***.

how in the world will there be a felony criminal conviction of Joe Biden before the 2024 election?

**** are a threat to democracy!!

R.Suave » 29 Dec 2023, 7:38 am » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 7:38 am

It's in DA KOSTITOOOOSHUN!

what is?

R.Suave » 29 Dec 2023, 12:52 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:52 pm

Hiding....again

You're supposed to be in the desert, livestreaming your agonizing death

Look at this...just look at this blatant projection. All he can do now is accuse me of what he is guilty of. 

He has nothing more. Nada. Zip. Zilch. 

maineman » 29 Dec 2023, 12:53 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:53 pm

how in the world will there be a felony criminal conviction of Joe Biden before the 2024 election?

 

Remember, the precedent you are setting is you don't need one.  While I would speak out against it I would be laughing my *** off at you.  

You know what this is all about? Some dumb **** in Maine eyeing the governor's seat and needs name recognition.

She already suspended her own ruling until the Maine courts hear it

Warcok » 29 Dec 2023, 1:07 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 1:07 pm

You know what this is all about? Some dumb **** in Maine eyeing the governor's seat and needs name recognition.

She already suspended her own ruling until the Maine courts hear it

Even Gavin Gruesome is defending Trump says he deserves to be on the ballot   

Huey » 29 Dec 2023, 1:01 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 1:01 pm

Remember, the precedent you are setting is you don't need one.  While I would speak out against it I would be laughing my *** off at you.

The policy of the DOJ is that the sitting president is immune from criminal prosecution.  I have never wanted to change that precedent.

maineman » 29 Dec 2023, 1:11 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 1:11 pm

The policy of the DOJ is that the sitting president is immune from criminal prosecution.  I have never wanted to change that precedent.

You still don't get it.  If the state of Fl says biden is not upholding  this part of his oath, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” say with the migrant situation, and based on the investigation into Hunter by congress there is enough evidence uncovered to show that Biden accepted bribes, and they got there Supreme Court to say so, he is off the ballot.  

 

Vegas » 29 Dec 2023, 1:00 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 1:00 pm

Look at this...just look at this blatant projection. All he can do now is accuse me of what he is guilty of. 

He has nothing more. Nada. Zip. Zilch.

We had a deal.


 

R.Suave » 29 Dec 2023, 1:43 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 1:43 pm

We had a deal.

Yes, the deal was for you to go first since it's your **** thread. 

You ran like you always do with my deals. 

And enough of these blatant projections and lies. It's **** embarrassing for you. 

BuckNaked » 29 Dec 2023, 12:59 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2023, 12:59 pm

what is?

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.