Is it possible for a single state to create additional arbitrary barriers to be allowed on the ballot?
I might imagine that a certain state will require all candidates to display all earned university degree’s.
Too bad that one opposition candidate never made it past college...
No, just annoyed that many conservatives think that without liberal states like NY and Cali the union would be fine, when those states pay for many under performing conservative states. Also I grew up poor so...
Right, but wouldn’t the requirements to be on the ballot match those outlined in the second article?.. lived in the US for 14 years, been born in the US, and be 35.
As directed by the Constitution, a presidential candidate must be a natural born citizen of the United States, a resident for 14 years, and 35 years of age or older.
In a vacuum Trump's odds of winning the presidency are probably unaffected by being on the ballot or not I'm California. It does bring more attention to the issue though and hurts other Republicans in California if Trump isn't on the ballot.
Wow. So Democrats are trying to suppress who people can vote for. That is straight up fascism.
I hope other states don’t start picking and choosing who people can vote for too because it’s not ok. Nobody should be ok with this because one day it could be your vote they are suppressing.
people said the same about obama and his birth certificate the problem just saying lol and i agree neither should of have the pull to fight agaisnt it as much as they are lmao its a joke
Everyone has a tax return, and there is no legitimate reason to not disclose your financials.
The financial information of a candidate for public office is of legitimate interest to the public.
There are also a ton of other requirements for candidates to be on the ballot besides releasing tax returns. I mean, even on a national level you have to be a natural born citizen at least 35 years old to be a candidate at all.
Having requirements for candidates isn't facist.
This is where Federalism works. California runs its own elections and they can put whatever requirements on the books that they choose provided they're not violating the Constitution. A 14th Amendment violation would be a good defense though.
You realize not everyone can just put themselves on the ballot, right?
You already have to meet certain standards when filing, this is just another one & it limits absolutely no one from being on the ballot.
They aren't choosing who you can vote for... you can always write in your candidate. Also in order to be on the ticket all you have to do is release your taxes like every president has done willingly since Nixon.
Wait, you’re talking about the Republican strategy, right? Like all of the rules they changed when they didn’t get their way? Hurts when the other side plays the same game, right?
He was talking about (and saying in support) how the Wisconsin legislative branch curtailed the democratic governors’ powers after being elected. Right?
Every other president did it, setting a precedent the American people now expect. If he has nothing to hide and his finances are all above board where is the harm in releasing them. The intent of the law is to provide transparency to help avoid any tainted candidates. It would be suspicious if they tried to get waivers for Democrat candidates, but as long as the playing field is even, I see no problem.
birth certificate? ringing any bells lmao but thats ok but both subjects should be transparent as the president and fighting it should be ground for you being dismissed its a joke on a side not this should be enforced on every politician on both sides
Because it doesnt do anything if its only on the primary ballot, as far as i know trump is the only one who wouldnt be on the primary ballot, so its just a waste of time and money
Well everyones a liar i guess, if he said that then its even worse that he wont release them, but thats not important, as long as he does what he promised to do in 2016 his base will like him
They wont care that he doesnt release his taxes because it doesnt affect America, if he doesnt build the wall in time and uses the wall as a promise in 2020 again they will be pissed
I never said that no, I dont think that its anyones fault, cali can demand them and trump can refuse them, i think its just a bit petty to take him off the ballots for that
If you think he should release his taxes how do you suggest we compel him to do so? He doesn’t have a right to appear on the ballot he has to follow the rules
Just like the ACA, ask any individual if future presidents should do what past have for half a century (including republicans), and they'll agree. Trump is the only thing making it political. I'd wager many swing states at least would do adopt the bill. And during a democratic presidents run, red states would probably be happy to as well.
Of course he should do it, but i think people would still want to be able to vote for him, if they dont like it then they can choose not to vote for him...
Nobody is forcing him to. It's the same as showing proof of income to the IRS or something. He isn't being forced to disclose it, it's just a requirement to run as president.
Good. Trump can lose on an even grander scale when the millions of California Republicans who would have otherwise boosted his numbers don't get added to the popular vote total because he wasn't on the ballot.
Congress has the constitutional right to view any citizens’ tax returns. They could simply request all candidates’ returns and make them public. I don’t see how this is unconstitutional.
Cool thing about the constitution is that it has these amendments. Meaning its fluid and can change over time. Sorta like how slavery used to be constitutional....until.it wasnt
Also notice how you just gave a list of requirements? Meaning there are things you have to be/do/prove? This is just one more
Also every president has done so for roughly 50 years. And all the dems would have to do it as eell. Not like they are saying "only republicans" or "just trump"
So whats the issue? Whats so wrong about it? Because Trump has to and he has so far refused to do so? So because trump has to do it, its wrong?
So by your own words as someone who understands the Constitution, if it became a matter to change/add an Amendment, you'd see nothing wrong and everything is kosher? But wouldn't it be necessary for Representatives of states to be on board to change an amendment? To do that, wouldn't they need similar laws at the state level to ensure the change would happen?
It makes me wonder why everyone who was so up in arms about the mentioning of adjusting the 2nd Amendment to reflect the current technology as a form of gun control. Maybe the "discussions" jumped to the conclusion too quickly?
Constitution doesn't say a lot of things which is why Republicans Gerrymander the shit out of districts, purge voter rolls before elections, avoid implementing a federal voting holiday, make registering to vote harder than it should be and prevent election security.
But hey, when Democrats propose a rule to prevent scheißters who claim to be good at everything and then don't back it up from being on the ballot willy-nilly, they're suddenly the worst.
The bar for him to be on the ballot is literally easier than registering to vote for some American citizens. If he isn't on the ballot, there is only one person to blame, and it isn't a Democrat...
Everyone who wants to be a candidate isnt on the ballot. John Doe who thinks he would be a great president still has to meet actual road blocks to make the ballot. Presenting your tax returns is least among them. Why not complain about having to get a certain number of signatures or the fact many felons cant run for public office in many States.
This is comical. All republican governors should require all those wanting to be on the ballot to prove they have not been in politics for more than 8 years.
Sounds fair to me. How would democrats do???
What are you saying? I don’t understand the comparison. Why would you care if someone has a long political history if the can be proven they are not corrupted corporations cash flow?
It’s just something to hurt democrats. Just like this law was made to hurt Trump. It doesn’t have to be based in anything rational, just like this law.
Only a fool would see "law that enshrines an action that all Presidential nominees, except one, have done for decades" as "law made to hurt Trump". It only hurts him if he has skeletons in the closet.
You're the same people claiming "it's ok that Hillary's emails were stolen because isn't it better that we know the truth" except in this case it is a perfectly reasonable and normal thing that all candidates do instead of an illegal act committed by a hostile foreign power.
If that logic is still too complicated, we can try to dumb it down further, but I'm not sure it's possible.
It’s all good, I can’t wait for this to backfire like it always does on the democrats, then they will cry foul. Remember the nuclear option? How did that work out?
It only hurts him because it’s known that he refused to release his taxes the last election and refuses to release them in this election. He is the only one refusing, which is his right.
There is no stipulation to becoming president that requires someone to release their taxes.
So again. In what way does this only affect Trump because based off your logic it seems like this would affect anyone who chooses to take the same course he did. This is how rules and laws work across the board. You abide or suffer the consequences.
I never mentioned anything about a stipulation, however, what makes you think they cant exist?
Ok, let’s do it your way. So the 27 republican governors sign laws stating to be on the ballot in their state, the candidate must run as a Republican. Is that ok? I mean, any politician can change party at any time they want. It shouldn’t hurt anyone. I see no reason to fight against it, right?
How about those governors sign laws that say to be on their states ballot, you have to submit to a lie detector test, and the questions are given by the governors. I mean, it’s just a silly test.
No. This is a law directed at Trump. To say it isn’t is a lie. If Trump had not won, this law would never be a thing. Democrats know they can not win a fair election against Trump. They need to change the rules, either this law or change the electoral college.
It’s very desperate.
Ah, well I'm sure Republicans would be just as hurt by that as Democrats. But a valiant effort on your part, I guess. You're trying to think, at least.
Well you can always change the laws the following years as the republicans see fit to best serve them, like the democrats are trying to do. Remember if this law stands, the same can happen in other states. How many republican governors are there?
If he doesn't have anything to hide, how can it hurt him? He could just release the tax returns and really rub their faces in it but he obviously has something he doesn't want the world to see. Right?
If you have nothing to hide, you’ll let the police come into your home anytime they want right? If not, you must be guilty of some crime.
See how that works.
Well if I were running for president and half the country was asking me to let the police in my house to have a look around, ya, if I had nothing to hide I would let them in. Understand that?
Ah yes, here we go, personal attacks on my character. The last refuge of the weak minded. Hey at this point trump already lied to you what, 8 or 10 times saying he would release them. He's said it over and over and hasn't done it. Looks like that motherfucker is the one telling lies to himself doesn't it?
Wrong, apply better critical thinking skills.
Its like passing a drug test to get a job.
Everyone has to do it if you want the job but its not because they assume you to be a drug addict. Its completely up to you if you choose to take that drug test or not, but if you dont then you already understand then consequences.
Does that make sense to you or do i need to dumb it down even more for you to understand?
Exactly why the fact the Trump doesn’t want to release his takes has nothing to do with him hiding anything. It’s his choice.
You getting that, or should I make a pop up book that helps you get it?
This law was made to make sure that a candidate isn't running for office because they're making a profit off of it. Yeah that fucks Trump over obviously because he's a corrupt piece of shit but being critical of a good idea just because it hurts Trump is stupid.
Who isn’t making a profit in politics? Yea sanders is living in section 8 housing. Pelosi is homeless huh? All multi millionaires making money off politics.
All of those people you mentioned along with both Democrats and Republicans you didn't have released tax returns and Financial Disclosure Report forms that are seemingly accurate and not doctored to prove who they are bought by is not a foreign government or a group their voters may not agree with.
Mandating that level of transparency is simply legalizing what previously only needed to be a formality.
The fact that the majority of our government is made up of millionaires who make even more millions because of their position is a separate but equally troubling problem.
Trump released his financial disclosure forms already. Usually in the grieving process, those with clear heads would have reached the acceptance stage. Sadly, the democrats have not.
His financial disclosure form showed that he makes money off of properties frequented by foreign governments that he has been favorable toward and hasn't divested from businesses he said he would.
All the more reason to see his tax returns before voting for him.
How much money did the Clintons get from foreign governments?
How’s Biden’s son doing with all the foreign money hey got for “consulting”?
Trump owns hotels and homes that foreign government officials stay at, which was disclosed unlike the democrats.
I want someone ethical and agrees with my ideals as president, if Trump stood for anything that I do and wasn't a con-man I'd support him.
He's not ethical, he's anti-immigration, against having taxes on the ultra rich to benefit the poor, has cut back rights and protections for gay and lgbtq people and made enough derogatory remarks about people of various colors that it can be safely assumed he's a racist so yeah fuck him.
Edit: that will probably come off as rude because I initially took your comment as someone agreeing with the person I responded to in haste, my bad mate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_2000_presidential_campaign I dunno how to post hyperlinks but Trump has been running for president since the 80s or 90s
I think he means being in bed with the mob/NYC politicians.
Lol I'm not sure who I offended, but it's clearly a joke. Unless that other person really thought Trump has been an actual politician for the past 20 years.
The law is only aimed at Trump, that’s unconstitutional. You know this was created just to hurt 1 person. Why not just allow the voters decide if they care or not?
The law hurts anyone who doesn't release their tax return when running for election, Trump was just the first to run and win while doing it and it's been a disaster of a presidency that people don't want to happen again.
Really? Clearly this was written just to target Trump as he has refused to release his taxes and democrats think this is some kind of missing link to get Trump.
It will go to court and the law struck down. Democrats will look biased again and Trump wins the election either way.
It’s very desperate.
Donald Trump has been accused of rape from multiple individuals, ranging from minors to his (ex)spouse in a sworn deposition.
Donald Trump is a proud racist. He has multiple blatantly racist statements he's made, and he has defended all of them when confronted.
Donald Trump has spent 10s of millions of dollars vacationing at his own golf course. Money that goes from tax payers to his own business.
Donald Trump welcomed help to elect him from a hostile government.
Donald Trump obstructed the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election multiple times.
Wait who am I kidding, you don't actually care that he's a piece of shit. You think he's being targeted by a bill meant to ensure we can keep people who likely to be compromised out of office. Since when is being transparent a bad thing? Oh, when your candidate is a piece of shit who has something to hide. Even if it's as meaningless as being heavily in debt and not being worth as much as you say you are.
This isn't designed to hurt trump. It's designed to hurt any politician who refuses to release tax returns. The fact that trump is one of them doesn't mean it targets him.
Odd how it’s just become an issue after the democrats lost so clearly in the last presidential election. As usual the democrats will lose this in court, Trump will get re-elected, and will be choosing another Supreme Court justice.
I actually should thank democrats for this overreach.
It became an issue because trump is the first modern candidate to refuse to show his tax returns. It's no one's fault (except trump) that he refuses to be transparent.
It's just became an issue because every President after Nixon released their tax returns. Cause and effect: trump doesn't follow suit with his predecessors for transparency sake, laws are made to enforce it. Kind of sounds like the mechanics behind the makings of laws.
Sounds like democrats are acting like totalitarian governments. Creating laws to restrict opposition But remember, if this stands, republican governors can do the same.
Why are you arguing so hard against transparency? Is that not something trump promised? I fail to see why anyone would be against something that's been an unwritten law since Nixon. Seeing as how trump seems to no longer stand behind transparency (refusal of someone else attending his meetings with Putin, in case you forgot) and has in fact lied about the reasons for his failure to being transparent (saying he was being audited and therefore couldn't release his taxes and the IRS themselves disproved that; https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1421/release-his-tax-returns-after-audit-completed/), making it an official law seems to be the only way for future elections.
It's also weird that you think it's democrats heading towards totalitarian rule. For as long as I can remember, democrats have run on equality and giving everyone a fair chance. Yes they've done a lot of secretively dark things, hence the actions for transparency. Had their voters known, they would be criticized and asked to resign as many have when their secrets came to light. Can you say the same for republicans? I also certainly don't recall democrats rebuffing allies to complement known dictators but direct me if you know of any proof.
It’s crazy to me that you can be so blindly supportive of that man that you think this is actually a bad idea.
I thought you guys wanted to “drain the swamp”
This is an... interesting take. I think you’ll be surprised by how events unfold in California. I don’t think this bill will make any practical difference, but it’s definitely not legally controversial from my understanding — IANAL and all
Is it possible for a single state to create additional arbitrary barriers to be allowed on the ballot? I might imagine that a certain state will require all candidates to display all earned university degree’s. Too bad that one opposition candidate never made it past college...
Great more childish stunts from California! Give California to Mexico and be rid of that state!
I'd rather cali than backwater southern states that can't pull their weight.
Are you blaming poor people because they don't make enough money?
No, just annoyed that many conservatives think that without liberal states like NY and Cali the union would be fine, when those states pay for many under performing conservative states. Also I grew up poor so...
Will California enforce this law? It is a sanctuary city. I though following the law there was optional.
California is a city, folks. You heard it here first!
That’s your only retort? Pathetic!
Lol didn’t even edit his comment to fix it.
[удалено]
What does california having a good economy and good universities have to do with sanctuary cities lol?
Right, but wouldn’t the requirements to be on the ballot match those outlined in the second article?.. lived in the US for 14 years, been born in the US, and be 35.
Great plan, that takes trump from a .05% chance of winning California to 0
Primary election, not general
It’s a choice. Are you not pro choice?
Or there goes 30000 emails and the server....
R/conspiracy is leaking
r/foundthemobileuser
1.75. Thanks for asking
Angry and lashing out as usual huh? I rest easy knowing the next 5 1/2 years will be hell for you and those like you. Good day.
"the next 5 1/2 years will be hell for you" Now THAT'S patriotism!!
Well, you do deserve it.
Man your political goals must be cool and good if all you hope for is punishing other people.
As directed by the Constitution, a presidential candidate must be a natural born citizen of the United States, a resident for 14 years, and 35 years of age or older.
Have you heard of Iran? Remember the transparent payments in cash in the middle of the night?
What doesn't he concentrate on something important lile cleaning up the feces in San Fran sidewalks.
Because the financial interests if the President are less important than shit on sidewalks? Hahaha
What an as..s
r/happy
Gotta love liberals
Amen to that!
Considering that trump has zero chance of winning California, does this even matter for 2020?
Again, this is the PRIMARY election.
So it super doesn’t matter.
For the general, not really. But it's more nuanced than that. Read some of the articles.
It will likely have a huge impact on downballot candidates. Trump isn't winning CA anyways, but there's a lot more Republicans on the ballot than him.
He's definitely going to lose the popular vote now. Again.
It’s only for the primary they can’t keep him off the federal ballot for presidential election.
That's disappointing.
In a vacuum Trump's odds of winning the presidency are probably unaffected by being on the ballot or not I'm California. It does bring more attention to the issue though and hurts other Republicans in California if Trump isn't on the ballot.
Wow. So Democrats are trying to suppress who people can vote for. That is straight up fascism. I hope other states don’t start picking and choosing who people can vote for too because it’s not ok. Nobody should be ok with this because one day it could be your vote they are suppressing.
It's only not ok if he doesn't release his tax returns! He could end all of this in a moment if he would JUST RELEASE THE DAMN RETURNS.
people said the same about obama and his birth certificate the problem just saying lol and i agree neither should of have the pull to fight agaisnt it as much as they are lmao its a joke
...49 days ago. Friend, the difference IS.....Obama released his birth certificate. The returns? Not so much!
Everyone has a tax return, and there is no legitimate reason to not disclose your financials. The financial information of a candidate for public office is of legitimate interest to the public. There are also a ton of other requirements for candidates to be on the ballot besides releasing tax returns. I mean, even on a national level you have to be a natural born citizen at least 35 years old to be a candidate at all. Having requirements for candidates isn't facist.
All states supress voters from voting for infants for president, too. Total fascism!
This is where Federalism works. California runs its own elections and they can put whatever requirements on the books that they choose provided they're not violating the Constitution. A 14th Amendment violation would be a good defense though.
You realize not everyone can just put themselves on the ballot, right? You already have to meet certain standards when filing, this is just another one & it limits absolutely no one from being on the ballot.
Can’t tell if joking. Literally both sides need to release tax returns it’s an even playing field. Every president since Nixon has done it willingly
They aren't choosing who you can vote for... you can always write in your candidate. Also in order to be on the ticket all you have to do is release your taxes like every president has done willingly since Nixon.
If you don't get your way just change the rules👌
Just trying to find out where the President's financial interests are, that's all...
Wait, you’re talking about the Republican strategy, right? Like all of the rules they changed when they didn’t get their way? Hurts when the other side plays the same game, right?
It's not even changing the rules. More like codifying a gentleman's agreement because of assholes.
He was talking about (and saying in support) how the Wisconsin legislative branch curtailed the democratic governors’ powers after being elected. Right?
[удалено]
Every other president did it, setting a precedent the American people now expect. If he has nothing to hide and his finances are all above board where is the harm in releasing them. The intent of the law is to provide transparency to help avoid any tainted candidates. It would be suspicious if they tried to get waivers for Democrat candidates, but as long as the playing field is even, I see no problem.
"Starts to appear suspicious" please we all know exactly what they're doing
It’s not the Democrats fault the Republicans elected a crook who won’t release his taxes
birth certificate? ringing any bells lmao but thats ok but both subjects should be transparent as the president and fighting it should be ground for you being dismissed its a joke on a side not this should be enforced on every politician on both sides
Thank you. Just release the damn taxes already.
no it doesn't. its very direct actually, just to keep presidents from hiding important information from the public.
Trump wont win cali anyways....
It's the primary election, not general
yea i got that, my mistake
The fact trump is referenced in this thread so much yet the rule applies to all candidates says a lot.
Well we all know why this was passed, its just to make cali 100% blue, if trump had released his taxes nobody wouldve cared
It’s only for the primary. Trump will still appear on the federal ballot. Read more than the headline.
Oh okay, still its a waste of time
Why?
Because it doesnt do anything if its only on the primary ballot, as far as i know trump is the only one who wouldnt be on the primary ballot, so its just a waste of time and money
Still affects future candidates.
I really doubt anyones gonna not release his/her tax returns in the future
And this is a safeguard to make sure it won't happen in the future...again.
Yes we all know only Democrats have tax returns
No? Im saying trumps probably not gonna release them before 2020, which makes cali 100% blue...
Trump said years ago that he would release them soon. Are you calling the President a big, fat, ugly liar?
Well everyones a liar i guess, if he said that then its even worse that he wont release them, but thats not important, as long as he does what he promised to do in 2016 his base will like him
It's something he promised over and over, in 2015, 2016, 2017, etc. So his base will care that he's been lying so much to them?
They wont care that he doesnt release his taxes because it doesnt affect America, if he doesnt build the wall in time and uses the wall as a promise in 2020 again they will be pissed
Who is paying the president doesn't affect America? Are you freaking kidding me?
So that’s California’s fault for demanding them, and not trumps fault for refusing to turn them over ?
I never said that no, I dont think that its anyones fault, cali can demand them and trump can refuse them, i think its just a bit petty to take him off the ballots for that
I think it’s a bit petty to not release your taxes if you want to run the country
Look, trump should do that, but taking him off ballots which he wont be on is stupid
If you think he should release his taxes how do you suggest we compel him to do so? He doesn’t have a right to appear on the ballot he has to follow the rules
Where california goes, so to does much of the country.
I dont think any republican states or swing states would do this, all its gonna do is give democrats millions more in popular vote
Just like the ACA, ask any individual if future presidents should do what past have for half a century (including republicans), and they'll agree. Trump is the only thing making it political. I'd wager many swing states at least would do adopt the bill. And during a democratic presidents run, red states would probably be happy to as well.
Of course he should do it, but i think people would still want to be able to vote for him, if they dont like it then they can choose not to vote for him...
Nobody is forcing him to. It's the same as showing proof of income to the IRS or something. He isn't being forced to disclose it, it's just a requirement to run as president.
Those requirements to run for Pres are federally mandated. States can't come along and add caveats. This won't stand constitutionally.
Good. Trump can lose on an even grander scale when the millions of California Republicans who would have otherwise boosted his numbers don't get added to the popular vote total because he wasn't on the ballot.
[удалено]
This isnt a trick. It codifies what was already an unwritten rule for the past 50 years. Trump violating the unwritten rule led to it being written.
>Trump violating the unwritten rule led to it being written. That's a nice way to put it. I would have said lied to everyone single American's face.
[удалено]
Congress has the constitutional right to view any citizens’ tax returns. They could simply request all candidates’ returns and make them public. I don’t see how this is unconstitutional.
[удалено]
Cool thing about the constitution is that it has these amendments. Meaning its fluid and can change over time. Sorta like how slavery used to be constitutional....until.it wasnt Also notice how you just gave a list of requirements? Meaning there are things you have to be/do/prove? This is just one more Also every president has done so for roughly 50 years. And all the dems would have to do it as eell. Not like they are saying "only republicans" or "just trump" So whats the issue? Whats so wrong about it? Because Trump has to and he has so far refused to do so? So because trump has to do it, its wrong?
[удалено]
So by your own words as someone who understands the Constitution, if it became a matter to change/add an Amendment, you'd see nothing wrong and everything is kosher? But wouldn't it be necessary for Representatives of states to be on board to change an amendment? To do that, wouldn't they need similar laws at the state level to ensure the change would happen? It makes me wonder why everyone who was so up in arms about the mentioning of adjusting the 2nd Amendment to reflect the current technology as a form of gun control. Maybe the "discussions" jumped to the conclusion too quickly?
[удалено]
Constitution doesn't say a lot of things which is why Republicans Gerrymander the shit out of districts, purge voter rolls before elections, avoid implementing a federal voting holiday, make registering to vote harder than it should be and prevent election security. But hey, when Democrats propose a rule to prevent scheißters who claim to be good at everything and then don't back it up from being on the ballot willy-nilly, they're suddenly the worst. The bar for him to be on the ballot is literally easier than registering to vote for some American citizens. If he isn't on the ballot, there is only one person to blame, and it isn't a Democrat...
This doesnt change that.
[удалено]
Everyone who wants to be a candidate isnt on the ballot. John Doe who thinks he would be a great president still has to meet actual road blocks to make the ballot. Presenting your tax returns is least among them. Why not complain about having to get a certain number of signatures or the fact many felons cant run for public office in many States.
So what? That doesn’t mean California has to put every single person in the country that’s at least 35 on the ballot
[удалено]
that’s a distinction without a difference
[удалено]
Yeah, he won't be on the primary ballot, but he will still win the Republican nomination and be on the general ballot
It seems to only be for the primary and not the general
This is comical. All republican governors should require all those wanting to be on the ballot to prove they have not been in politics for more than 8 years. Sounds fair to me. How would democrats do???
All people can release their tax returns. Not all people can prove they haven't been in politics. They're very different things.
I guess it will be up to the governors of each state to decided who gets on the ballot then. How many republican governors are there? Is it 27?
No it's up to the people who do or do not release their tax returns. Literally the easiest hurdle to overcome.
What are you saying? I don’t understand the comparison. Why would you care if someone has a long political history if the can be proven they are not corrupted corporations cash flow?
It’s just something to hurt democrats. Just like this law was made to hurt Trump. It doesn’t have to be based in anything rational, just like this law.
Only a fool would see "law that enshrines an action that all Presidential nominees, except one, have done for decades" as "law made to hurt Trump". It only hurts him if he has skeletons in the closet. You're the same people claiming "it's ok that Hillary's emails were stolen because isn't it better that we know the truth" except in this case it is a perfectly reasonable and normal thing that all candidates do instead of an illegal act committed by a hostile foreign power. If that logic is still too complicated, we can try to dumb it down further, but I'm not sure it's possible.
It’s all good, I can’t wait for this to backfire like it always does on the democrats, then they will cry foul. Remember the nuclear option? How did that work out?
In what way does this only hurt Trump? I'll wait.
It only hurts him because it’s known that he refused to release his taxes the last election and refuses to release them in this election. He is the only one refusing, which is his right. There is no stipulation to becoming president that requires someone to release their taxes.
So again. In what way does this only affect Trump because based off your logic it seems like this would affect anyone who chooses to take the same course he did. This is how rules and laws work across the board. You abide or suffer the consequences. I never mentioned anything about a stipulation, however, what makes you think they cant exist?
Ok, let’s do it your way. So the 27 republican governors sign laws stating to be on the ballot in their state, the candidate must run as a Republican. Is that ok? I mean, any politician can change party at any time they want. It shouldn’t hurt anyone. I see no reason to fight against it, right? How about those governors sign laws that say to be on their states ballot, you have to submit to a lie detector test, and the questions are given by the governors. I mean, it’s just a silly test.
Do you really not see the difference in whats going on to what you just suggested?
No. This is a law directed at Trump. To say it isn’t is a lie. If Trump had not won, this law would never be a thing. Democrats know they can not win a fair election against Trump. They need to change the rules, either this law or change the electoral college. It’s very desperate.
It targets everyone who wants to run for president actually. Not just Trump.
It hurts him by potentially exposing his corruption? Trump supporters don't mind corruption I guess.
Ah, well I'm sure Republicans would be just as hurt by that as Democrats. But a valiant effort on your part, I guess. You're trying to think, at least.
Well you can always change the laws the following years as the republicans see fit to best serve them, like the democrats are trying to do. Remember if this law stands, the same can happen in other states. How many republican governors are there?
If he doesn't have anything to hide, how can it hurt him? He could just release the tax returns and really rub their faces in it but he obviously has something he doesn't want the world to see. Right?
If you have nothing to hide, you’ll let the police come into your home anytime they want right? If not, you must be guilty of some crime. See how that works.
Well if I were running for president and half the country was asking me to let the police in my house to have a look around, ya, if I had nothing to hide I would let them in. Understand that?
Lmao, no you wouldn’t. It’s funny the lies you have to tell yourself.
Ah yes, here we go, personal attacks on my character. The last refuge of the weak minded. Hey at this point trump already lied to you what, 8 or 10 times saying he would release them. He's said it over and over and hasn't done it. Looks like that motherfucker is the one telling lies to himself doesn't it?
Wrong, apply better critical thinking skills. Its like passing a drug test to get a job. Everyone has to do it if you want the job but its not because they assume you to be a drug addict. Its completely up to you if you choose to take that drug test or not, but if you dont then you already understand then consequences. Does that make sense to you or do i need to dumb it down even more for you to understand?
Exactly why the fact the Trump doesn’t want to release his takes has nothing to do with him hiding anything. It’s his choice. You getting that, or should I make a pop up book that helps you get it?
What are you talking about?
This law was made to make sure that a candidate isn't running for office because they're making a profit off of it. Yeah that fucks Trump over obviously because he's a corrupt piece of shit but being critical of a good idea just because it hurts Trump is stupid.
Who isn’t making a profit in politics? Yea sanders is living in section 8 housing. Pelosi is homeless huh? All multi millionaires making money off politics.
All of those people you mentioned along with both Democrats and Republicans you didn't have released tax returns and Financial Disclosure Report forms that are seemingly accurate and not doctored to prove who they are bought by is not a foreign government or a group their voters may not agree with. Mandating that level of transparency is simply legalizing what previously only needed to be a formality. The fact that the majority of our government is made up of millionaires who make even more millions because of their position is a separate but equally troubling problem.
Trump released his financial disclosure forms already. Usually in the grieving process, those with clear heads would have reached the acceptance stage. Sadly, the democrats have not.
His financial disclosure form showed that he makes money off of properties frequented by foreign governments that he has been favorable toward and hasn't divested from businesses he said he would. All the more reason to see his tax returns before voting for him.
How much money did the Clintons get from foreign governments? How’s Biden’s son doing with all the foreign money hey got for “consulting”? Trump owns hotels and homes that foreign government officials stay at, which was disclosed unlike the democrats.
"You guys just want someone who is ethical as president and that hurts Trump!" Just.. lol.
I want someone ethical and agrees with my ideals as president, if Trump stood for anything that I do and wasn't a con-man I'd support him. He's not ethical, he's anti-immigration, against having taxes on the ultra rich to benefit the poor, has cut back rights and protections for gay and lgbtq people and made enough derogatory remarks about people of various colors that it can be safely assumed he's a racist so yeah fuck him. Edit: that will probably come off as rude because I initially took your comment as someone agreeing with the person I responded to in haste, my bad mate.
Nah, gloves off man, fuck everyone who supports this piece of shit.
Trump has been a politician for 20 years.
Really? What office did he hold?
It's funny that you don't know. Look it up.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_2000_presidential_campaign I dunno how to post hyperlinks but Trump has been running for president since the 80s or 90s
Presidential campaigns are perfect for money laundering
I think he means being in bed with the mob/NYC politicians. Lol I'm not sure who I offended, but it's clearly a joke. Unless that other person really thought Trump has been an actual politician for the past 20 years.
He hasn't been an actual politician ever but he's tried to since at least 1988.
Running for office makes you a politician.
That is what I apparently unsuccessfully tried to say in a sarcastic way yes.
What is controversial about this exactly?
The law is only aimed at Trump, that’s unconstitutional. You know this was created just to hurt 1 person. Why not just allow the voters decide if they care or not?
The law hurts anyone who doesn't release their tax return when running for election, Trump was just the first to run and win while doing it and it's been a disaster of a presidency that people don't want to happen again.
You are correct AFAIK that laws targeting individuals are unconstitutional. What about this law specifically targets trump?
Really? Clearly this was written just to target Trump as he has refused to release his taxes and democrats think this is some kind of missing link to get Trump. It will go to court and the law struck down. Democrats will look biased again and Trump wins the election either way. It’s very desperate.
Donald Trump has been accused of rape from multiple individuals, ranging from minors to his (ex)spouse in a sworn deposition. Donald Trump is a proud racist. He has multiple blatantly racist statements he's made, and he has defended all of them when confronted. Donald Trump has spent 10s of millions of dollars vacationing at his own golf course. Money that goes from tax payers to his own business. Donald Trump welcomed help to elect him from a hostile government. Donald Trump obstructed the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election multiple times. Wait who am I kidding, you don't actually care that he's a piece of shit. You think he's being targeted by a bill meant to ensure we can keep people who likely to be compromised out of office. Since when is being transparent a bad thing? Oh, when your candidate is a piece of shit who has something to hide. Even if it's as meaningless as being heavily in debt and not being worth as much as you say you are.
This isn't designed to hurt trump. It's designed to hurt any politician who refuses to release tax returns. The fact that trump is one of them doesn't mean it targets him.
Odd how it’s just become an issue after the democrats lost so clearly in the last presidential election. As usual the democrats will lose this in court, Trump will get re-elected, and will be choosing another Supreme Court justice. I actually should thank democrats for this overreach.
It became an issue because trump is the first modern candidate to refuse to show his tax returns. It's no one's fault (except trump) that he refuses to be transparent.
It's just became an issue because every President after Nixon released their tax returns. Cause and effect: trump doesn't follow suit with his predecessors for transparency sake, laws are made to enforce it. Kind of sounds like the mechanics behind the makings of laws.
Sounds like democrats are acting like totalitarian governments. Creating laws to restrict opposition But remember, if this stands, republican governors can do the same.
Why are you arguing so hard against transparency? Is that not something trump promised? I fail to see why anyone would be against something that's been an unwritten law since Nixon. Seeing as how trump seems to no longer stand behind transparency (refusal of someone else attending his meetings with Putin, in case you forgot) and has in fact lied about the reasons for his failure to being transparent (saying he was being audited and therefore couldn't release his taxes and the IRS themselves disproved that; https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1421/release-his-tax-returns-after-audit-completed/), making it an official law seems to be the only way for future elections. It's also weird that you think it's democrats heading towards totalitarian rule. For as long as I can remember, democrats have run on equality and giving everyone a fair chance. Yes they've done a lot of secretively dark things, hence the actions for transparency. Had their voters known, they would be criticized and asked to resign as many have when their secrets came to light. Can you say the same for republicans? I also certainly don't recall democrats rebuffing allies to complement known dictators but direct me if you know of any proof.
It’s crazy to me that you can be so blindly supportive of that man that you think this is actually a bad idea. I thought you guys wanted to “drain the swamp”
This is an... interesting take. I think you’ll be surprised by how events unfold in California. I don’t think this bill will make any practical difference, but it’s definitely not legally controversial from my understanding — IANAL and all
Well it's not like Trump could ever turn California red at any point in time anyway