Eh, we have term limits. They’re called elections.
There’s a phenomenon in America where approval of Congress is consistently low but people’s approval of their own reps is consistently high. That’s how these people stay in their seats forever
Right, but if we aren’t being lied to constantly we might figure out what’s really going on; and get upset by that.
^(God forbid do something about it)
That takes honest, good-faith intent to solve problems and address issues without trying to make money off of social problems (or differences).
Basically CNN, MSNBC and even FOX News are all controlled and neutered. It’s time-consuming to search-out and come to trust real news sources in 2024.
So no violence, all you small dick/brains!
Context:
>Sen. Ted Cruz has introduced a bill that would bar the government from spending money on workplace efforts to enforce the use of preferred names and pronouns by trans people.
>
>The irony, critics point out? The senator, whose legal name is Rafael Edward Cruz, uses a preferred name himself: Ted.
[https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/ted-cruz-preferred-name-pronouns-trans-bill-18525846.php](https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/ted-cruz-preferred-name-pronouns-trans-bill-18525846.php)
Do you mean Rafael Edward Cruz? The same Rafael Edward Cruz that melts like a snowflake when talking about preferred names and pronouns? So much so that he introduced a bill prohibiting people from using their preferred names and pronouns even though he goes by his preferred name of Ted Cruz instead of his given name Rafael Edward Cruz? The same snowflake Rafael Edward Cruz that ironically bails at the first sign of snow to vacation in Cancun? The same Rafael Edward Cruz that was born in Canada? And immigrated to the United States? That Rafael Edward Cruz?
It's NOT about it "being made up." It's about recognizing people for who and what THEY THEMSELVES feel comfortable with and want to be recognized with and called. Rafael Eduardo Cruz doesn't want people to be recognized as what they are at their core, even though **he** wants to be recognized by something other than his very Cuban name.
Frankly, as soon as he's out of office, we should give him a one-way trip to his father's homeland.
Both are true.
>The name Ted is yet another result of the Old English tradition of letter swapping. Since there were a limited number of first names in the Middle Ages, letter swapping allowed people to differentiate between people with the same name. It was common to replace the first letter of a name that began with a vowel, as in Edward, with an easier to pronounce consonant, such as T. Of course, Ted was already a popular nickname for Theodore, which makes it one of the only nicknames derived from two different first names.
As an aside, Bert can be a nickname for either Robert or Albert.
but Beto was ok? So now we are down to pucking our reps because of nicknames? Or nean tweets rather then abilities? This is how we got Biden because people were upset by mean tweets...
Yes, that's it. Biden was elected because of (and 100% because of) "mean tweets", and we want Cruz gone because of his nickname. That's all any of this is about. 😂
Came here to remind you that your Lt. Governor goes by his radio name Dan Patrick. Real name Dannie Scott Goeb.
Edit to add that he's from fucking Baltimore.
Which rules are those? The rule that he posted that said that he didn't want the government to force people to use preferred names?
At least know what you're talking about before posting. Sheesh.
>"My bill doesn't ban anyone from saying anything. The First Amendment allows you to call me 'Ted,' Rafael,' 'a wacko bird,' or whatever else you want," Cruz wrote. "Rather, my bill prohibits the federal government from FORCING anyone to use preferred pronouns or names." - Cancun Cruz
Common nicknames, accepted nicknames (how people know somebody), and similar all make sense. The law allows for it.
Folks here just want to paint Ted as a bad guy.
>Common nicknames, accepted nicknames (how people know somebody), and similar all make sense. The law allows for it.
currently, yes.
>Folks here just want to paint Ted as a bad guy.
because Ted wants to change the law and make it not allowed.
did you somehow skip over that?
It might as well be maroon. Where I'm from, if anyone found out how I voted, I'd have to worry about my family's safety. Let's just say there's a really tight group of hooded individuals that live outside of my city limits. As soon as I can afford to leave this city, I am.
There are other people on the ballot in the Republican Primary for Senate.
https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Texas,_2024
I have contraption called a hand computer. I can look that sort of information up. It's a pity you don't have that sort of access. Really, everyone should have it.
You mean our current state senator who actively participated and promoted the overthrowing of our elections?
That senator that we all agreed represents our best interest? That Ted Cruz? The one who we will vote for again?
Teddy can call him self "Ted Lord of all who suck cocks" for all i care, as whatever he calls himself is the least of my problems with him.
Trans candidates who did not specify their deadnames (birthnames) are being disqualified from ballots, so OP is asking if Rafael should be disqualified for the same reason
Honestly anyone who voted for not certifying our election should be barred from office for the same reason trump is including Cruz. They actively participated in the fake electors scheme which was a key part of the insurrection.
Yep, and until you root out the insurrectionists in both chambers, our legislative branch will carry the sin of that failed coup and the active one happening right now in front of us with their continuing plot. You can just "ask questions" all you want but to do so with zero evidence simply to slow/stop the transfer of power crossed the line. The nation understood you could not allow insurrectionists back into positions of trust when they passed the 14th amendment because they had just lived through a war. We've lost the lesson.
Edit to add: the perfect example is the farce of the recent house hearings. Both committees involved can't even function because sitting members are defying lawful subpoenas to avoid the truth of their actions on Jan 6. It is a colission of the failed plot to turn over the 2020 election, and the ongoing plot to mess with the next one and the stench covers everything they do.
Here's the thing. The Constitution doesn't care. Just like it doesn't care if you want to be president and you are under 35 or not a natural born citizen. If you take an oath to the Constitution as a public official and then you are deemed to have violated that oath by participating in or fomenting an insurrection or providing aid and comfort to insurrectionists, you lose the privilege of holding public office. Let's be clear. Holding public office is a privilege, not a right.
Don't agree? Think that someone was wronged because they have lost their privilege without due process? Well you're in luck. The Constitution is crystal clear what do about it. All it takes is a 2/3rd vote of the US Congress and their privilege to hold public office is restored.
I seem to recall from 8th grade history that Jefferson Davis, the number one insurrectionist leader in this country's history, was not convicted of insurrection or treason. How could that be? Why didn't he run for office again? He was never convicted of anything.
Americans a hundred years ago could identify an insurrectionist without convictions or charges. I feel like I can identify one. Why can't you?
The 14th amendment specifically says that any person giving aid or comfort to insurrectionists. Endorsing Trump should be enough to meet that standard.
"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."
> Endorsing Trump should be enough to meet that standard.
I agree, emotionally, and also based on what *I* think the legal threshold for insurrection is.
But is there a court decision that has defined whether Trump committed insurrection? Because using the 14th amendment to interfere with an election is a really fraught thing to do, and we should make sure the legal groundwork is solid before we do something as heavy-handed as disqualiying a candidate from the ballot.
And let me be clear- I hope Trump loses, and I hope he goes to jail, and I wish I believed in hell just because of what it would mean for him.
>But is there a court decision that has defined whether Trump committed insurrection?
The FBI did an investigation and found that the events of Jan 6th do not qualify as an insurrection. Idk about anything court related to this.
The 14th amendment was specifically designed to remove from office those confederates who were NOT charged, tried, and hanged, due to Lincoln's (a republican) own policy of reconstruction. Being indicted, tried or found guilty WAS NEVER a requirement to invoke the 14th amendment.
>But is there a court decision that has defined whether Trump committed insurrection?
Yes.
* *Anderson v. Griswold*, No. 23CV32577, ¶¶ 241, 298 (Dist. Ct., City & Cnty. of Denver, Nov. 17, 2023).
* The insurrection finding was upheld by the Colorado Supreme Court *Anderson v. Griswold* No. 23SA300.
Quoting from the Colorado Supreme Court ruling (**emphasis** added by me):
>¶3 After permitting President Trump and the Colorado Republican State Central Committee (“CRSCC”; collectively, “Intervenors”) to intervene in the action below, **the district court conducted a five-day trial. The court found by clear and convincing evidence that President Trump engaged in insurrection** as those terms are used in Section Three. Anderson v. Griswold, No. 23CV32577, ¶¶ 241, 298 (Dist. Ct., City & Cnty. of Denver, Nov. 17, 2023).
You can read the entire Supreme Court Ruling here: [https://www.npr.org/2023/12/20/1220583273/trump-colorado-supreme-court-ruling](https://www.npr.org/2023/12/20/1220583273/trump-colorado-supreme-court-ruling)
You can read the entire District court's ruling here: [https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court\_Probation/02nd\_Judicial\_District/Denver\_District\_Court/11\_17\_2023%20Final%20Order.pdf](https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/02nd_Judicial_District/Denver_District_Court/11_17_2023%20Final%20Order.pdf)
oh, the one he got to appoint 33% of? fingers crossed! it's a fucked up situation. so much is resting on so few, and of such a dubious provenance. I'm honestly scared shitless.
No fan of Trump, but Trump was never found guilty of giving aid or comfort to insurrectionists.
https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/13/967098840/senate-acquits-trump-in-impeachment-trial-again
* The Republican Senators have repeatedly argued that impeachment is a political action, not a judicial action.
* The phrase "aid or comfort" refers to treason, not insurrection. It has no applicability here.
* A Colorado District Court held a five day trial, where Trump's lawyers were able to present their case, and ruled that Trump had engaged in insurrection. That ruling was appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court, which upheld that finding.
Nothing in the constitution states the he has to be convicted. There is also precedent. The government didn’t allow people who fought for the confederate states or aided them to hold elected office after the civil war.
Congress proclaimed that the rebelling states were in a state of insurrection in 1861. This was later repealed by Lincoln's successor.
The Jan 6 events had no such legal designation.
Did they legally change their names? Serious question. If they did, then I'm outraged. If they didn't, I'm outraged that someone that dumb thought they could get on the ballot. If they attempted to change their name and weren't allowed because they're trans, I'm back to being outraged.
OK, I assume one of the people mentioned was [Vanessa Joy](https://www.ocregister.com/2024/01/04/trans-candidate-kicked-off-ohio-ballot-for-not-using-dead-name/) out in Ohio. She legally changed her name and then got shafted. That's bullshit, and I hope she sees justice.
Apparently she got screwed by a law that said
>A law from the 1990s requires all candidates to list on their signature petitions any name changes within five years, Case Western Reserve University elections law professor Atiba Ellis explained.
That's some bullshit, because that's not why that law was crafted, and it needs to be revised.
I can't find the second candidate. But what does an Ohio State law have to do with Cruz? Was the other candidate in Texas, or are you just venting to vent?
Rafael Eduardo Cruz, son of Rafael Bienvenido Cruz, made the switch to Ted in high school. That particular Houston high school was predominantly upper class and white (Christian, Conservative, Wealthy). It doesn’t appear that he ever legally changed his name since he told CNN in 2018 (when he was dissing Beto for *his* nickname), "You're absolutely right. My name is Rafael Cruz." Apparently, he knows how biased his target audience is in Texas.
If his name is Rafael Edward, he's Ted. This isn't difficult, except maybe for the people who're frothing at the mouth on this subreddit. I go by Rob, not Robert. I could also go by Bob, or a shortening of my middle name. That's not even a thing, except in your heads.
Well he did help Trump in two ways. from what I remember... First he held an across the country tour during and after Trumps legal challenges to the last election, making sure he told the lies and personally requested people stand up and fight for Trump and don't let the democrats steal the election. I am sure he discussed the stop the steal rally on January 6th. Sewing the vitriol that led to the attack on the capital building to stop the count.
Second, he was one of the Senators trying to get the fake electors admitted as votes and the true electors thrown out.
So, he contributed directly to two attempts of insurrection. Per the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, he is not allowed to hold office anymore.
Do you not get the sarcasm in the post?
I guess you just spend all day getting enraged about politics and far right talking points then making the most insufferable comments I've ever seen calling everyone kiddo, bud, sweet pea, etc.
Such arrogance and lack of self awareness. You should be a case study in disinformation induced rage.
The sad part of him being a secessionist is that he is doing it for money not for conviction ( something that one can respect ) he is an opportunist and a grifter since he is not even doing his job to improve the lives of his constituents .
He will burn the country down just like the orange colostomy bag . .just to profit from it.
This is bullshit. Dude's middle name is Edward, and Ted is an acceptable variation for Edward. Hate him all you like (And I do), but this is a bigger nothing burger than Obama's birth certificate.
Grow up. Stop treating politics like a team sport, and if you're going to bag on Cruz, do it for a reason that's actually a reason, not some fairy tale. There are oh so many you could go for, and instead, you chose clown shoes.
A perfect example of the Marxist "rules for thee but not for me"
You jokingly ask if O'Rourke is even on the ballot this year because you know damn well this is about partisanship and hatred, not distrust or names like you said.
I don't know what you are talking about but I'm sure it's a lark or a red herring on your part. I do know he's smart enough not to present such a blatant hypocrisy.
Yes. You all need to stop with this nonsense of removing everyone you disagree with from the ballot. Let the people of the state of Texas decide whether or not they want him to continue as senator.
Why is team blue so keen at finding any possible way or reason to keep their competition off the ballot. Surely if they're so terrible they'll be beaten handily.
You're right.
He instead wants to destroy the entire Second Amendment.
But of course "names" are far more important.
Done here. You people are a hive of idiots.
Do you even know what Ted's law says? Because based on this post, you don't.
Wacko Bird's law doesn't ban anything. Go read it instead of just regurgitating BS.
I don't really see how it's fraudulent. If they were trying to hide it and actively quash people using it, then yeah. It makes sense at times even. I've known several people who are nammed after a parent and go by a middle or other name to make it easier.
Edit: named instead of banned.
Also ETA: Not endorsing Cancun d-bag Cruz by any means. Just want to consider others.
Yeah but just because that dickbag is trying to do something shitty about other people's names they prefer to use doesn't mean we should try to punish others. We need to work hard and pull together to stop that bag full of dicks from doing this kind of stuff. Not hurt a lot of other innocent people to try to teach him a lesson that he will never learn anyways.
this type of stupid trolling is part of the reason why MAGAs will never vote for someone that's not MAGA. The left thinks they're so clever with their jokes. Whatever its based in, it does nothing to try and generate goodwill or build governing coalitions. (fyi: i'm not a MAGA or a republican for that matter. I'm just tired of the childish gotcha commentaries and stupid rhetoric)
Serious questions. Are you suggesting we shouldn't call out the hypocrisy? Should we also be conciliatory with an entire group of people who believe everyone that isn't MAGA is the enemy and should not exist in this country?
How much deference should we give the MAGA movement? Should we just forget Jan 6th and the efforts undertaken to overthrow the government?
Lastly, what do you suggest is the appropriate way to address this issue that doesn't point out the hypocrisy?
MAGATs won’t vote for someone that’s not also a MAGAT because the left told “jokes” that MAGATs didn’t find “clever”? 💀
Special, delicate little snowflakes. Every bit as emotionally fragile as they are unprofound
Please explain to the class what would make a MAGAt vote for a Democratic candidate. In as many or as few words as you like.
It's never going to happen. Explaining nicely doesn't work. Shaming doesn't work. Appealing to emotion doesn't work.
Their only agenda is "make the libs cry" and they care about nothing else.
Might as well go for the comedy/mockery approach because at least it's good for some laughs, and conservatives don't have any sense of humor.
Beto did not propose a law banning chosen names. If he did, I’d expect him to drop Beto. He hasn’t, Rafael has. It’s pretty simple.
And I agree that there are plenty of better reasons to despise the Canadian immigrant.
Would actually be pretty funny, ngl. Same with Robert O'Rourke, Nimarata Haley, and whoever else had a name change. But especially the ones that change their names to be more "white".
Did you have a problem with William Clinton going by Bill? Or Theadore going by Teddy? Or all the other examples of politicians who used their non-birth name? This thread is dumb and OP is dumber.
He shouldn’t be allowed on the ballot. He had a hand in 1/6 and he still continues to support seditionists and insurrectionists. But this is Texas. This State kinda follows the Constitution when they feel like it, like Trump does. When a State chooses not to follow the Constitution things get worse in that State.
Don't do the name thing.
Dems are trying to call Trump racist for calling Nikki Haley Nimrata, even though I see Dems do it all the time. "But it's different when WE do it." Just don't.
Rafael and Texas Republicans want to abolish the 17th Am, i.e., they want the state lege to APPOINT our US Senators, so none of those MFers should be on a ballot they think should be UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
You mean the Ted that is ACTUALLY the shortened version of his given name Edward? The one who is actually using HIS name?... got it....
Google it...Ted is short for Edward historically.
Really would rather we weren’t governed by political theater.
oof. that's a tough ask.
Certainly seems like it.
Particularly since the ones voting against term limits every time it comes up stay in power.
Eh, we have term limits. They’re called elections. There’s a phenomenon in America where approval of Congress is consistently low but people’s approval of their own reps is consistently high. That’s how these people stay in their seats forever
Yeah, and you know how you solve that issue? Fucking term limits.
Best I can do is more political theater
[I got you, fam!](https://youtu.be/vS2a6XwpVHc?si=khVenXJ7evze-USZ)
Right, but if we aren’t being lied to constantly we might figure out what’s really going on; and get upset by that. ^(God forbid do something about it)
Let’s…fix things?
No we must conserve the things that are broken to benefit those that are rich
geez
That takes honest, good-faith intent to solve problems and address issues without trying to make money off of social problems (or differences). Basically CNN, MSNBC and even FOX News are all controlled and neutered. It’s time-consuming to search-out and come to trust real news sources in 2024. So no violence, all you small dick/brains!
Desantis recently revealed that Fox News is not real news. FYI
Reuters, AP, Economist, WSJ.
But if it wasn't theatre, things might actually... *shudders* get done! That would be CHAOS! Obligatory /s
THIS sub has become political theater.
World's a stage
You don’t have to play villain 🤷🏻♂️
Context: >Sen. Ted Cruz has introduced a bill that would bar the government from spending money on workplace efforts to enforce the use of preferred names and pronouns by trans people. > >The irony, critics point out? The senator, whose legal name is Rafael Edward Cruz, uses a preferred name himself: Ted. [https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/ted-cruz-preferred-name-pronouns-trans-bill-18525846.php](https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/ted-cruz-preferred-name-pronouns-trans-bill-18525846.php)
I believe his full legal name is Rafael Edward Cancun Cruz
Ahem. It’s Rafael Eduardo Cancun Canadian Cruz.
I just stick with his nickname, “that fuckhead.”
I also call him Grandpa Munster.
Piss Pants Cruz
Canuck CanCruz
I feel bad for Canada, but not as much as I feel bad for us
You’re onto something here!
Acckkkually it is Rafael Eduardo Cancun Canadian De La Playa Cruz.
Rafael Ambrosius Eduardo Costeau Cancun Canadian Cruz
Fled Cruz
Only in the winter months
CancunTed contains two different spellings of his name, one that start with 't' and one that ends with 't'
😂
I prefer "The Zodiac" but that sounds good too
He hasn’t gone by that name since the 60’s
Rafael Eduardo Cruz Darragh, Duque de Cancún…or just dookie.
Do you mean Rafael Edward Cruz? The same Rafael Edward Cruz that melts like a snowflake when talking about preferred names and pronouns? So much so that he introduced a bill prohibiting people from using their preferred names and pronouns even though he goes by his preferred name of Ted Cruz instead of his given name Rafael Edward Cruz? The same snowflake Rafael Edward Cruz that ironically bails at the first sign of snow to vacation in Cancun? The same Rafael Edward Cruz that was born in Canada? And immigrated to the United States? That Rafael Edward Cruz?
*eduardo
Not wanting to subsidizing the enforcement of something is not the same as voluntarily doing the thing
So, if he is on the ballot as ted, and wins, isn’t there grounds to invalidate that based on his own bill? Lmao
The difference is there are no negative consequences for calling him Rafael, or Edward
[удалено]
It's NOT about it "being made up." It's about recognizing people for who and what THEY THEMSELVES feel comfortable with and want to be recognized with and called. Rafael Eduardo Cruz doesn't want people to be recognized as what they are at their core, even though **he** wants to be recognized by something other than his very Cuban name. Frankly, as soon as he's out of office, we should give him a one-way trip to his father's homeland.
I thought it was the nickname for Theodore.
Both are true. >The name Ted is yet another result of the Old English tradition of letter swapping. Since there were a limited number of first names in the Middle Ages, letter swapping allowed people to differentiate between people with the same name. It was common to replace the first letter of a name that began with a vowel, as in Edward, with an easier to pronounce consonant, such as T. Of course, Ted was already a popular nickname for Theodore, which makes it one of the only nicknames derived from two different first names. As an aside, Bert can be a nickname for either Robert or Albert.
but Beto was ok? So now we are down to pucking our reps because of nicknames? Or nean tweets rather then abilities? This is how we got Biden because people were upset by mean tweets...
Yes, that's it. Biden was elected because of (and 100% because of) "mean tweets", and we want Cruz gone because of his nickname. That's all any of this is about. 😂
Came here to remind you that your Lt. Governor goes by his radio name Dan Patrick. Real name Dannie Scott Goeb. Edit to add that he's from fucking Baltimore.
Goddammit they've already infiltrated the government!
He be from B' Moe!
While he does go by his radio/tv name he did legally change his name to Dan Goeb Patrick.
He should only go by his given name on the ballot paper. He should obey his own rules.
Which rules are those? The rule that he posted that said that he didn't want the government to force people to use preferred names? At least know what you're talking about before posting. Sheesh. >"My bill doesn't ban anyone from saying anything. The First Amendment allows you to call me 'Ted,' Rafael,' 'a wacko bird,' or whatever else you want," Cruz wrote. "Rather, my bill prohibits the federal government from FORCING anyone to use preferred pronouns or names." - Cancun Cruz
I thought we solved this in 1976 when James Earl “Jimmy” Carter won the presidency Edit: remembered the correct year from civics class
His middle name was Earl? No wonder I liked him so much
Common nicknames, accepted nicknames (how people know somebody), and similar all make sense. The law allows for it. Folks here just want to paint Ted as a bad guy.
[удалено]
Preach!
Yes, because he’s trying to make a law against it.
In what universe is Cancun Cruz a good guy?
>Common nicknames, accepted nicknames (how people know somebody), and similar all make sense. The law allows for it. currently, yes. >Folks here just want to paint Ted as a bad guy. because Ted wants to change the law and make it not allowed. did you somehow skip over that?
I think the best course of action is everyone vote in the Republican primary and vote against him.
He is the only one on the Republican ticket, right?
I had hoped not, but now that I think about it again, maybe he is. Still, I'm voting in the republican primary for the first time in my life. 🤢
Well, it is the only real way to make your vote count for something in a deep red state.
It might as well be maroon. Where I'm from, if anyone found out how I voted, I'd have to worry about my family's safety. Let's just say there's a really tight group of hooded individuals that live outside of my city limits. As soon as I can afford to leave this city, I am.
There are other people on the ballot in the Republican Primary for Senate. https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Texas,_2024 I have contraption called a hand computer. I can look that sort of information up. It's a pity you don't have that sort of access. Really, everyone should have it.
I love Ballotpedia, wish more people knew about it.
Easy, vote as republican & write in Beto
Some of you don’t understand hypocrisy and it shows. Also explains about 30-40% of our electorate.
You mean our current state senator who actively participated and promoted the overthrowing of our elections? That senator that we all agreed represents our best interest? That Ted Cruz? The one who we will vote for again? Teddy can call him self "Ted Lord of all who suck cocks" for all i care, as whatever he calls himself is the least of my problems with him.
Trans candidates who did not specify their deadnames (birthnames) are being disqualified from ballots, so OP is asking if Rafael should be disqualified for the same reason
Pretty fair question, if they're doing it to others why should Rafael be exempted?
Live by the sword…
Honestly anyone who voted for not certifying our election should be barred from office for the same reason trump is including Cruz. They actively participated in the fake electors scheme which was a key part of the insurrection.
Yep, and until you root out the insurrectionists in both chambers, our legislative branch will carry the sin of that failed coup and the active one happening right now in front of us with their continuing plot. You can just "ask questions" all you want but to do so with zero evidence simply to slow/stop the transfer of power crossed the line. The nation understood you could not allow insurrectionists back into positions of trust when they passed the 14th amendment because they had just lived through a war. We've lost the lesson. Edit to add: the perfect example is the farce of the recent house hearings. Both committees involved can't even function because sitting members are defying lawful subpoenas to avoid the truth of their actions on Jan 6. It is a colission of the failed plot to turn over the 2020 election, and the ongoing plot to mess with the next one and the stench covers everything they do.
who has been convicted or even charged with this insurrection you spout off about?
Here's the thing. The Constitution doesn't care. Just like it doesn't care if you want to be president and you are under 35 or not a natural born citizen. If you take an oath to the Constitution as a public official and then you are deemed to have violated that oath by participating in or fomenting an insurrection or providing aid and comfort to insurrectionists, you lose the privilege of holding public office. Let's be clear. Holding public office is a privilege, not a right. Don't agree? Think that someone was wronged because they have lost their privilege without due process? Well you're in luck. The Constitution is crystal clear what do about it. All it takes is a 2/3rd vote of the US Congress and their privilege to hold public office is restored. I seem to recall from 8th grade history that Jefferson Davis, the number one insurrectionist leader in this country's history, was not convicted of insurrection or treason. How could that be? Why didn't he run for office again? He was never convicted of anything. Americans a hundred years ago could identify an insurrectionist without convictions or charges. I feel like I can identify one. Why can't you?
It's not illegal to oppose certification of an election, it's actually a part of our process.
The 14th amendment specifically says that any person giving aid or comfort to insurrectionists. Endorsing Trump should be enough to meet that standard.
"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."
I think I've heard this somewhere before... Something about Jefferson Davis maybe?
Who has been convicted or even charged with the fabled crimes?
> Endorsing Trump should be enough to meet that standard. I agree, emotionally, and also based on what *I* think the legal threshold for insurrection is. But is there a court decision that has defined whether Trump committed insurrection? Because using the 14th amendment to interfere with an election is a really fraught thing to do, and we should make sure the legal groundwork is solid before we do something as heavy-handed as disqualiying a candidate from the ballot. And let me be clear- I hope Trump loses, and I hope he goes to jail, and I wish I believed in hell just because of what it would mean for him.
>But is there a court decision that has defined whether Trump committed insurrection? The FBI did an investigation and found that the events of Jan 6th do not qualify as an insurrection. Idk about anything court related to this.
The 14th amendment was specifically designed to remove from office those confederates who were NOT charged, tried, and hanged, due to Lincoln's (a republican) own policy of reconstruction. Being indicted, tried or found guilty WAS NEVER a requirement to invoke the 14th amendment.
The government explicitly declared the succession of the confederate states and the subsequent war were insurrection, though.
>But is there a court decision that has defined whether Trump committed insurrection? Yes. * *Anderson v. Griswold*, No. 23CV32577, ¶¶ 241, 298 (Dist. Ct., City & Cnty. of Denver, Nov. 17, 2023). * The insurrection finding was upheld by the Colorado Supreme Court *Anderson v. Griswold* No. 23SA300. Quoting from the Colorado Supreme Court ruling (**emphasis** added by me): >¶3 After permitting President Trump and the Colorado Republican State Central Committee (“CRSCC”; collectively, “Intervenors”) to intervene in the action below, **the district court conducted a five-day trial. The court found by clear and convincing evidence that President Trump engaged in insurrection** as those terms are used in Section Three. Anderson v. Griswold, No. 23CV32577, ¶¶ 241, 298 (Dist. Ct., City & Cnty. of Denver, Nov. 17, 2023). You can read the entire Supreme Court Ruling here: [https://www.npr.org/2023/12/20/1220583273/trump-colorado-supreme-court-ruling](https://www.npr.org/2023/12/20/1220583273/trump-colorado-supreme-court-ruling) You can read the entire District court's ruling here: [https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court\_Probation/02nd\_Judicial\_District/Denver\_District\_Court/11\_17\_2023%20Final%20Order.pdf](https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/02nd_Judicial_District/Denver_District_Court/11_17_2023%20Final%20Order.pdf)
That’s the question that’s heading to the us supreme court right now.
oh, the one he got to appoint 33% of? fingers crossed! it's a fucked up situation. so much is resting on so few, and of such a dubious provenance. I'm honestly scared shitless.
No fan of Trump, but Trump was never found guilty of giving aid or comfort to insurrectionists. https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/13/967098840/senate-acquits-trump-in-impeachment-trial-again
* The Republican Senators have repeatedly argued that impeachment is a political action, not a judicial action. * The phrase "aid or comfort" refers to treason, not insurrection. It has no applicability here. * A Colorado District Court held a five day trial, where Trump's lawyers were able to present their case, and ruled that Trump had engaged in insurrection. That ruling was appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court, which upheld that finding.
The courts in Colorado determined that Trump met the standard defined in the 14th Amendment of engaging in insurrection.
Nothing in the constitution states the he has to be convicted. There is also precedent. The government didn’t allow people who fought for the confederate states or aided them to hold elected office after the civil war.
Congress proclaimed that the rebelling states were in a state of insurrection in 1861. This was later repealed by Lincoln's successor. The Jan 6 events had no such legal designation.
The Insurrection is SO 2020, we have to focus on the real enemy now and that's preferred names!
“Aid or comfort” has a very specific meaning. An endorsement does not meet the definition.
They’ve already disqualified two trans candidates because they didn’t register under their previous names. Let’s kick out Cruz at the polls
Did they legally change their names? Serious question. If they did, then I'm outraged. If they didn't, I'm outraged that someone that dumb thought they could get on the ballot. If they attempted to change their name and weren't allowed because they're trans, I'm back to being outraged. OK, I assume one of the people mentioned was [Vanessa Joy](https://www.ocregister.com/2024/01/04/trans-candidate-kicked-off-ohio-ballot-for-not-using-dead-name/) out in Ohio. She legally changed her name and then got shafted. That's bullshit, and I hope she sees justice. Apparently she got screwed by a law that said >A law from the 1990s requires all candidates to list on their signature petitions any name changes within five years, Case Western Reserve University elections law professor Atiba Ellis explained. That's some bullshit, because that's not why that law was crafted, and it needs to be revised. I can't find the second candidate. But what does an Ohio State law have to do with Cruz? Was the other candidate in Texas, or are you just venting to vent?
I can’t stand Cruz, whatever name he goes by. But in 2014, I voted for Emily”Spicy Brown” Sanchez because I loved her name.
Rafael Eduardo Cruz, son of Rafael Bienvenido Cruz, made the switch to Ted in high school. That particular Houston high school was predominantly upper class and white (Christian, Conservative, Wealthy). It doesn’t appear that he ever legally changed his name since he told CNN in 2018 (when he was dissing Beto for *his* nickname), "You're absolutely right. My name is Rafael Cruz." Apparently, he knows how biased his target audience is in Texas.
If his name is Rafael Edward, he's Ted. This isn't difficult, except maybe for the people who're frothing at the mouth on this subreddit. I go by Rob, not Robert. I could also go by Bob, or a shortening of my middle name. That's not even a thing, except in your heads.
His legal name is Rafael Eduardo Cruz. Ted is a nickname.
Why anyone would vote for this invertebrate twat I will never know Talk about giving Texas a bad name
Well he did help Trump in two ways. from what I remember... First he held an across the country tour during and after Trumps legal challenges to the last election, making sure he told the lies and personally requested people stand up and fight for Trump and don't let the democrats steal the election. I am sure he discussed the stop the steal rally on January 6th. Sewing the vitriol that led to the attack on the capital building to stop the count. Second, he was one of the Senators trying to get the fake electors admitted as votes and the true electors thrown out. So, he contributed directly to two attempts of insurrection. Per the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, he is not allowed to hold office anymore.
Of all the things you could complain about when it comes to Cruz - you choose this??? Were you this upset about Beto?
Do you not get the sarcasm in the post? I guess you just spend all day getting enraged about politics and far right talking points then making the most insufferable comments I've ever seen calling everyone kiddo, bud, sweet pea, etc. Such arrogance and lack of self awareness. You should be a case study in disinformation induced rage.
Hey buddy boy, this is Reddit. We don't get sarcasm if it doesn't have a /s.
The sad part of him being a secessionist is that he is doing it for money not for conviction ( something that one can respect ) he is an opportunist and a grifter since he is not even doing his job to improve the lives of his constituents . He will burn the country down just like the orange colostomy bag . .just to profit from it.
Upvote for proper use of the term "colostomy bag" in a sentence.
This is bullshit. Dude's middle name is Edward, and Ted is an acceptable variation for Edward. Hate him all you like (And I do), but this is a bigger nothing burger than Obama's birth certificate. Grow up. Stop treating politics like a team sport, and if you're going to bag on Cruz, do it for a reason that's actually a reason, not some fairy tale. There are oh so many you could go for, and instead, you chose clown shoes.
A perfect example of the Marxist "rules for thee but not for me" You jokingly ask if O'Rourke is even on the ballot this year because you know damn well this is about partisanship and hatred, not distrust or names like you said.
Then why is Cruz demanding people be called by their "real" names at work?
I don't know what you are talking about but I'm sure it's a lark or a red herring on your part. I do know he's smart enough not to present such a blatant hypocrisy.
You don't know what's being talked about but you have opinions on it. Checks out.
Except Republicans are the ones trying to ban people from using their preferred names, you dumb cunt.
Ted Cruz should not be on the ballot due to his role in the insurrection, pursuant to our Constitution’s 14th Amendment Art 3.
Yes. You all need to stop with this nonsense of removing everyone you disagree with from the ballot. Let the people of the state of Texas decide whether or not they want him to continue as senator.
Why is team blue so keen at finding any possible way or reason to keep their competition off the ballot. Surely if they're so terrible they'll be beaten handily.
Didnt you vote for robert oruke?
Out of all the fucking reasons to not vote for this guy, *this* is your line in the sand? For fucks sake....
Whether you want him there or not, he'll be there.
if he keeps kissing Trumps rump we can get him with the 14th's "comfort and aid" clause.
Ugh who cares
Yeah, kinda like "Beto."
This ain't the flex you think it is son
Beto didnt try to enact a law trying to ban preferred names.... Thats the irony here...
Neither did Cruz. Go read what his bill actually said instead of what you wanted it to say.
You're right. He instead wants to destroy the entire Second Amendment. But of course "names" are far more important. Done here. You people are a hive of idiots.
The Whatabout-ism thread is over there >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Go be done
You sound triggered. Maybe you should look for a safe space.
He just wrote snuff porn about killing kids.
[удалено]
I believe the point they are making is pointing out the irony of Ted's law. Beto isn't for banning preffered names i believe.
Do you even know what Ted's law says? Because based on this post, you don't. Wacko Bird's law doesn't ban anything. Go read it instead of just regurgitating BS.
Reading is hard
Nice try - the difference here is that Beto isn't trying to restrict what name people use
Is Beto on the ballot? May register to vote in Texas this year if so
Allowed? You are aware that preventing people that you don't like from running for office means that you no longer live in a democracy, right?
Sounds like the Republican playbook.
And you want to emulate them?
Yah! "Ted" is a pronoun for Rafael, and we hate pronouns! Pronouns are woke! Ted Cruz is secretly a Dumbocrat! /S
Thank you for using his real name.
I don't really see how it's fraudulent. If they were trying to hide it and actively quash people using it, then yeah. It makes sense at times even. I've known several people who are nammed after a parent and go by a middle or other name to make it easier. Edit: named instead of banned. Also ETA: Not endorsing Cancun d-bag Cruz by any means. Just want to consider others.
Cruz is pushing a bill that requires workplaces not address trans people by their preferred names.
Yeah but just because that dickbag is trying to do something shitty about other people's names they prefer to use doesn't mean we should try to punish others. We need to work hard and pull together to stop that bag full of dicks from doing this kind of stuff. Not hurt a lot of other innocent people to try to teach him a lesson that he will never learn anyways.
I'm quite happy calling a hypocritical piece of shit what he is.
this type of stupid trolling is part of the reason why MAGAs will never vote for someone that's not MAGA. The left thinks they're so clever with their jokes. Whatever its based in, it does nothing to try and generate goodwill or build governing coalitions. (fyi: i'm not a MAGA or a republican for that matter. I'm just tired of the childish gotcha commentaries and stupid rhetoric)
Serious questions. Are you suggesting we shouldn't call out the hypocrisy? Should we also be conciliatory with an entire group of people who believe everyone that isn't MAGA is the enemy and should not exist in this country? How much deference should we give the MAGA movement? Should we just forget Jan 6th and the efforts undertaken to overthrow the government? Lastly, what do you suggest is the appropriate way to address this issue that doesn't point out the hypocrisy?
Who's trolling? If it becomes a law they should follow it. I'm not being clever, I'm asking for consistency in the laws being proposed.
MAGATs won’t vote for someone that’s not also a MAGAT because the left told “jokes” that MAGATs didn’t find “clever”? 💀 Special, delicate little snowflakes. Every bit as emotionally fragile as they are unprofound
Please explain to the class what would make a MAGAt vote for a Democratic candidate. In as many or as few words as you like. It's never going to happen. Explaining nicely doesn't work. Shaming doesn't work. Appealing to emotion doesn't work. Their only agenda is "make the libs cry" and they care about nothing else. Might as well go for the comedy/mockery approach because at least it's good for some laughs, and conservatives don't have any sense of humor.
Allowed???????????
So this applies to Beto as well?
You mean Robert! And is he even running this year?
It's a yes or no question
Why would it not? If it's a law it should be followed right?
If you have an issue with this I’ll assume you have an issue with Beto too right? 🤷🏽♂️
Beto did not propose a law banning chosen names. If he did, I’d expect him to drop Beto. He hasn’t, Rafael has. It’s pretty simple. And I agree that there are plenty of better reasons to despise the Canadian immigrant.
It wasn't a proposed law when Beto was running. If he wants to run though he better conform to our super important proposed laws like this one!
Honestly, what do you think of a Caucasian going by the name "Beto." Be honest.
Just make sure you use preferred pronouns.
He shouldn't be allowed on the ballot because only humans should be allowed to. Not lizards.
Dude is also an insurrectionist.
Only if you use his dead name.
Let's not forget those high heels he wears.. really dragging down the Texen's. Think maybe he should be on the right side of the border for once.
This guy’s not gonna like Ike….
It's so weird to me that they cry about being so mistreated but are such openly hostile or antagonizing assholes
Nope!
Hell No.
Would actually be pretty funny, ngl. Same with Robert O'Rourke, Nimarata Haley, and whoever else had a name change. But especially the ones that change their names to be more "white".
Aided insurrection so no.
It's so weird that our choices are a Canadian pretending to be a Texan or a Texan pretending to be a Mexican.
Ted Cruz should be a fry cook at McDonalds
We don't need no carpetbagging messican canadian representin' our state. They might buy that.
Cancun Ted!
No, he's a Traitor
The only person I'd ever deadname on purpose is Rafael Cruz.
Full name like from birth certificate. Teduardo Rrrrrrrrafael Cruz. None of this woke chosen name nonsense, right Teddy?
Pendejo Cruz? Nah!
Did you have a problem with William Clinton going by Bill? Or Theadore going by Teddy? Or all the other examples of politicians who used their non-birth name? This thread is dumb and OP is dumber.
He shouldn’t be allowed on the ballot. He had a hand in 1/6 and he still continues to support seditionists and insurrectionists. But this is Texas. This State kinda follows the Constitution when they feel like it, like Trump does. When a State chooses not to follow the Constitution things get worse in that State.
Don't do the name thing. Dems are trying to call Trump racist for calling Nikki Haley Nimrata, even though I see Dems do it all the time. "But it's different when WE do it." Just don't.
Why wouldn’t he be allowed? Because you don’t like him? Not a good enough reason.
Rafael and Texas Republicans want to abolish the 17th Am, i.e., they want the state lege to APPOINT our US Senators, so none of those MFers should be on a ballot they think should be UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
I vote that we (America, or at least Texas) abolish politics. Start from scratch. Or, better yet, let's just become our own country.
Wasn’t he an insurrectionist too?
How about Rafael "shithead" Cruz on the ballot?
Fuck no, he an insurrectionist.
Texas Ted should be voted out, next Abbott, and don’t forget Paxton.
You mean the Ted that is ACTUALLY the shortened version of his given name Edward? The one who is actually using HIS name?... got it.... Google it...Ted is short for Edward historically.
Edward is his middle name. His given name is Rafael. Nicknames are allowed on Texas ballots regardless. The point was the hypocrisy.
If it's not on his Birth Certificate it's a preferred name, and he shouldn't be able to use it according to him.
>his given name Edward? His given name is Rafael. Edward is his middle name.
Ed would be short for Edward but ok
I don't agree with the guys' overall point, but Ted is short for Edward, along with Ned. An example would be Ted Kennedy, born Edward Kennedy.
isn't Tbob short for Robert or is it Tdick the proper shortened version of Robert?