What's your opinion of the 14th Amendment solution for keeping Trump off the ballot? (poll)

[brooklynite]

61 votes, 3 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	No conviction for Insurrection is needed; Election officials will remove him from the ballot
	21 (34%)
	No conviction for Insurrection is needed; but no Election officials will remove him from the ballot
	5 (8%)
	A conviction for Insurrection is needed; no Election officials will remove him from the ballot
	30 (49%)
	A conviction for Insurrection is needed; but Election officials will remove him from the ballot
	5 (8%)
	3 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[brooklynite]

1. Laws professors notwithstanding no Election official will take unilateral action absent a conviction

[getagrip_already]

5. Never say never....

Several are considering it, including Georgia.

But there are also suits being brought against sos who won't remove him. Those will also get appealed all the way to scotus.

One way or another, if scotus wants to hear this case, they will.

[getagrip_already]

2. No conviction is needed, but that will mean little until it gets to scotus

Some secretaries of state will keep him off the ballot and be sued, working its way up, and some will refuse to remove him and be sued, working it's way up.

There will likely be differing opinions in different federal circuits, and scotus will take it up on an emergency basis.

One way or another, scotus will be forced to rule as soon as a sos removes him from a ballot. Of course, that's IF a sos removes him from a ballot, but there are 4 states discussing doing it in unison (2d, 2r).

Of course, that could backfire if scotus doesn't rule and states go there own way. Then it would be possible for a third party to win the electors in some states ensuring nobody gets to 270. Then the house decides which magat becomes potus.

[bucolic_frolic]

3. Challenging laws is the way case law is made

The only case in re: A14 Sec3 is the NM case last year.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/couy-griffin-january-6-new-mexico-judge-14th-amendment/

If such a case went to SCOTUS, they may well rule, but they'd be ignoring A14 Sec 3 if they didn't dump reinstatement back to Congress for a vote.

[getagrip_already]

7. Schumer would take a vote in a heartbeat......

Failing to get 2/3, the effort would be over since there is no point to a house vote.

[bucolic_frolic]

11. The Reconstruction Congress gave posterity a gift with A14 Sec 3

It's broad enough so officials and the country can try to figure out how to make it work. Avoiding Civil War was very important to them. It's in some ways a political opening to squeeze non-patriots from power if the State's viability is threatened. But they had no surefire solution.

My take is Congress is vested with the power to reinstate. By this amendment, that's the only place and method to reinstate. But one never knows how a court will rule.

[PJMcK]

4. I took a Pass

The reality should be your first selection. The Amendments are supposed to be self-enacting (or whatever the legal term is). But in our litigious society, whether or not Trump's name is on a state's ballot, there will be a lawsuit that will reach the Supreme Court.

If a Red state puts Trump on the ballot, a Democratic lawyer will sue that it violates the 14th.

If a Blue state keeps Trump off the ballot, a Republican lawyer will sue to reinstate him on the ticket.

It's inevitable that we'll see furious legal wrangling. And it'll have to be lightning fast to be relevant.

However, I'll stand by my earlier projection that has no evidence: Christie will be the nominee. Trump will be a convicted felon.

[getagrip_already]

10. Christie is toxic.... it will be a dark horse

Like sununu or one of the other less abrasive, non minority governors.

[WarGamer]

18. Christie? Nominee...

I'll bet you everything I own, including a paid-off home and my 401k, IRA and stock portfolio.

LMAO.

[PJMcK]

19. I'm not a betting man!

My limit is $1.00.

My prediction is based on the way the MSM has been normalizing Christie as the anti-Trump. He's been featured a lot lately on cable on news shows and it feels like they're trying to make him more appealing to the mainstream audience.

In any event, we'll see what happens. Regardless of the Republican primaries and eventual nominee, it'll be almost unbelievable to me if Trump makes it. His support is already diminishing. By the end of next summer, he'll be convicted of at least one of his crimes possibly more. Can Republicans really nominate a convict?!

Let's make this a gentle person's wager, shall we? (wink)

[WarGamer]

22. Christie is at 5%...

He's despised by the MAGA'ts and has ZERO natural base.

If I was a Vegas Sports Book...

I'd put Christie at the same as the Arizona Cardinal winning the Super Bowl in 2023-2024 or about 200:1

Actually... NAH. The Cardinals have a WAAAAYY better chance than Christie.

[PJMcK]

24. All true

But I've been a Cubs fan since my youth in the 1960s.

It's just been interesting to me that Christie has been given so much exposure on cable news.

It's early days!

Now, imagine that the Cardinals score a wildcard berth...

[LudwigPastorius]

33. Christie Cream will be out before, or shortly after, Super Tuesday.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/27/politics/republican-primary-president-trump-rivals/index.html

Christie is setting records for intraparty unpopularity.

His net favorability rating in the latest Quinnipiac University poll stands at minus-44 points among Republicans. An astounding 61% of Republican voters hold an unfavorable view of him.

[former9thward]

6. If Trump is truly the weakest candidate, why remove him?

[getagrip_already]

8. He is still very dangerous.....

And don't underestimate an October surprise or three.

[underpants]

14. This is why. Very frightening

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservatives-aim-to-restructure-u-s-government-and-replace-it-with-trumps-vision

[Fiendish Thingy]

9. A conviction for a relevant charge is needed

If Trump s convicted of any Jan 6 charge, then and only then do expect efforts to disqualify him to succeed.

As we saw with Couy Griffin, the conviction needn’t be specifically tied to the insurrection statute.

[former9thward]

20. We did not see that with Griffin.

Griffin was a minor county office holder and no one, including Griffin, cared about the case. He did not use a lawyer to represent him and he did not contest any allegations against him. When he filed his appeal he turned it in late and lost on those grounds.

[Fiendish Thingy]

26. Nevertheless, the judge didn't disqualify him until after conviction

The conviction created a legal finding of fact under oath and the rules of evidence.

[DVRacer]

12. I think we look terrible trying to keep people off ballots

It might have a feel good factor to say keep him off but it doesn’t look right to almost half the country. We have to beat him at the ballot box.

[bucolic_frolic]

27. It's a lot like cancer. If the disease threatens the patient's life, you do all you can and choke it

off anyway you can, prevent growth as long as you can and hope for the best.

The body politic is under siege. In case you haven't noticed.

[MiniMe]

13. His disillusioned supporters Won't accept it it they keep him off by the 14th

He needs to lose bigly. I'm just scared that if he is on the ballot, he won't lose again. I never believed it was possible for him to win the first time. GET OUT AND VOTE!!

[Elessar Zappa]

15. Conviction necessary, no one will remove him.

We’re gonna have to win this the old-fashioned way: by outvoting the idiots.

[struggle4progress]

16. Worth a try: just don't count on it

[Silent Type]

21. Not counting on 14th A to work in this case. We'll have to beat him at polls or scare GOPers

into nominating someone else.

[dpibel]

23. Haven't you forthrightly declared

that the 14th is a nonstarter?

So what is the point of this poll?

Will it change your mind?

[onenote]

29. Are DUers only supposed to start polls on questions that they don't have opinions about?

I’ve been here a long time and have never known that to be the case.

[dpibel]

30. Jeez, boss, I dunno

I'm pretty new around here.

[brooklynite]

31. I've expressed my opinion. I'm interested in the aggregate opinion of the community...

...which seems to be in sync with mine.

[dpibel]

34. So a call out for support?

Got it.

Hope it all works out for you.

[brooklynite]

37. No idea what you're talking about.

[jcgoldie]

25. not gonna happen

[ecstatic]

28. We deserve to have the supreme court take up the issue before the election

Get them on record. The scholars have convinced me that trump is not eligible, but it's more than that. Think about how we look to the rest of the world. We are a joke right now. A fucking criminal who tried a coup last time gets to run again? Are you kidding me?

But setting our image issues aside, trump did plan an insurrection and he is not eligible. It's just a matter of doing something about it. And I do believe it's a separate issue from his criminal liability. The same thing goes for the congress members who participated. It's obvious the congress members will never be held accountable. I hate that it has taken so long for us to think about it, we tend to pin all our hopes on "heroes" like Jack Smith and Fani Willis and forget about handling other common sense things.

[Maru Kitteh]

32. He IS running. He will be the nominee. He will be on the GE ballot in a majority of states,

if not all. If he's convicted I expect that will be after the election. Please for the love let it not take toooo long but I suspect in deference to the office and to history, most of the judges will try to appear reasonable and where it's even remotely practicable, try to draw down the middle. That means this is going to be a very, very long show.

Buckle up. This is going to get bumpy. We need to be steeled for the long fight, because this thing is just starting.

[Patterson]

35. It's not going to happen.

[kentuck]

36. It is all unprecedented.

It seems the most likely scenario would be for SoS's to remove from the ballot in different states but then, it would be challenged to the Supreme Court. I doubt that they would go along with the Secretaries of State.

It appears that it will have to work its way thru the court system and thru the electoral process.

[Zeitghost]

38. A conviction is needed

And he hasn't been charged with anything that qualifies. This is a pipe dream.